Forums Latest Auctions Members

How likely is Omega to release a steel 42mm Moonwatch with 321 calibre?

  1. Martin_J_N

    Martin_J_N May 21, 2020

    Posts
    751
    Likes
    1,520
    My understanding is that the 321 had issues of reliability, related to the column wheel (experts correct me please if I have this wrong), the 861 and 1861 removed this issue, the new movement was also much cheaper to make.

    So define better, the 321 was the first, it went to the moon, but it had a very short lifespan, the 861/1861 family has been in the Speedmaster since the mid 60’s, therefore I would say that purely on longevity the 861/1861 Calibre is the better movement.
     
    Pun likes this.
  2. SergioRZ

    SergioRZ May 21, 2020

    Posts
    36
    Likes
    18
    I'll have to disagree on the evaluation criteria you chose to define a better movement.

    But that is irrelevant for me and to this discussion, that's not the reason why I would love to have a c321 Moonwatch accurate replica. ;)
     
  3. Martin_J_N

    Martin_J_N May 21, 2020

    Posts
    751
    Likes
    1,520
    Okay, if the 321 is the better movement why not keep it or refine it so that any issues are ironed out? Why replace it?

    If we summarise what you want, your watch will be the same externally as the watches that landed on the moon, internally your watch will also have the same movement.

    Everything will be 100% exactly as the watches worn by astronauts on the Luna surface.

    I don’t want to upset you but you realise that those watches actually exist, and are frequently put up for sale by collectors?

    Anything else is just going to be a modern imitation of the Speedmaster’s finest hours.

    So the closest that you are ever going to get if you don’t want a true 1960’s replica is to accept the new 321 Calibre watches and associated price, the current big box Moonwatch in its various formats, or the LE’s featuring the new 3861 movement.

    Or you can wait, to see if Omega launches an exact replica of the watch that went to the moon in the late 60’s and early 70’s, at the price of today’s Moonwatch price, you may be waiting a while.
     
  4. SergioRZ

    SergioRZ May 21, 2020

    Posts
    36
    Likes
    18
    It's actually very simple. I wish I could go in a store and buy a new accurate replica of the Moonwatch, that's all ;)

    I don't really care about the price... I'll wait, if they do it I'll buy one. If they don't... well, then I can't buy one.

    It's as simple and straight forward as it can be :D

    Plan B:

    Put a better movement on the current Moonwatch, and I'll buy that too! hehehehehhe


    What I DON'T want:

    Also very simple: I don't want a replica with a different movement from the watch that is being replicated if that movement isn't a real "upgrade" or as good as it should be comparing to other current Omega movements.


    But I don't think we should all want the same things, I fully respect that other people have different desires and expectations... that's all fine! Purpose of my original topic is to learn about what the future might bring concerning the Moonwatch and the c321, I'm trying to plan ahead :)
     
  5. Martin_J_N

    Martin_J_N May 21, 2020

    Posts
    751
    Likes
    1,520
    Good luck finding a better movement than one that has been in use for over 50 years in the Omega Speedmaster.
     
    Pun likes this.
  6. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 21, 2020

    Posts
    17,442
    Likes
    36,651
    What specifically do you believe is the issue with the 861/1861 that doesn't make it an "upgrade" or "as good as it should be"?
     
    madjestikmoose and Sidreilley like this.
  7. Aryen

    Aryen May 21, 2020

    Posts
    72
    Likes
    358
    I just bought a brand new Speedy Pro and slapped an 1171/633 bracelet on it, giving it that great early 70’s vintage Speedy look (apart from the missing tritium).
    Then again, I own a calibre 321 Seamaster chrono to scratch the movement itch.
     
  8. texasmade

    texasmade May 21, 2020

    Posts
    555
    Likes
    605
    OP mentioned the hacking seconds and the chrono minute hand jumping early.
     
  9. Pun

    Pun May 21, 2020

    Posts
    1,203
    Likes
    5,118
    Post photos or never happened!!;)
     
    Aryen likes this.
  10. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 21, 2020

    Posts
    17,442
    Likes
    36,651
    321 doesn't hack. Chronograph minute recorder jump can be adjusted...try again.
     
  11. SergioRZ

    SergioRZ May 21, 2020

    Posts
    36
    Likes
    18
    You're taking things out of context...

    I was never comparing the 861 to the 321, when I talked about how I dislike some features of the 861 it was always comparing to other current Omega movements in the context of a modern replica that does not have the original movement of the replicated watch.

    And the movement "quality" was never the issue concerning the desire for an accurate/exact replica of the Moonwatch. It is what it is, I'd like to have it unchanged regardless of how good it is.

    If you read from the beginning you'll get it and it saves me the trouble of explaining everything again and again hehehehe ;)
     
  12. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 21, 2020

    Posts
    17,442
    Likes
    36,651
    I've read the whole thread. It's clear - you want an exact replica, but it doesn't have to be exact if the movement is somehow better, but then the movement being better doesn't matter. Yep, clear to me 100%. :rolleyes:
     
  13. SergioRZ

    SergioRZ May 21, 2020

    Posts
    36
    Likes
    18
    So, why are you doing this?

    Is it common forum practice to harass new members like this?

    If you're not retarded or have serious psychiatric issues you know very well what you just did: Mixing together all those different subjects and different scenarios that were talked about in this 3 page topic, as if it was all said in one sentence or as if the conversation didn't evolve and change along the way... then you use that to imply that I said things that I never did say, not like that in that "general" context, nothing even remotely similar to that.

    I NEVER SAID THAT I WANT AN EXACT REPLICA THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT!!!!!!!! Can you read? That makes no sense at all!

    I NEVER SAID I WANT A BETTER MOVEMENT BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THE MOVEMENT IS BETTER!!!! Can you read? That makes no sense at all!

    Do you think that is fair? Do you think everyone has the time to spend in this type of childish internet forum words game?

    Do you assume you know better than me what I want to say?

    So the forum members agree this is acceptable behavior, bashing people like this?
     
    Cdubs and Cad290 like this.
  14. BatDad

    BatDad May 21, 2020

    Posts
    831
    Likes
    2,460
  15. Cdubs

    Cdubs May 21, 2020

    Posts
    7
    Likes
    20
    Call me fuzzy but this seems like the punchline to a 1-2-3 bait tactic intended to incite some kind of response or placate some kind of self fulfillment.

    1. Ask about a very specific technical question that in which the questioner has superior domain knowledge.
    "What specifically do you believe is the issue with the 861/1861 that doesn't make it an "upgrade" or "as good as it should be"?"
    2. Refute the answer with said superior domain knowledge. Which in this case questioner did not even give OP a chance at a direct response.
    "321 doesn't hack. Chronograph minute recorder jump can be adjusted...try again."
    3. Passive aggressively insult the OP by confounding statements
    "I've read the whole thread. It's clear - you want an exact replica, but it doesn't have to be exact if the movement is somehow better, but then the movement being better doesn't matter. Yep, clear to me 100%."

    To me the OP's personal opinions and questions are valid and contribute to understanding consumer sentiment. Completely unfair to passive aggressively take hits at said individual.

    I too am interested where this is coming from.

    /end rant
     
    SergioRZ likes this.
  16. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 21, 2020

    Posts
    17,442
    Likes
    36,651
    I don't believe I am harassing you. I'm simply trying to understand where you are coming from, and possibly give you a different perspective if you are open to it. I asked specifically what it was about the 861/1861 that you felt was not an upgrade, and you said I was taking things out of context. I wasn't, and in the end you didn't answer that question. I only got an answer of what someone else thinks your issues were and those misconceptions were easily corrected/refuted.

    Let's start with what the primary purpose of a chronograph function on a watch is - to measure elapsed time. The 18,000 A/hr of the 321 has in effect a lower resolution that the 21,600 A/hr of the 861/1861. So it is able to measure elapsed time more accurately.

    It is cheaper to service and a simpler movement overall - those are good things from an engineering point of view for reliability. Omega's tolerances for the 321 are far looser than those of the 861/1861, so in all these ways, the 861/1861 is a better movement.

    So this already is a Moonwatch with an upgraded movement. Was it cheaper to make? Yes I'm sure it is, but making things cheaper and better is what progress is about.

    As for the rest of your post, I'm going to chalk that up to not being here enough to appreciate the flow of this forum. We like banter, discussion, and some gentle ribbing here and there. If that's not for you, then so be it.

    Cheers, Al
     
    chnzwh, David J, STANDY and 4 others like this.
  17. texasmade

    texasmade May 21, 2020

    Posts
    555
    Likes
    605
    To get back on topic, I just don’t see Omega releasing the 321 in a closed case back 42mm moon watch. Omega has positioned the 321 as a premium product with a premium price and to make a cheaper version of that would make the current SS 321 pointless. There’s a reason why the 321 was rereleased as a platinum watch and the SS was rereleased as an Ed White.
     
    SergioRZ likes this.
  18. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 21, 2020

    Posts
    17,442
    Likes
    36,651
    Only if you make this your avatar...

    Fuzzy.jpg
     
    Seaborg and imageWIS like this.
  19. Cdubs

    Cdubs May 21, 2020

    Posts
    7
    Likes
    20
    I don't speak for the OP here, but as an outsider as well I see the following:

    1. No acknowledgement of how OP feels. No apology required but none offered either.
    2. When someone says "be open minded", which OP already stated in his post he is, they usually mean the other thing.
    3. Again falling back on domain knowledge to establish one's superior position.
    4. Normalized bullying and passive aggressiveness and speaking on behalf of the entire forum.

    I'm not gonna get into specifics because that plays into questioner here's supposed strengths but suffice it to say I don't think OP ever stated 861/1861 to be inferior to 321 but to modern 9300 or 3861. Another case of selectively confounding posts to adhere to questioner's narrative.

    / end rant 2
     
    SergioRZ likes this.
  20. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 21, 2020

    Posts
    17,442
    Likes
    36,651
    Thanks Fuzzy for your input. It seems that even though you say you don't presume to be speaking on behalf of the OP, you are, and he doesn't seem to want to participate other than to like your posts, so let's talk.

    I agree that he never said that it was inferior, and in fact I've never suggested that he did say that.

    What he did ask for is a "replica" with an "upgraded movement" and what several people here have tried to point out is that is exactly what Omega offers now in the Speedmaster with the 1861 movement. I do understand this is not what the OP wants as he has made that much clear.

    This lead to the statement that the OP believes that the change to the 861 was purely on a financial basis, and really that is the key thing I am trying to clarify here. The movement was cheaper to build, and better in many ways. When I attempted to get more detail from the OP, I was told essentially that he didn't want to bother, so I should just read the thread. Fair enough.

    And yes, I'm sure you will point out that I am again talking about watches - because this is watch forum.

    Cheers, Al
     
    STANDY, frazierspa and imageWIS like this.