Forums Latest Members
  1. Sgt_Bilko Aug 19, 2015

    Posts
    520
    Likes
    2,501
    After an initial drop in value from new it seems as though Speedmaster Professionals hold their value remarkably well, so the price doesn't appear to vary a lot regardless of the year for two watches in similar condition. Excluding the Cal 321, if we look at the Cal 861 starting in the late 1960s and go through to the modern Cal 1861 from this decade is there any real difference in quality?

    From a collector's point of view I naturally gravitate towards a watch that is as close as possible to the moon landing but I just wondered how the actual quality of Speedmasters has held up over the years. Omega were cutting a lot of corners at one stage with many of their watches but apparently much better recently. Are there any good or bad periods for a Speedmaster? Is a Speedmaster from 2010 as well made as one from 1970?
     
    Mad Dog likes this.
  2. emilio Aug 19, 2015

    Posts
    830
    Likes
    3,690
    Great question.

    Mainly wondering about the speedies from the Quartz period..
     
  3. Sgt_Bilko Aug 19, 2015

    Posts
    520
    Likes
    2,501
    In theory an 1861 should have a modest advantage over an 861, yet it's the early 861s that seem to be more desirable. As for the whole quartz debacle I wouldn't even look at a Seamaster from the 1980s so it did make me wonder if Omega has always maintained Speedmasters at the same level or possibly even improved them lately.
     
    Edited Aug 19, 2015
  4. watchtinker Aug 19, 2015

    Posts
    380
    Likes
    398
    There have been many subtle changes in 861s over the years and a few have taken place in 1861s as well.
    However, differently from 321s, whose modifications have been somewhat documented in technical notes, changes in 861/1861s are less trackable.
    As a general rule, one should bear in mind that over the years there have been significant progresses in watch manufacturing and the newer is the caliber, the better it can be expected to perform.
     
  5. Sgt_Bilko Aug 20, 2015

    Posts
    520
    Likes
    2,501
    And yet in many areas products are simply built to lower standards nowadays for reasons of cost. As an example I have a Leak valve amplifier here from 1962 that still works perfectly and would wipe the floor with practically any modern amplifier, even if the Leak does look like something from the time of the ark. I think we all know that Omega had a "dodgy period" when they were cutting costs, particularly during the quartz crisis, so I just wonder how well they have maintained their attention to detail through the years with the Speedmaster.
     
  6. ibis888 Dec 14, 2015

    Posts
    318
    Likes
    192
    Interesting thread. I recently picked up a 1970 Speedmaster and was considering the same issues.. I ultimately went the older watch, despite it costing ~20% more than a newer tritium dialed 861 for the following reasons:

    -Step dial
    -'Pre-moon' case back
    -Potential to maintain value more than the newer versions?

    But my ultimate deciding factor - having a 45 year old watch on my wrist adds an intangible mental satisfaction that made the extra cost worth it to me.

    I would like to think that if the movement was a dud, it would have manifested itself by now...