Mythbusting the Moonwatch and how the Daytona failed by the Official Omega Vintage Somlo London Shop

[BLOW UP]

I just watched this video: Mythbusting the Moonwatch and how the Daytona failed, by the Official Omega Vintage Somlo London Shop and he's claiming that all modern Speedmasters are considered Moonwatches? That sounds absurd.. Am I missing something?? This has to be a complete load of bollocks, doesn't it???

 

[Dan S]

I watched the first 20s and then decided that life is too short.

 

[BLOW UP]

It's at 54 seconds

 

[JwRosenthal]

I appreciate a good Rolex burn as well as the next vintage Rolex owner- despite their revisionist history, they haven’t been first in anything except marketing.

 

[blufinz52]

JwRosenthal

they haven’t been first in anything except marketing.

Well, they've been first in market share for quite a while

 

[noelekal]

Dan S

I watched the first 20s and then decided that life is too short.

I read your post Dan S and then decided that life is too short to watch it.

 

[BLOW UP]

JwRosenthal

I appreciate a good Rolex burn as well as the next vintage Rolex owner- despite their revisionist history, they haven’t been first in anything except marketing.

oh I don't know about that weren't they the first to make Gold Ever Rose .. groundbreaking surely

 

[JwRosenthal]

BLOW UP

oh I don't know about that weren't they the first to make Gold Ever Rose .. groundbreaking surely

Would make sense since they created the metals that make stainless steel, built Mt. Everest from sand and invented the oyster…and on the seventh day they rested.

 

[sheepdoll]

Today is the Empire 6ths back, Or Revenge of the 6th. Right?

 

[Foo2rama]

What is and is not a moon watch as the OP asked.

depends on how you look at it.

no 861 went to the moon, but one went around the moon.

if you define it as watches that went to the moon only the 145.012 -67 I think was on the moon.

no watches got the nasa caseback untill 1971…

in general most people think of the moon watch as any “professional” with the crown guards.

But again it all depends.

 

[BLOW UP]

Foo2rama

What is and is not a moon watch as the OP asked.

depends on how you look at it.

no 861 went to the moon, but one went around the moon.

if you define it as watches that went to the moon only the 145.012 -67 I think was on the moon.

no watches got the nasa caseback untill 1971…

in general most people think of the moon watch as any “professional” with the crown guards.

But again it all depends.

Really???
I'm certainly no Speedmaster expert, but I'm pretty sure I could think of hundreds of Speedmaster references that have nothing/virtually nothing to do with the Moonwatch or its very many iterations ...It just doesn't make any sense
..Just think about all of the automatics for starters
...I'm gobsmacked to find out that Omega or anybody else, would even consider these as Moonwatches; it's a bit like saying all Mercedes are Silver Arrows?? Mine certainly isn't; yes it just so happens to be silver, has four wheels and an internal combustion engine, but it's a massive great big lump compared to one of the Silver Arrows ..it just seems completely bonkers to me

 

[Davidt]

Read @Foo2rama 's comment again. He didn't say all Speedmasters, he said all Speedmaster Professionals. Big difference.

I'd agree, all Speedmaster Pros are Moonwatches.

 

[BLOW UP]

Davidt

Read @Foo2rama 's comment again. He didn't say all Speedmasters, he said all Speedmaster Professionals. Big difference.

I'd agree, all Speedmaster Pros are Moonwatches.

I think even with the 'professional' caveat its still hugely problematic ..there are many examples but here's one, how can a Racing Professional Speedmaster be a Moonwatch? It has a completely different specificity and intention.

But my original query/inquiry is about the video and what the expert claims "All modern Speedmasters are considered Moonwatches" , I see this as very problematic; I just can't see how Omega/anyone can consider 'All modern Speedmasters' to be Moonwatches???

Perhaps this supports what the guy is talking about, I just found this article on the Omega website, it's on the 1987 automatic Speed Master 376.0822 'Holy Grail', they got it in front of and partially eclipsing the moon??
But can this really be considered a Moonwatch???

https://www.omegawatches.com/planet-omega/60th-anniversary-speedmaster/speedmaster-automatic-1987

Together with the fact that automatic chronographs were still in their infancy in 1969, it's my understanding that NASA specified a manual wind because they had some kind of misunderstanding of the way an automatic would work in space/very low/0-gravity.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Davidt

Read @Foo2rama 's comment again. He didn't say all Speedmasters, he said all Speedmaster Professionals. Big difference.

I'd agree, all Speedmaster Pros are Moonwatches.

Nope:

 

[Davidt]

BLOW UP

I think even with the 'professional' caveat its still hugely problematic ..there are many examples but here's one, how can a Racing Professional Speedmaster be a Moonwatch? It has a completely different specificity and intention.

But my original query/inquiry is about the video and what the expert claims "All modern Speedmasters are considered Moonwatches" , I see this as very problematic; I just can't see how Omega/anyone can consider 'All modern Speedmasters' to be Moonwatches???

Perhaps this supports what the guy is talking about, I just found this article on the Omega website, it's on the 1987 automatic Speed Master 376.0822 'Holy Grail', they got it in front of and partially eclipsing the moon??
But can this really be considered a Moonwatch???

https://www.omegawatches.com/planet-omega/60th-anniversary-speedmaster/speedmaster-automatic-1987

Together with the fact that automatic chronographs were still in their infancy in 1969, it's my understanding that NASA specified a manual wind because they had some kind of misunderstanding of the way an automatic would work in space/very low/0-gravity.

Vercingetorix

Nope:

As far as I'm aware, neither of those say 'Professional' on the dial.

 

[JwRosenthal]

All bear the name, but there can only be one

 

[BLOW UP]

JwRosenthal

All bear the name, but there can only be one

 

[BLOW UP]

Davidt

As far as I'm aware, neither of those say 'Professional' on the dial.

How has 'Professional' been conflated with 'Speedmaster'??
I'm genuinely not being pedantic, but this is specifically about "All modern Speedmasters are considered Moonwatches"

 

[Davidt]

Because a couple of posts above, Foo and I both said that ‘all Speedmaster Professionals are moonwatches’.

We’re partly agreeing with you, all modern speedmasters aren’t moonwatches, but (depending on your criteria) all Speedmaster Professionals are moonwatches.

 

[Bill Sohne]

Foo2rama

What is and is not a moon watch as the OP asked.

depends on how you look at it.

no 861 went to the moon, but one went around the moon.

if you define it as watches that went to the moon only the 145.012 -67 I think was on the moon.

no watches got the nasa caseback untill 1971…

in general most people think of the moon watch as any “professional” with the crown guards.

But again it all depends.

Hi Phil

I think the 105-012 was also used on the moon ,,, remember reading that somewhere years ago,,,

best
bill