But I guess it won’t be a big deal if the case is designed this way. Production variances tho is another thing. To me this level of variance shouldn’t happen on a $6-7k watch.
Update: I took it to the AD this afternoon, compared to the other 3861 models they have, suffice to say there are variance in production. A few findings:
1. The case variance is not by hesalite vs sapphire models, but rather random;
2. The AD showed me that they all arrived rather recently together from Omega, so there’s no refinishing subsequent to leaving the factory;
3. As to the “sharp edge” comments, my observations is that the one with narrower polished bevel is sharper than the one with wider bevels. But it’s only the edge of the case, not the bracelet that is sharp. And I went back to the original video of The Timeless Watch Channel, the 3861 he tried on appear to be the version with a very narrow bevel too.
I have to say that the AD is extremely nice and professional. They acknowledge there are differences, and offered me with an exchange. I now have a hesalite one with similar bevel width to the Sapphire example of @Calibre561’s. So a big thanks to the AD, I’m a very happy customer now.
I know people have different views and tolerances. Maybe I’m a bit OCD to let this minor detail bother me... but I think this observation should be documented and shared with the community as a reference point.
If you were able to take pictures of the watches at your AD, please post them here.
Most of the manufacturing and case finishing steps are automated. So much variance is quite surprising...
Update: I took it to the AD this afternoon, compared to the other 3861 models they have, suffice to say there are variance in production. A few findings:
1. The case variance is not by hesalite vs sapphire models, but rather random;
2. The AD showed me that they all arrived rather recently together from Omega, so there’s no refinishing subsequent to leaving the factory;
3. As to the “sharp edge” comments, my observations is that the one with narrower polished bevel is sharper than the one with wider bevels. But it’s only the edge of the case, not the bracelet that is sharp. And I went back to the original video of The Timeless Watch Channel, the 3861 he tried on appear to be the version with a very narrow bevel too.
I have to say that the AD is extremely nice and professional. They acknowledge there are differences, and offered me with an exchange. I now have a hesalite one with similar bevel width to the Sapphire example of @Calibre561’s. So a big thanks to the AD, I’m a very happy customer now.
I know people have different views and tolerances. Maybe I’m a bit OCD to let this minor detail bother me... but I think this observation should be documented and shared with the community as a reference point.
Unfortunately I was not able to take pictures side by side. The AD politely asked me not to share it online for understandable reasons.
I am curious -- what were the understandable reasons? They are photos of factory-supplied watches. What was their issue with showing them?
So how will Omega address this issue for those of us whose AD’s may not accept returns or exchanges? I’m not feeling great about my purchase now knowing there are better versions of the same watch already out there.
I haven’t done this for the new exchanged 3861 (call it 3861W standing for “wide”), since it’s already dark when I got home.
But before heading to the AD I took these pictures for my 1863 sapphire case and the first 3861 (Call it 3861N standing for “narrow”):
I processed them trying to capture the case side profiles. Sorry the angle and proportions are slightly off as they are not taken in an controlled environment. But I think it still tells something about the bevels.
My theory is as follows:
1. The outer edges of the case side in both should extend out of the bezel edges to a similar length, making the case diameter the same 42mm.
2. Think of the square metal block before cutting the bevel, as indicated as the grid lines, the “cutting” of the bevel actually is steeper in the 1863, removing more metal. The 3863N case actually keeps more metal.
3. The “starting point” of the bevel on the topside actually extends out slightly on the 3863N case.
4. When it comes to potential future polish tho, the 1863 case is still easier because it only need to shave the vertical outer side of the case. There will be room of bevel above for it to cut in. The 3863N case can still take a polish, but since there’s not much room of the bevel, it’ll need to work on both surfaces: shaving the vertical side, and also re-work on the bevel, which could be difficult but there’s metal on the topside to do that.
Just my theory. Will attempt the same picture for my new 3863W when I get a chance.
Does it really matter? The difference is so subtle it took the community three months to notice it. If you have a really strong opinion on which variant is 'better,' check your AD's return policy.
There are people here who feel anything goes because they have an allegiance to the brand. If as the OP suggest earlier in the thread that the bevel variance also indicates better or worse case finishing, and therefore fewer sharp edges, then I would think this would be significant to those of us who care and notice the lackluster quality of one variety over the other.
Get over yourself.
Not sure what you mean by that. This is a watch forum where we discuss topics like potential issues that might afflict them?
