New speedmaster 3861 SS. Quality control issues.

[Al_Snoopy]

Hello all. Couple of days ago I bought a brand new SS 3861 from an Omega Boutique. Purchasing an Omega has been a long time milestone, really happy to get there and I love the watch. However, there are a few quality control issues which leave a bad taste. Listing them from the most severe to the least severe, in my opinion. These are all visible to the naked eye without lupe or any other magnification.

1. Spot of leftover material which shines when hit by light. Could be gold!


2. Spot of leftover material which doesn't shine under light.


3. Dial isn't centered. Line drawn with CAD.


4. Chrono seconds hand isn't aligned with 12 o'clock.


Boutique said they are bringing a new one for me to check and swap if I am happy with it. They had 3 or 4 speedy's in store and all of them displayed misaligned chrono seconds hand.

My thoughts are: This watch is running at +2s/day. This is awesome and I'd be reluctant to swap it for another with worse tolerances, even if properly aligned. If the timekeeping is same or better than what I got, then no questions asked, straight swap assuming all the points above are not present on the new watch. Alternatively, I could bargain for a partial refund due to clear quality control errors, keep it and then sort it under warranty.

Bottom line is: This is not a £50 watch. It costs a small fortune and I'd expect the quality control to be equivalent to the money I'm paying. Pull your fingers out Omega!

Rant over.

Update: the boutique swapped it for a new one. It all aligns perfectly to my naked eye and as far as I can tell, I can't see any specks on the dial. Overall, I'm over the moon with it!! Pun intended.


And because you win some and "lose" some, average precision is up to +2.6s/day (from +2s/day) and deviation in six positions is up to +7.2s/day (from +3.5s/day), but these don't bother me at all, it's all minor. Precision at low power reserve is improved, however.

All in all, very happy with the outcome!

PS: S/N #835, hopefully no bushing issues?

Edited: May 8, 2023

 

[Cod Holliday]

I am so glad I don't own a loupe and also don't know how to use autocad.

 

[Al_Snoopy]

C Cod Holliday

I am so glad I don't own a loupe and also don't know how to use autocad.

I didn't need lupe, just naked eye did it.

Edited: May 6, 2023

 

[Evitzee]

If you are expecting perfection you will constantly be disappointed. I think you are struggling with the idea that you spent more money than what you are comfortable with ("a small fortune") and are now looking for flaws to prove to yourself that it's not worth the money, and you shouldn't have bought it. Last January you were going for a Seamaster 300M which you had wanted "for many years", what happened? Maybe you regret not getting the Seamaster?

Edited: May 6, 2023

 

[Al_Snoopy]

Evitzee

If you are expecting perfection you will constantly be disappointed. I think you are struggling with the idea that you spent more money than what you are comfortable with ("a small fortune") and are now looking for flaws to prove to yourself that it's not worth the money, and you shouldn't have bought it. Last January you were going for a Seamaster 300M which you had wanted "for many years", what happened? Maybe you regret not getting the Seamaster?

You are wrong in your assumption regarding money. The reason why I refer to it as "small fortune" is because I respect the money and the time and effort used to earn them and always look to get my money's worth in all purchases. A watch which costs that much should be subjected to succinct quality control, not subpar. Yes, I expect perfection or near to, when spending that amount.

I wanted an Omega for many years. Seamaster was a strong candidate, but I decided against it because I am on the list for a Rolex Submariner, which in my opinion is superior. That, and I didn't want 2 Omega in my 3-watch collection.

 

[blufinz52]

The issues you pointed to wouldn't bother me, as I think they are very minor. To tell you the truth, I don't think I would have even noticed them. But I understand they these bother you and I hope the OB can provide one without the flaws. I'm interested to know how this turns out. And good luck on getting the Sub. I recently got the 124060 after a 7 month wait, which I didn't think was too bad.

 

[Al_Snoopy]

blufinz52

The issues you pointed to wouldn't bother me, as I think they are very minor. To tell you the truth, I don't think I would have even noticed them. But I understand they these bother you and I hope the OB can provide one without the flaws. I'm interested to know how this turns out. And good luck on getting the Sub. I recently got the 124060 after a 7 month wait, which I didn't think was too bad.

To be honest, they bother me only because I noticed haha. I blame my good eyesight.

Thanks, I'll update here with what the outcome is. I'm going for the 124060 too, looking forward to it!

Enjoy your watches!

 

[Jones in LA]

As others have mentioned, attaining absolute perfection may be too much to expect. I like the way you have broken your findings into degree of severity. The shiny speck of whatever does seem a bit over the line, and should probably be removed. I purchased a 3861 which had a seconds chrono misalignment issue as well -- it was about one full watch beat off, which I judged as being excessive (I own 6 other chronographs, none of which have this degree of misalignment, though some are not perfectly aligned). So that watch is in for warranty service. From what I see in your photos, I don't think the chrono hand misalignment is excessive. And trying to line up those three points using cad on a photograph, there are just too many possibilities for the presence of optical artifacts and/or distortions to trust that particular finding.

 

[Scarecrow Boat]

A Al_Snoopy

3. Dial isn't centered. Line drawn with CAD.

I’m having a hard time accepting that photo as proof the dial is off center. The position and orientation of the watch isn’t perfectly square/level, both horizontally and vertically, to the sensor plane in the camera. There is a generous amount of distortion in your image.

One thing to remember is these are mass produced accessories/jewelry. As said above, expecting perfection will set you up for disappointment. Like other brands, Omega offers a warranty for a reason- things happen.

 

[SC1]

Leaving your front door each day and stepping out into the flawed, off center, world has got to be one, serious, fucking drag.

Thoughts & Prayers bro, thoughts & prayers.

 

[Al_Snoopy]

Scarecrow Boat

I’m having a hard time accepting that photo as proof the dial is off center. The position and orientation of the watch isn’t perfectly square/level, both horizontally and vertically, to the sensor plane in the camera. There is a generous amount of distortion in your image.

One thing to remember is these are mass produced accessories/jewelry. As said above, expecting perfection will set you up for disappointment. Like other brands, Omega offers a warranty for a reason- things happen.

It's all visible to the naked eye. CAD was used for ease.

 

[ErichPryde]

If the dial isn't centered it should also be visible when you draw a line immediately from 60 to 120 on the bezel, or if you draw a line immediately through the center seconds marker over 12:00 to the center seconds 6:00 on the dial itself

I think I see what you are talking about but I would want to see some different perspectives on this. Are the 60 and the 120 supposed to be immediately over 12/6, or are they normally some fraction of an inch off?

 

[ErichPryde]

A Al_Snoopy

I wanted an Omega for many years. Seamaster was a strong candidate, but I decided against it because I am on the list for a Rolex Submariner, which in my opinion is superior. That, and I didn't want 2 Omega in my 3-watch collection.

Are you talking about the Seamaster diver? What do you think of the Seamaster heritage line? I feel that both the first and second generation Seamaster Heritage are much more comparable to a no date Rolex, and chose one specifically over a ND sub. Of course, I understand that everyone's opinion is different and the Sub is am attractive watch.


Also, where did this three watch collection thing come from? Is that an internet Forum / YouTube thing? I've seen a couple people use that number and I'm unsure/curious of why.

 

[SC1]

3. Dial isn't centered. Line drawn with CAD.



Here's what I don't get... if your CAD expertise is conclusive why is your line centered nearly perfectly over the 120 on tachymeter but off center on the post for the handset and then even more off centered to the right of the 60 on the tachymeter?

If your CAD is conclusive it would mean the tachymeter insert is perfectly circular yet the printing on it is off center and the dial -and- movement are off center... leading my decidedly non-CAD brain to conclude that either:
A) Your skills in concluding all this are flawed ~ ie: your photograph is angled (or the watch was during the shooting of the photograph) and thusly a perfectly straight line is a false positive.
or
B) The case itself is flawed ~ as the insert itself along with dial and movement are all in alignment but the case is crooked. And even more so, the case becomes crooked only once past the hand's centerpost (when looking from bottom to top). Again, not possible I would say.

 

[Dan S]

The "dial isn't centered" claim and analysis is total BS. But in any case, all of these things are well within spec. "Quality control" doesn't mean perfection.

 

[Scarecrow Boat]

A Al_Snoopy

It's all visible to the naked eye. CAD was used for ease.

My point above is that your vertical line isn’t going to be an effective evaluation if the photo wasn’t taken properly to begin with. There are many variables as to why your example is flawed but this is the easiest to show you- Your watch isn’t perfectly vertical in your photo. Saving your photo and leaving it as is, I overlayed a grid onto it. Using the lugs as physically straight lines, you can see the lug/case line travels away from the grid line. IE your watch is rotated. The first image is the 12p’clock lug and the second image is the 6o’clock lug. Which follows why your line doesn’t dissect the 12 and 6 markers.

Edited: May 6, 2023

 

[SC1]

Dan S

The "dial isn't centered" claim and analysis is total BS. But in any case, all of these things are well within spec. "Quality control" doesn't mean perfection.

Agreed... OP wants perfectly perfect perfection when it comes to dial/chapter ring/bezel alignment he need not go any further than Seiko.

 

[Al_Snoopy]

Dan S

The "dial isn't centered" claim and analysis is total BS. But in any case, all of these things are well within spec. "Quality control" doesn't mean perfection.

I would kindly disagree, it's not BS. It's visible to the naked eye. To reinforce this, when the time is set at 6 o'clock , the hour marker is slightly to the left of the 30min lume mark. Which further shows that the dial is slightly rotated counter-clockwise.

In any case, I'm more bothered by leftover material on the dial of a luxury watch, rather than the alignment issues.

Edited: May 6, 2023

 

[pusslicker]

A Al_Snoopy

It's all visible to the naked eye. CAD was used for ease.

Your house cost a lot more and it is off by degrees and inches. Look up at the point in the corner where all three lines meet. You'll be lucky if they are less than a degree off 90 or the corner opposite isn't a couple inches higher or lower. That watch is much closer than anything else you own.

 

[Al_Snoopy]

P pusslicker

Your house cost a lot more and it is off by degrees and inches. Look up at the point in the corner where all three lines meet. You'll be lucky if they are less than a degree off 90 or the corner opposite isn't a couple inches higher or lower. That watch is much closer than anything else you own.

Agreed, but my house is not a million dollar mansion. This watch however is the equivalent of that, in the watch world.