I am thinking of buying a Speedmaster Moon. I understand that the most pure descendant in modern times is the 311.30.42.30.01.005.

What stops me from getting it is the plexi (or is it hesalite?), because I just I'll end up scratching it, and I don't have a AD's close by to polish it for me.

Then I found out about the 311.30.42.30.01.006 - all in all the same watch, but with sapphire glass, and see-through back. Are there any real negatives with the .006? Sapphire would take off one of the big negatives for me, but then again I really want the closest to a true "Moon".

Practically, I want the Mark II, but that's a whole different story! ;-)

 

The closest to the Moon is hesalite front, closed back. It's more than a classic, it's a living fossil. It's the only vintage watch that's still manufactured today, pretty much untouched since 1969.

If a few concessions to modernity are acceptable, then the sapphire version is a step up in my book. More up to date and clearer looking.

Some people dislike the sapphire version because of a light diffraction effect that shows like a whitish halo around the edge of the crystal. Most noticeable against the black dial. Also keep in mind that the sapphire back version will also have a reduced resistance to magnetic fields (there's a soft iron cover under the solid steel backs).

Hesalite will scratch, true. But polishing is something you can do yourself. Some plastic polishing paste and elbow grease and it will look like new again.

 

Good observations. About the hesalite, is it really that easy to polish yourself? Surely there must be a limit even to that? How often could it be polished if needed? I use all my watches alot in common day life.

I think I'm leaning towards the .006 as either watch are new and actually have diddly squat with space to do.

The perfect modern incarnation would be with auto movement and date, that's why I also consider the Mark II as I love it's retro look.

 

As Blackdog noted, the current "traditional" Speedmaster Professional with the caliber 1861 movement and the hesalite crystal is the closest modern descendant to the Speedmaster references that were worn on the moon (105.003, 105.012 and 145.012). The 145.022 circled the moon, but was not worn on the lunar surface. Depending on the reference, the "classic" moon watches were first equipped with the caliber 321 movement, which was then succeeded by the caliber 861 movement, and finally by the current caliber 1861 movement. If Omega phases out the caliber 1861 movement in favor of the new master chronometer 3861 movement, it could be argued that the caliber 1861 reference 311.30.42.30.01.005 will really be the last "true" descendant of the moon watch since calibers 321, 861 and 1861 are essentially similar whereas the caliber 3861 is an entirely new movement. As for the hesalite vs. sapphire debate, there is little question that the sapphire version is not a "true" moon watch in that it has never been flight qualified by NASA whereas all of the hesalite versions meet that standard. As Blackdog also noted, scratches to the hesalite crystal are easily removed with Polywatch and a little elbow grease. Unlike sapphire, hesalite will not shatter in a hard impact, is unlikely to cause any damage to the dial or the movement if it does break, and is far cheaper to replace. The hesalite version also causes some pleasing dial distortion when viewed from the side and plays with the light in a way that the sapphire version does not. Some folks, me included, find that the milky white ring on the sapphire version detracts from the overall appearance of the watch. To each his own.

 

I just watched a test video where Polywatch was used with great results. Cool. I didn't know that.

But I'm guessing eventually the plexi wears out and so it's fairly cheap to replace then?

EDIT: Which one is the correct one for Hesalite crystal then?

https://www.polywatch.de/en/plastic-polish/
https://www.polywatch.de/en/glass-polish/

 

Not necessarily. I have vintage Omega Constellations from the 1960s that have the original plexiglass crystals and they look just fine. That being said, a hesalite crystal may need to be replaced if it is cracked by an impact or has a deep gouge that can't be polished out. Omega routinely replaces the hesalite crystal if you send your Speedy to them for service, but any qualified watchmaker with an Omega parts account can do it for you.

 

There's no practical limit to how much it can be polished. My 50 year old Speedmaster has the original plexi. It has been polished god knows how many times in a half century and is no where near being polished through.

Think of it mathematically - The hesalite is probably what, 1/8th" thick? That's about 3125 microns. lets say you remove several (3-5?) microns with every polish, and you polish it every month (I polish mine perhaps 1-2x per year, and I wear it 350+ days a year). It would take you between 50-85 years to polish through it. Even if you polish it weekly, which is fairly absurd, it might still take you 12-18 years to need a new one.

You'll get the watch serviced countless times before you reach any of those dates, and a brand new crystal can, and often is, installed whether needed or not.

 

Many good answers fellas. Thanks! Now I actually am warming up to the .005. Searching for a good deal on both.

About my question on the Polywatch version - is it the plastic that's correct?

 

Plastic is correct. Hesalite is basically just acrylic/plastic... Any plastic polish will probably do. Polywatch, Novus, etc. Heck, I've used toothpaste as polish compound more than a time or two and it's passable.

 

It depends on how deeply it gets scratched. Light scratches are removed with only taking a little material off, where deeper scratches require a lot more material removal.

 

Yes, there are two versions, you want the one for plastic (acrylic/hesalite) as the other one is a 2-part system used for mineral crystals and it works totally differently. One thing to clarify here is that unlike most polishing compounds and even toothpaste, Polywatch doesn't remove material and that's why it's best for crystals over these other options. It generates heat when you rub it in, so that's why the longer you polish the better it looks, and by creating heat it essentially melts the surface of the hesalite and allows it to both round off the edges of scratches but also fills them in with adjacent material, so nothing is really being removed, just flowed elsewhere. This stuff is also excellent for restoring taillight lenses on vintage cars, makes them look brand new again.

 

Given that the melting point of "Hesalite" (PMMA) is 160 degrees C, I don't think this is really accurate.

It's a fine abrasive, and I suspect there is some chemical in it that does soften the material, but it's clearly not done with heat. I've polished many hundreds of crystals using it...

 

The original MKII was no-date and manual wind. Essentially a re-cased Moonwatch...
The modern MKII is a completely new watch. It only looks like the vintage MKII. But it could be argued that it is a significantly superior movement.

 

Thank you for the clarification!

Adding this to support Archer's comment:
"According to PolyWatch, when the plastic is ground off, it also ”melts” into the scratches to help remove the scratches. Lastly, the watch crystal polishing cream also contains some ingredients that dissolve the acrylic to some degree in order to help the crystal have its scratches removed."

 

I'm trying on a .005 tomorrow. The provenance of this watch is what draws me to the hesalite version. Already secured some discount over the phone with the AD, hopefully there's a little more to be had when I'm there waving a credit card. A tube of Polywatch should last me a lifetime.

 

I was trying to decide between the .005 and the .006 myself.
Ended up choosing the .006 because that's what I really wanted and I knew it deep inside, I knew that if I'll get the .005 I will end up regretting it every time I would wear it on my wrist.
The "more space accurate" point was something I was also debating in my mind, honestly if the trip to the moon was done today you can be pretty sure the watch that would have gone there would have had a sapphire crystal (see latest SpaceX mission on which one of the astronauts had the X-33 on his wrist, which has a sapphire crystal).
Regarding the "milky ring" I don't find it unattractive, if anything I think it adds to the whole space theme cause it reminds me of the Earth's halo.
I'm also a big fan of the display back and that also played a part in why I chose the .006.

Bottom line, like I said in the beginning, close your eyes and imagine it on your wrist, which one do you see? That's the one you should go for!
And remember that there are no wrong answers when it comes to the Speedy (Reduced not included )

And remember to post photos once you get it! Or else

 

I went for the sapphire because I wanted the see-through caseback (it’s quite a pretty movement), and because I feel a €5000 luxury watch shouldn’t have a cheap-o plastic crystal.

 

I would love to know which is the most popular of the two. I would imagine the sapphire sandwich.

 

From what I've seen here on OF the Hesalite is more popular.

 

Without a doubt.