The Speedmaster First Omega in Space is now being discontinued. What makes the Speedmaster FOiS 311.32.40.30.01.001 so special and do you need to order one while you can? The word has been out for a while already: the Speedmaster FOiS is being phased out. Omega also confirmed to us that it’s over and done with. […]

Visit Speedy Tuesday — The Discontinued Speedmaster FOiS to read the full article.

 

Nice write up. I think there is a typo at the end of para 4, I think you meant to say (and indeed do so later) that Omega had no suitable bracelet for the FOIS at launch rather than no suitable strap.

The comment about facets is highly contentious has been discussed on here at length. If you are basing your conclusion on that video that is doing the rounds, it is a little ambiguous as it refers mainly to the 2998. I personally believe that at least some straight lugs did come with a lug facet. Find me a 105.003-65 without a facet for instance, they are even discernible in publicity shots but it seems certain the -64 model (as per the EW re-release) did not. Whatever, it seems probably no straight lug ever had a facet as large as that on the FOIS.

 

Still an option to buy on Omega's UK website although when you try you get an error message, guess that Omega's website team are still enjoying some eggnog and haven't updated the website as yet.

 

Great article, thanks for sharing!

The FOIS goes with so many bracelet options .
https://omegaforums.net/threads/first-omega-in-space-fois-on-bracelet.96000/

 

Hi,

Thanks for the typo, will edit it.

No, I never base my conclusion on videos tbh. I checked with different people at Omega's HQ and Museum. They all repeatedly indicated a watch from the first three gens never left the manufacture with facets. It was only done later on during service (also at HQ, from what I understood).

 

The video I referred to was an interview with someone from Omega Switzerland discussing the new EW, he says something similar but it is ambiguous, I wasn't suggesting you re-posted hearsay or unsubstantiated gossip. As I say, I have my doubts that they are 100% right on this. The 105.003-65 for instance was made by a different (as yet unidentified) case maker to the rest of the straight lugs and I've never seen one with no facet a la -64. How come, for instance, most -64s seen have no facet but most -65s do? It just doesn't make sense that they started off the same. I am splitting hairs though, I fully agree that the FOIS facet was exaggerated beyond any seen on an original watch.

The cynic in me wonders if this new found revelation about the facets is a way of distancing the new EW and future straight lugs from the FOIS which was available at a rather modest price point and may not help the halo image Omega are keen to promote going forward.

 

Thanks for a splendid writeup of a wonderful (if sometimes underrated) watch. It would be interesting to chart the ebb and flow of conversation and sakes data on the FOIS since its launch. I suspect that there aren't many models that have seen a late surge like it seems to have. I know that I had just about given up on owning a Speedy I'd really get on with after trying and giving up more than once on the Pro.

Then I saw and tried on the FOIS -- and have rarely taken it off since. The depth and clarity of the lacquered dial and sub-dials, the jewel-like polished hands and facets, the precise and weighted applied logo, the simple but useful differentiation of chrono functionality, those pen-cap chrono pushers. It has a charm and presence all its own.

Godspeed, little friend.

 

Interesting. I thought the facets on CK2915 60th reissue was meant to replicate the original 1957 CK2915 facets (from factory)?

 

Nice write up. So far the highest number posted on Omegaforums is 15241. No one has posted a higher number but it'll be interesting to see if the production hits 16,000 or if we ever get to see what the final # was.

 

So glad I got one of the very last.
#15241 on Uncle Seiko

 

Yes, that is also what they indicated back then. But they told me they had some new insights that these watches never left the factory like that. Not only the marketing/product dept told me that, but also the guys from the archives.

 

These two watches look like the best/mintest/most untouched specimens of 2998s ... with what looks like identical bevels. Not as pronounced as the FOIS, but more than the 105.003-65.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BzGp8NdIP0d/

and

 

Exactly. I just don't buy that they can suddenly declare that there were no bevels, there are too many near perfect examples of watches suggesting otherwise. Period photos too. And as noted above, it does make a mockery of the supposedly carbon copy 70th Anni watches released just 3 years ago. Are they suggesting there were none on the Seamaster and RM too? I honestly think they are either mistaken or are basing this conclusion on incomplete information. It has to be said it wouldn't be the first time that the museum/extract dept have stated things that are questionable to say the least.

I would imagine that very few UK or US market Omegas would have gone to Omega for service in the 60s or 70s, even fewer to Switzerland. Where is the instruction to independents to bevel the lugs when servicing a Speedmaster? Why did they all refinish every watch (except the -64)? Nope. I don't buy it at all.

 

Thank you for sharing your informative article.

I realize that the FOIS pays homage to the 2998-4 and is not an exact rendition, but, I remember when I first saw the watch at a Tourneau Watch store a number of years ago, at first glance I liked the watch, but, then I noticed that the sub-dial hands were not all the same and the lack of symmetry bothered me for lack of a better word.

Why did Omega decide not to make all the sub-dial hands the same as they were in the original reference?

 

Someone had the idea of a new visual feature by separating the time-telling function (alpha hands) from the chronograph function (stick hands) ... unbeknowing they would just rattle the cages of all pedants.

 

Agreed. Omega can say what they want, but unless there are facet-adding gremlins out there, '64's did not have bevels, '65's do. Period.