Speedy Tuesday: Omega’s Speedmaster Is The Perfect First Watch

Posts
6,707
Likes
21,636
That's why I asked my OB's watchmaker, and then also one in Biel, and relayed what I heard from them here.
Okay, so we have dissenting information from two reliable sources.

I am not doubting your story, to be clear. But: it is second hand information. Al, who has posted reliable information here for years, has offered first-hand information.

If your sources want to weigh in here with their documentation, great. In the interim, the information from Al has to supersede that until proven otherwise.
 
Posts
2,717
Likes
5,084
My general take on this, having talked to people who work directly for Omega, is that many engage in at least some combination of CYA and "sell the customer the right watch." I totally don't blame them. The luxury watch scene is absolutely not in the business of people owning one singular "right" watch.
 
Posts
231
Likes
185
Okay, so we have dissenting information from two reliable sources.

I am not doubting your story, to be clear. But: it is second hand information. Al, who has posted reliable information here for years, has offered first-hand information.

If your sources want to weigh in here with their documentation, great. In the interim, the information from Al has to supersede that until proven otherwise.
I don't see it as dissenting, and I also don't think litigating wording is worth our time.

Beyond that, I'm hopeful this is an open & welcoming place to share information and experiences versus a "proof" and "supersede" place since the internet has plenty of those already.
 
Posts
6,707
Likes
21,636
Beyond that, I'm hopeful this is an open & welcoming place to share information and experiences versus a "proof" and "supersede" place since the internet has plenty of those already
Respectfully disagree. The information people rely on here can have significant impact on what can end up being substantial financial expenditures. Given that, proof is often a welcomed and appreciated standard.
 
Posts
231
Likes
185
Respectfully disagree. The information people rely on here can have significant impact on what can end up being substantial financial expenditures. Given that, proof is often a welcomed and appreciated standard.
My hope is "respectfully" is the key word for this site, and we hold everyone to that standard, because maybe we're not?

As far as "proof" goes for this topic ...

Well, in my career, unfortunately I've seen a lot of formerly "proven" things get unproven fast in the form of a smoking hole or other conflagration, so I recommend doubling the risk margin on any assets you'd rather not see the risk trigger for, but these are personal preferences & choices.
 
Posts
2,717
Likes
5,084
@GrussGott with the greatest respect, what you stated in this post about 30m water resistance is not "largely the same" as what is stated on omega's website.


I don't say this to be confrontational or disagreeable, but Omega very clearly states that watches rated to 30 m can handle a lot more than hand-washing.
 
Posts
2,717
Likes
5,084
"There's very little that gets watch enthusiasts fired up more than an argument about water resistance ratings, excepting maybe the occasional comment about whether a watch is too thick."

-Benjamin Franklin
 
Posts
6,707
Likes
21,636
Well, in my career, unfortunately I've seen a lot of formerly "proven" things get unproven fast in the form of a smoking hole or other conflagration, so I recommend doubling the risk margin on any assets you'd rather not see the risk trigger for, but these are personal preferences & choices
I can appreciate your sentiments, and, in fact, I personally err on the more conservative side of this topic as well, when it comes to water immersion and associated issues.

But, that’s not the question. I do not expect that whatever reliable information about this topic to “get unproven fast,” so the real issue is, what is the accepted Omega standard, and have we seen it. And I think the preponderance of evidence is that the Omega certified watchmaker who commented on it has done this, so unless there is an unlikely smoking gun, I think the issue has been settled?
 
Posts
2,717
Likes
5,084
I can appreciate your sentiments, and, in fact, I personally err on the more conservative side of this topic as well, when it comes to water immersion and associated issues.

But, that’s not the question. I do not expect that whatever reliable information about this topic to “get unproven fast,” so the real issue is, what is the accepted Omega standard, and have we seen it. And I think the preponderance of evidence is that the Omega certified watchmaker who commented on it has done this, so unless there is an unlikely smoking gun, I think the issue has been settled?

I agree. Credit to Omega for over-building their watches in a way that 30M of water resistance literally means 30M. We live in a world where planned obsolescence and exceptions are so common we've perhaps been taught not to take ratings anywhere close to face value. Throw in a healthy dose of misinformation and welcome to (almost!) 2025.

That said-- I 100% understand the sentiment @M'Bob expresses here- it's a choice-- a perfectly valid one-- to not expose something that is expensive to repair to water. That choice is individual and separate from Omega's pressure rating.
 
Posts
231
Likes
185
@GrussGott with the greatest respect, what you stated in this post about 30m water resistance is not "largely the same" as what is stated on omega's website.

I don't say this to be confrontational or disagreeable, but Omega very clearly states that watches rated to 30 m can handle a lot more than hand-washing.
My posts here are casual so I agree with you: I'm SURE there's lots of poorly worded stuff in there! My thought was people here are also casual enough to get the gist.

With that, if you and Bob and Al think it will be helpful, I'll delete my post.
 
Posts
16,741
Likes
47,363
(5.) Any rating. If you use any Omega watch for swimming, and especially water sports, take it in to an OB yearly for free* testing where it'll also have the gaskets inspected & replaced if needed (*though this is what the Swiss guys said and I can't say they speak for all OBs)


You do know that they only pressure test a watch. The checking gaskets doesn’t happen and are only replaced if it fails a pressure test.
Replacing gaskets is gunna cost you a fair chunk of coin as there is several gaskets in stem, pushers and caseback. So checking is a fair bit of watch dismantling.
 
Posts
2,717
Likes
5,084
My posts here are casual so I agree with you: I'm SURE there's lots of poorly worded stuff in there! My thought was people here are also casual enough to get the gist.

With that, if you and Bob and Al think it will be helpful, I'll delete my post.

I don't see any reason you should delete it, that removes a portion of a completely acceptable and mostly friendly conversation.

Omegaforums.net may be one of the very last bastions of the true "internet forum" on the internet, and discourse- true discourse- includes the occasional mistake. I've made them!

Edit: in fact, at least one occasion I had information wrong it resulted in a fairly amusing comment by @Aroxx :
Edited:
 
Posts
231
Likes
185
I think the issue has been settled?
Given I'm sharing what I was told in person by Omega employees, and have no expertise myself, I really can't say.

If you feel my post unsettled something or someone, I can delete it.
 
Posts
231
Likes
185


You do know that they only pressure test a watch. The checking gaskets doesn’t happen and are only replaced if it fails a pressure test.
Replacing gaskets is gunna cost you a fair chunk of coin as there is several gaskets in stem, pushers and caseback. So checking is a fair bit of watch dismantling.
That's the wording both Omega HQ watchmakers used, but maybe they misspoke or embellished.
 
Posts
231
Likes
244
Given I'm sharing what I was told in person by Omega employees, and have no expertise myself, I really can't say.

If you feel my post unsettled something or someone, I can delete it.
Don't delete it dude. We're just having a friendly discussion.

Nobody is doubting what you were told. We're just saying that what you've been told contradicts the official and published information that's been released by Omega themselves as a brand.

We don't know why they're giving you contradictory information. However, what we can tell you is that if you own a Speedmaster, you can take the watch to a depth of 50m underwater and swim with it at that depth, if you want to.
 
Posts
6,707
Likes
21,636
If you feel my post unsettled something or someone, I can delete it.
Not in the slightest. If I disagree with you, that doesn’t mean anyone is angry, or that your opinion doesn’t matter or shouldn't remain.

On a side note: is anyone else tired of the way people that disagree with our views tend to get villainized? Why can’t we disagree and still grab a beer?
 
Posts
2,717
Likes
5,084
Not in the slightest. If I disagree with you, that doesn’t mean anyone is angry, or that your opinion doesn’t matter or shouldn't remain.

On a side note: is anyone else tired of the way people that disagree with our views tend to get villainized? Why can’t we disagree and still grab a beer?

Exactly, and I think that's an important lesson here. everywhere else on the internet disagreement tends to be so loaded and include so much else. Here though, I feel comfortable disagreeing. That definitely lends an old time, smaller internet forum feel ( I can't believe I'm typing old-time ::facepalm1::)
 
Posts
5,095
Likes
17,738
Given I'm sharing what I was told in person by Omega employees, and have no expertise myself, I really can't say.

If you feel my post unsettled something or someone, I can delete it.

On the contrary, your post was helpful. I've read and heard similar comments about water resistance (i.e. 30m really means light drops of rain and you need a minimum of 50m, if not 100m to go swimming.) I've heard it so often that it becomes gospel. So it's nice to have Al debunk it and this thread will probably interest other readers in the future.

Maybe it'll convince the Fratello author to get a Speedy afterall.

 
Posts
5,095
Likes
17,738
On a side note: is anyone else tired of the way people that disagree with our views tend to get villainized? Why can’t we disagree and still grab a beer?

It might just be your dastardly mustache...
 
Posts
27,646
Likes
70,274
@GrussGott with the greatest respect, what you stated in this post about 30m water resistance is not "largely the same" as what is stated on omega's website.


I don't say this to be confrontational or disagreeable, but Omega very clearly states that watches rated to 30 m can handle a lot more than hand-washing.
Agreed. This isn’t about semantics, about being casual, or being poorly worded, or posts being largely the same. That’s nothing but gaslighting people into believing that what was said was very different than what was actually said. To me that is the most disrespectful thing in this thread. If you are going to post, at least own what you say…



You do know that they only pressure test a watch. The checking gaskets doesn’t happen and are only replaced if it fails a pressure test.
Replacing gaskets is gunna cost you a fair chunk of coin as there is several gaskets in stem, pushers and caseback. So checking is a fair bit of watch dismantling.

To clarify, Omega has no requirement to replace seals annually, and no requirement to have an annual pressure test. These are simply recommendations. As you have noted, seals are only replaced if the watch fails the pressure testing.