Forums Latest Auctions Members

Straight from the horses mouth: the caliber 321 speedy will be made in SS

  1. Slim Pickens

    Slim Pickens Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    10
    Likes
    9
    Hi everyone,

    I don’t post much on here but like some of You once the 321 caliber was announced I became giddy. My wife will say I don’t need any more watches but we all know this is a sickness .
    anyway I’ve been scouring the Internet for any info on the 321 being produced in SS as the already announced Platinum is expensive and in limited quantities. Well for those that know Teddy On YouTube, he did a recent interview with the CEO of Omega at the Bond Seamaster 2020 watch reveal and He confirmed they’re working on a SS version (NOT limited production ) 321!

    Link to Interview:


    So hopefully we have some more official news closer to Baselworld or SIHH this year.
     
  2. Foo2rama

    Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    12,275
    Likes
    16,841
    What is the time point in the video when he says this?
     
    BenBagbag likes this.
  3. Evitzee

    Evitzee Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    1,935
    Likes
    2,933
    I don't think it was any secret that Omega was going to produce a steel version 321 this year. It is supposedly constrained by production ability, but that can always be worked on, and it will not be anywhere close to the standard version price wise. Most expect it to be in the $12k to $15k range. Maybe we will be surprised and they will discontinue the 1861 version and have a 3861 standard model and a 321 model. But the 321 version will not be cheap, Omega won't be leaving money on the table.
     
    Edited Jan 5, 2020
    connieseamaster and Pun like this.
  4. Evitzee

    Evitzee Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    1,935
    Likes
    2,933
    12 minute mark
     
  5. Slim Pickens

    Slim Pickens Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    10
    Likes
    9
    Around the 11:52 mark
     
    Edited Jan 5, 2020
  6. Slim Pickens

    Slim Pickens Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    10
    Likes
    9
    Agreed...but most only “assumed” a steel version would be produced. However, when only the platinum version was announced, many (including myself) were disappointed as We thought Omega would make the historic movement only a limited production and say “forget the masses”. So assumptions aside, it’s nice to have official confirmation as I have only heard speculation up until this video/interview.
     
  7. JwRosenthal

    JwRosenthal Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    3,709
    Likes
    7,256
    So forgive my ignorance, but why would a new 321 be more desirable than the current movement. I get the excitement of them reissuing a movement akin to that which has been out of production for years, but what validates the premium over the current model other than speculative collector value?
     
    LastGreekLetter and Njnjcfp88 like this.
  8. Evitzee

    Evitzee Jan 5, 2020

    Posts
    1,935
    Likes
    2,933
    Because many people have been conditioned to believe that ONLY a 321 powered Speedmaster can be truly called a moonwatch. The 861 line are just moonwatch wannabes and lack the requisite DNA. To me it's a silly argument but people are passionate about it. I wouldn't pay much premium for one but others will. This is an often irrational, emotion driven hobby that a company will exploit. Old man Hayek would have been all over this.
     
  9. wsfarrell

    wsfarrell Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    1,921
    Likes
    2,700
    Problem is, Omega could (and should) have put the 321 in the 50th anniversary watch---that would have been a killer. I believe for reasons of greed they decided to split them: one watch has a cool dial and caseback, the other has the updated 321 movement. I can't imagine there will be a ton of interest in the updated 321 movement by itself.
     
  10. Slim Pickens

    Slim Pickens Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    10
    Likes
    9
    Along with what others have said the 321 was a beautiful movement that harkens back to the days when watchmakers truly put their heart and soul into creating something of beauty. The haute horlogerie in the 321 is akin to that of Breguet and Vacheron...that along with the fact that it is considered THE Moonwatch and you have emotion in many buyers (including myself) that are prepared to write a check for one (within reason of course ). Knowing that the new 3861 in the recent anniversary movements are technologically superior to the 321 as far as manual winding timepieces are concerned.
     
  11. Screwbacks

    Screwbacks Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    1,219
    Likes
    2,230
    Is there any news as to the take up of the platinum 321s, whether or not it is fully sold or reserved?

    Anent status of this platinum321s, then the future steel version could be something to await for. ;)::psy::
     
  12. STANDY

    STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    11,133
    Likes
    25,926
    This wasn’t the first time it was mentioned a SS version was to be made, nor the first time a SS version would be made that wasn’t a LE. All in the above video has been known for nearly 9-10 months via Fratello postings....
     
  13. tyrantlizardrex

    tyrantlizardrex C is NOT for "Lizard". Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    7,539
    Likes
    21,956

    It’s worth extra internet cool points.
     
    chronos and STANDY like this.
  14. Wryfox

    Wryfox Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    1,348
    Likes
    3,611
    Yet the 321 was good enough for Space, with humans in it.:whistling:
     
  15. STANDY

    STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    11,133
    Likes
    25,926
    My want for a V8 dwindled once the carburettor disappeared so I see the passion for old school stuff. Marketing master stroke if it’s anymore than a standard SS 1861
     
    JwRosenthal likes this.
  16. padders

    padders Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    5,210
    Likes
    7,513
    Other than cool points, which is as good a reason as any, I have found one other reason why the 321 is better than the 861/1861 in the Moonwatch. It is debatable whether it is a good reason, but if you want your chrono hand to hit the 4 sub-second marks on the std Moonwatch dial, you need a movement that runs at 5 or 10Hz, the 861/1861 runs at 6Hz so only ever hits the full second mark, it misses the rest by design. They fix this on other Omega models by utilising either 2 intermediate marks for the 1861 and 3 marks for the 3313 and 930X/990X movements which run at 8Hz (as used in the Speedmaster '57/Racing) but the 1861 Moonwatch still uses an incorrect 4 mark pattern. See below for a comparison:

    Current 1861 Moonwatch, wrong number of marks for 6Hz movement frequency:

    omega-speedmaster-moonwatch-31130423001005-1-product-zoom.jpeg

    Silver Snoopy using correct 2 intermediate marks for the 1861

    silver-snoopy-award-ss-limited-29599.jpeg

    Speedmaster '57 using 9300 8Hz movement with correct 3 intermediate marks.

    omega-speedmaster-speedmaster-57-omega-co-axial-chronograph-41-5-mm-33110425101002-l.jpeg

    So much for the Speedmaster Moonwatch being a precision timing instrument, it hasn't been able to accurately time to a finer increment than 1 second since the 1969 movement change ;)

    There you have it. If you want a watch with the std Moonswatch dial which can accurately measure elapsed time to within a quarter of a second, you need the 321, the 861/1861 are only giving an approximation. QED.
     
    Edited Jan 6, 2020
    EauTerre, Badwolf, Longbow and 15 others like this.
  17. JwRosenthal

    JwRosenthal Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    3,709
    Likes
    7,256
    So the arguement of “only a watch with a 321 is a “real” moonwatch” didn’t do it for me as the reissued movement is not an “original” 321 as would have been taken to space, it’s a new movement made like the old one.
    The answer padders just gave- that I can understand. A bit more anal retentive than I would ever need for analog time keeping, but I get it.
    Thanks for that explanation.
     
  18. dscoogs

    dscoogs Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    519
    Likes
    3,089
    Real Speedy fan :). IMHO Omega should make the regular Moonwatch a 105.012-65 re-issue with the 321 cal and never change it again !
     
    Tickeroo likes this.
  19. padders

    padders Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    5,210
    Likes
    7,513
    I won't argue with your description of that post, I had rather too much time on my hands...
     
    JwRosenthal likes this.
  20. Foo2rama

    Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Jan 6, 2020

    Posts
    12,275
    Likes
    16,841
    @padders

    great I can’t unsee that ever!



    also in 321 vs 861


    The 321 ran for less then 20 years. The 861 is currently on its 51st year of production. Or we can argue it was in production for 50 years. That’s a heck of a run for any movement.
     
    Travelller, padders and JwRosenthal like this.