The future of the Constellation

Posts
240
Likes
403
I want to clarify that I’m not trying to knock on other people’s tastes or say the Manhattan design is total garbage. In my opinion it’s just an okay design. Kind of a funky 80s thing. I think the previous designs were much better. So it’s weird to me why the Manhattan has stuck for 40 years. I understand if it’s selling great in other markets and with the ladies models there is no incentive to change it. After all, Omega can only make so many watches in a year and they are obviously focused elsewhere.

I understand your point. In any case it seems that Omega can create iconic design(s) from time to time, that meets the people taste(s). Just think about the Speedmaster (that I also own). It's always there. I'm not telling that this 80's design has (or had) the same impact, but I see a long-lasting design, here.
Edited:
 
Posts
240
Likes
403
I love the shape of this kind of watches. I don't understand why this shape/form is so underrated.
 
Posts
2,721
Likes
12,012
Maybe I need to wear mine more and let it grow on me. I like the shape and form factor. I more dislike the claws and bezel numerals.
 
Posts
240
Likes
403
Maybe I need to wear mine more and let it grow on me. I like the shape and form factor. I more dislike the claws and bezel numerals.

Give it a try. Mine is from 1999/2000, dark grey dial. It gives its best in the shade, where the light pops out from the hands and indices, making the dial look almost black. Very visible, easy to read the time/enjoy the watch.
 
Posts
3
Likes
1
I wish for a return of the styling of the 50's and early 60's Constellations but with updated technology (and owning several Connies from that period, I can definitely say that the old technology is pretty damn good). Other than the Globemaster, the modern Constellations do absolutely nothing for me and I think that the DeVille Prestige and Hour Vision lines are SO much more attractive. The modern day Constellations just serve to remind me of when Omega went off the rails during the quartz crisis. It seems like the Constellation line never recovered. Hard for me to believe that they sell so well in other parts of the world, but anything is possible.
That’s sort of what they are getting at with the recent Globemaster, do you think?
 
Posts
9,099
Likes
47,523
That’s sort of what they are getting at with the recent Globemaster, do you think?
Yes, but it’s not the same. The dial is a home run, but I’m not a big fan of the fluted tungsten carbide bezel, the baton hands, or the chunky bracelet that’s very difficult to fit (no half links and no micro-adjustment).
Edited:
 
Posts
643
Likes
1,155
Yes, but it’s not the same. The dial is a home run, but I’m not a big fan of the coin edge tungsten carbide bezel, the baton hands, or the chunky bracelet that’s very difficult to fit (no half links and no micro-adjustment).
It’s as if they took the C-shape coin edge and applied it to a pie pan. Omega is moving in the right direction with the globemaster but not there yet.
 
Posts
9,099
Likes
47,523
It’s as if they took the C-shape coin edge and applied it to a pie pan. Omega is moving in the right direction with the globemaster but not there yet.
And a correction on my part. The Globemaster bezel is not coin edged. It’s fluted and somehow just doesn’t look like it belongs with the rest of the watch. That being said, I will credit Omega for using tungsten carbide. Not an easy material to work with, but that stuff is as tough as it gets and puts ceramic to shame. It’s pretty much bulletproof and impossible to scratch.
 
Posts
1,867
Likes
24,683
Yes, but it’s not the same. The dial is a home run, but I’m not a big fan of the fluted tungsten carbide bezel, the baton hands, or the chunky bracelet that’s very difficult to fit (no half links and no micro-adjustment).

For me it’s also missing a distinct feature of vintage piepan Connie’s - the dial that is very high in the case, possible due to the domed crystal. This gives the visual effect that the dial ‘towers above’ the case and that the dial lies right beneath the crystal. Very crisp and legible. Together with the slim cases, this is the most stunning effect in real life, which the Globemaster does not have at all.
 
Posts
1,502
Likes
2,571
For me it’s also missing a distinct feature of vintage piepan Connie’s - the dial that is very high in the case, possible due to the domed crystal. This gives the visual effect that the dial ‘towers above’ the case and that the dial lies right beneath the crystal. Very crisp and legible. Together with the slim cases, this is the most stunning effect in real life, which the Globemaster does not have at all.
Agreed, the Globemaster's dial is very flat and lacks a comparable impression of depth and three-dimensionality that all of the pre C-Case vintage Constellations, dome dial or pie-pan dial, had in spades.
 
Posts
643
Likes
1,155
And a correction on my part. The Globemaster bezel is not coin edged. It’s fluted and somehow just doesn’t look like it belongs with the rest of the watch. That being said, I will credit Omega for using tungsten carbide. Not an easy material to work with, but that stuff is as tough as it gets and puts ceramic to shame. It’s pretty much bulletproof and impossible to scratch.
Agreed but it harps back to the coin edge.
 
Posts
74
Likes
82
I'd happily take the current Globemaster design in a slightly smaller package. Maybe a no date nod to the 167.005 with a 8806 movement and 37mm case. Same thing with the DeVille Prestige and Tresor lines, I would just like to see more size options.
 
Posts
404
Likes
462
The constellation line is a good example of (20th century) Omega being unable to keep its designs somewhat consistent or them just slapping a random name on the dial of a new watch.

The manhattan watch, although being a cool design in itself, should probably never have been a part of the Constellation line as it barely resembles the models that came before.

Now we have a Constellation line in the catalog that carries virtually zero resemblance with the vintage constellations and a Globemaster line that is a mishmash of all the Constellation watches that came before the manhattan 😵‍💫
 
Posts
2,721
Likes
12,012
The revival of this thread inspired me to wear my neglected Manhattan today. It really is a decent wearer. Hacking and quick-set date is also very nice. Still can’t shake a stick at a linen dial C-case though. I still wish Omega would do better with the forgotten Constellation line.

 
Posts
56
Likes
34
The globe master appeals to me even if the Connie doesn’t.
It has the bezel and handed from the early 70’s c shape, the pie pan from the 50’s. What’s not to love.
We all like the Connie’s of old but China is where the $ are. They are keeping the claw alive and as long as it’s a cash cow, omega will keep it. Why wouldn’t they. they gave us the globe master so I guess they are trying to please both markets.
Actually the C-shape case and the baton hands are from 1960s Constellations not 1970s Constellations.
 
Posts
56
Likes
34
Somewhere in China, someone is blogging about how weird the Aqua Terra is and how Omega should go all in on more Manhattan variations instead.

I personally find the design... inelegant... But taste is not universal, it would seem.

Edit: I would definitely love it if Omega reissued a pie pan Connie with a modern movement though. Give it the sort of treatment as the trilogy watches or the Ed White reissue.
Omega already did that. It is called the Globemaster. Nobody buys it.
 
Posts
9,099
Likes
47,523
S Spqr
Omega already did that. It is called the Globemaster. Nobody buys it.
Not entirely correct. It's not a hot seller and that's a shame because it's probably one of the most underrated watches in Omega's catalog.
 
Posts
156
Likes
612
I’m trying to like the Globemaster. Need to try one on I suppose. But the dial just looks too big or something. I think if they made it 37mm it wouldn’t look so beefy. I do love the pie pan, bezel and the brushed finish. The gap at the first link of the bracelet- that might really bother me over time.