To co-axial or not to co-axial or is it a case of back to the future?

Claven2

FWIW, I just got a 2500c back from omega service. They replaced all the escapement parts. So I have the originals in a baggie. Smallest escapement parts I've maybe ever seen.

My watchmaker runs an AD, and he says it's not worth the effort to service coaxial on site. They do all non-ciaxials in house for less than the omega charge if desired by the customer, but for the $680 omega charges for a coax movement, he just sends them all out. Not profitable use of their time to do it themselves, he claims.

Skv

Then this technique does not benefit the customer at all. It is advertised as being 'better' in terms of it needing service at higher intervals (thus saving money). In practice it turns out that it actually needs the same amount of service, but it appears to be more time consuming to do it, thus increasing service costs for the customer? That sounds quite bad TBH.

I am wondering if Omega solved this in the 8800/8900 calibers.

OmegaSean

Service costs in the UK at official Omega Dealers
OmegaSean

Davidt

The coaxial escapement in its Omega guise at least is nothing more than a marketing gimmick in my opinion and far from offering a tangible benefit to individuals is actually a hindrance.

I own numerous vintage Omegas but have no desire to own a modern one because of this.

robinhook

I have to say this thread is a fantastic read and gave me a new perspective towards the co-axial tech. Thank you again Al!

Claven2

I think it depends what year your watch is. If it's a transition year, you can look at the calibre number in the edge of the movement to see what letter is after 2500.

vadimo

it was issued to me from the store Jan 2016, is there clear date from which watches would fully transition?