Community Stories

Why did Omega change the design of the Speedmaster Professional?

ninman
Posts
212
Likes
210
So when Omega made the first Speedmaster Professional 105012, it looked great.

What I'm confused about is why they changed it when they released the 145022, I.e. the first with the caliber 861 movement.

Specifically, why get rid of the tear drop seconds chrono hand? Why get rid of the long hour markers? Why get rid of the step dial?

Those things all made the Speedy look so good, so why change it?

Cheers
 
DaveK
Posts
4,814
Likes
14,404
Maybe they weren’t hugged enough as children?
 
X350 XJR
Posts
13,369
Likes
31,509
Evolution is in the eye of the beholder.
 
pdxleaf
Posts
4,936
Likes
17,236
If it were up to Omega, NASA would have switched to the Mark II 145.014 Speedmaster.
 
padders
Posts
9,536
Likes
15,041
ninman ninman
So when Omega made the first Speedmaster Professional 105012, it looked great.

What I'm confused about is why they changed it when they released the 145022, I.e. the first with the caliber 861 movement.

Specifically, why get rid of the tear drop seconds chrono hand? Why get rid of the long hour markers? Why get rid of the step dial?

Those things all made the Speedy look so good, so why change it?

Cheers

It may seem obvious to you which features should have been retained but it wouldn’t have been 50-60 years ago and in any event fashions change.

Your timing is slightly off and it wasn’t an overnight thing. The teardrop hand was err dropped around 1967 when the 145.012 was rolled out, the long indices lasted up until 1969 and were carried over to the first of the 861 models, namely the 145.022-68. The step dial lasted longer still, right up until ~1974.

This suggests the changes were evolutionary and done to keep the look fresh, or so would be my guess. Don’t forget the pushers, crown, lume material, font and logo have also changed over the years. Very few products stay truly static.
Edited:
 
Donn Chambers
Posts
2,439
Likes
3,314
ninman ninman
So when Omega made the first Speedmaster Professional 105012, it looked great.

What I'm confused about is why they changed it when they released the 145022, I.e. the first with the caliber 861 movement.

Specifically, why get rid of the tear drop seconds chrono hand? Why get rid of the long hour markers? Why get rid of the step dial?

Those things all made the Speedy look so good, so why change it?

Cheers

No knowledge on why things changed, but the ALMOST made everything right again with the new 3861 Speedy. If only they had gone back to the long markers. Then, it would have been perfect.
 
ninman
Posts
212
Likes
210
Donn Chambers Donn Chambers
No knowledge on why things changed, but the ALMOST made everything right again with the new 3861 Speedy. If only they had gone back to the long markers. Then, it would have been perfect.

Second this. I hope they release a version with the long hour markers, then I can get them to fit the new dial to my watch.
 
watch_my_six
Posts
405
Likes
591
ninman ninman
Second this. I hope they release a version with the long hour markers, then I can get them to fit the new dial to my watch.
Anyone know if there was any design or production reason for the short markers in the first place?
 
M'Bob
Posts
6,619
Likes
21,397
watch_my_six jspdl
Anyone know if there was any design or production reason for the short markers in the first place?

Clearly cost savings. They were running out of Tritium…
 
S.H.
Posts
1,548
Likes
3,703
watch_my_six jspdl
Anyone know if there was any design or production reason for the short markers in the first place?
I think there is a obvious one: the long tritium markers were masking the smaller tick marks, the short markers let you read the complete track...
 
watch_my_six
Posts
405
Likes
591
S.H. S.H.
I think there is a obvious one: the long tritium markers were masking the smaller tick marks, the short markers let you read the complete track...
Ah indeed! And how come it took until the 3861 to change the number of ticks between minute markers to more accurately reflect the beat rate of the movement? In other words, why was it 4 vs 2 to begin with?
 
ninman
Posts
212
Likes
210
But why switch from a tear drop chrono seconds hand to a flat one?
 
ninman
Posts
212
Likes
210
Do you think it would have been better to retain the exact look of the moonwatch in the hesalite version and put the new look on the sapphire?

That way people could get a 105012 looking watch, just with an updated movement, and everyone else could get the new look in the sapphire.
 
padders
Posts
9,536
Likes
15,041
watch_my_six jspdl
Ah indeed! And how come it took until the 3861 to change the number of ticks between minute markers to more accurately reflect the beat rate of the movement? In other words, why was it 4 vs 2 to begin with?
Because the original 321 movement had a slower rate than the later 861/1861 and 4 marks originally allowed accurate measurement to 1/5 of a second. When Omega changed to a 3Hz (6 tick) beat rate with the 861 they lost that precision by keeping the design the same. The 2 marks on the 3861 dial allows accurate 1/3s precision. The broad arrow watches have 3 marks which allows 1/4s precision due to the higher still beat rate at 4Hz from their rather more sophisticated 3303/3313 movement.

They actually changed to a 2 mark design long before the 3861 came about, the FOIS has it and that’s from 2012. They also used it on several LEs, the Snoopy 2 and Ultraman to name but 2.
Edited:
 
watch_my_six
Posts
405
Likes
591
padders padders
Because the original 321 movement had a slower rate than the later 861/1861 and 4 marks originally allowed accurate measurement to 1/5 of a second. When Omega changed to a 3Hz (6 tick) beat rate with the 861 they lost that precision by keeping the design the same. The 2 marks on the 3861 dial allows accurate 1/3s precision. The broad arrow watches have 3 marks which allows 1/4s precision due to the higher still beat rate at 4Hz from their rather more sophisticated 3303/3313 movement.

They actually changed to a 2 mark design long before the 3861 came about, the FOIS has it and that’s from 2012. They also used it on several LEs, the Snoopy 2 and Ultraman to name but 2.
I see, so while the 321 beats at 2.5Hz / 5 ticks, presumably because they couldn't actually squeeze in a 6th tick mark on the dial for the 3Hz / 6 ticks of the 861/3861, at least 3 ticks more accurately aligns with the faster beat rate, even though it's actually a reduction in precision?
 
Donn Chambers
Posts
2,439
Likes
3,314
ninman ninman
Do you think it would have been better to retain the exact look of the moonwatch in the hesalite version and put the new look on the sapphire?

That way people could get a 105012 looking watch, just with an updated movement, and everyone else could get the new look in the sapphire.

They would also have to put an applied logo on the hesalite to make it look like a 105.012. And a simpler caseback with no “flight qualified” text.

Would it have been better to do all this (at least on one version). Yes.

Would Omega do it on a standard Moonwatch. No.

But maybe on a limited edition with a premium price…. 😉
 
DougPhx
Posts
149
Likes
192
ninman ninman
So when Omega made the first Speedmaster Professional 105012, it looked great.

What I'm confused about is why they changed it when they released the 145022, I.e. the first with the caliber 861 movement.

Specifically, why get rid of the tear drop seconds chrono hand? Why get rid of the long hour markers? Why get rid of the step dial?

Those things all made the Speedy look so good, so why change it?

Cheers
They are a business focused on revenue & profit growth. Always keeping the same design you can run the risk as a manufacturer of being viewed as stale, not forward thinking, behind the competition, behind the times, etc.

One function of design evolution is a carrot on a stick and a rationale for customers to keep coming back to the trough. I realize there are some exceptions to this, but they are rare outliers. Follow the money. Without healthy revenue & profit everything else is just aggravating noise and expense dragging profit down.

Imagine pleading the importance of static design ethos & consistency to the board in a meeting with a huge chart behind them with a red arrow going aggressively down and to the right. I don’t think that speech would win the day. Follow the money.
 
D
Posts
211
Likes
124
There are reasons for all the changes but most are supposition. Lot's of good explanations. Maybe Omega management can chime in?
 
7 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

F

Why did Omega keep the Bond bracelet?

frabr Modern Omega Watches
Bimmerman77
Bimmerman77
Posts
11
Views
6K
Caliber561

The New 2021 Speedmaster Professional Moonwatch (Sapphire)

Caliber561 Modern Omega Watches
blubarb
blubarb
Posts
46
Views
52K
Longbow

Beautifully….flawed: A review of the Speedmaster Professional Limited Edition Tokyo 2020 Panda

Longbow Omega Watch Reviews
easygoinguk
easygoinguk
Posts
56
Views
49K
Longbow

An ownership review of the Omega Globemaster, or “The Idiot Button”

Longbow Omega Watch Reviews
trebor2
trebor2
Posts
168
Views
137K