Omega Speedy....
Discussion
Been seriously drooling over the Omega Speedmaster "Moonwatch" for quite a while now, saw one ( I thought) in a jewellers shop window down in Brixham town. It was second hand and "only" £1400 so I went back for another look. It was an Auto (sob).
So we went over to Torquay to visit Goldsmiths and see what could be done... a few quid later and I walked out with this little beauty:
As a bonus, they adjusted my old Seamaster mid size to fit my wife so she got a new watch as well:
Well pleased is an under-statement! Love the moonwatch and it feels just so right on my wrist.
Hope you don't mind me bragging?
So we went over to Torquay to visit Goldsmiths and see what could be done... a few quid later and I walked out with this little beauty:
As a bonus, they adjusted my old Seamaster mid size to fit my wife so she got a new watch as well:
Well pleased is an under-statement! Love the moonwatch and it feels just so right on my wrist.
Hope you don't mind me bragging?
andy_s said:
LukeBird said:
'twas a good year! 
A fine vintage indeed - like '65... 
Chicane-UK said:
How well are Automatic's looked upon in the general world of Omega watch "snobbery" ?
I want an automatic for practical reasons but am lead to believe they're sort of like the 911 Targa of the watch world - not the real deal, and frowned upon by the enthusiasts. Is this true?
They are generally looked down by most enthusiasts, for bI want an automatic for practical reasons but am lead to believe they're sort of like the 911 Targa of the watch world - not the real deal, and frowned upon by the enthusiasts. Is this true?
ks reasons IMO. I had one (the Triple Date) and it was a fantastic watch, I would definitely have another. As such they are generally cheaper than the Professional second hand as they dive in value quicker and to lower depths, buy correctly and you're no more likely to lose money than the Professional.
LukeBird said:
They are generally looked down by most enthusiasts, for bks reasons IMO. I had one (the Triple Date) and it was a fantastic watch, I would definitely have another.
As such they are generally cheaper than the Professional second hand as they dive in value quicker and to lower depths, buy correctly and you're no more likely to lose money than the Professional.
Pretty much what I thought. TBH not that bothered what other people think. Presumably the Automatic keeps time far better than the manual winder as well? I appreciate that an automatic isn't "original" but I've always liked the Speedmaster purely for how it looks, as well as its history / pedigree - but given the choice would rather have an accurate, easy to maintain watch than one that is less practical and loses or gains 6 seconds a day! ks reasons IMO. I had one (the Triple Date) and it was a fantastic watch, I would definitely have another. As such they are generally cheaper than the Professional second hand as they dive in value quicker and to lower depths, buy correctly and you're no more likely to lose money than the Professional.
:bangdrum: Quite agree regarding the automatic versions; the manual wind 321/861 movements in the early Speedmaster were the ones that earned the 'moonwatch' moniker, but obviously this was in a time before the automatic chronograph had been invented (well, produced at least), so almost by definition it was a manual wind chronograph that ended up on the moon - this wasn't becuse of the intrinsic qualities of the watch or movement, it was just pre-auto.
If you're looking at Speeds from the historical point of view and want a 'real' moonwatch, (...and it wasn't the only watch on the moon either), then you really need to get a vintage 321 or 861; if you just admire the looks and history then modern manual Speeds are very good but limited in terms of practicality, (although I dare say some people like manual winders), and functions as they are basically a 1950's design.
I think the Speedmaster dial is extremely well designed and I would like to think that this has had as much to do with its iconic status as just being used by NASA.
Mine is what I would consider to be the next natural evolutionary jump for the Speedmaster in that it's the same movement maker, (Lemania), but giving us automatic winding, day, date and 24hr hand, but all still in the moonwatch case. The movement itself (Omega 1045/Lemania 5100) was used in other watches in space (R. Feuhers Sinn 140/142) if that's relevent, and while it isn't 'the watch that was on the moon', it's probably the natural successor to it. :/bangsdrum:
If you're looking at Speeds from the historical point of view and want a 'real' moonwatch, (...and it wasn't the only watch on the moon either), then you really need to get a vintage 321 or 861; if you just admire the looks and history then modern manual Speeds are very good but limited in terms of practicality, (although I dare say some people like manual winders), and functions as they are basically a 1950's design.
I think the Speedmaster dial is extremely well designed and I would like to think that this has had as much to do with its iconic status as just being used by NASA.
Mine is what I would consider to be the next natural evolutionary jump for the Speedmaster in that it's the same movement maker, (Lemania), but giving us automatic winding, day, date and 24hr hand, but all still in the moonwatch case. The movement itself (Omega 1045/Lemania 5100) was used in other watches in space (R. Feuhers Sinn 140/142) if that's relevent, and while it isn't 'the watch that was on the moon', it's probably the natural successor to it. :/bangsdrum:
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff