I feel like I've made a big mistake

[ChrisSow]

Anyone swapped out of their grail watch and really wished they hadn't? Changed my 2008 16610 for a speedmaster moonwatch and have regretted it since. God why did I do it....why? Worst bit is it'll cost me £3000 to get me back to where I was.

[L1OFF]

I have a 16610 and a speedy pro, much prefer the speedy and wear it much more often. Give it some time the speedy is a supurb watch.

Edited by L1OFF on Monday 11th August 21:28

[Vvroom]

I recently bought a speedy and have to say that I just didn't get it. The mystique was shattered the first time I really studied the profile- the clunky way the bezel sits on the head of the watch: not for me! I've since sold it on.

If any of you recall the thread I started after picking it up for £1075- I made quite a profit!

Would never sell my 16610. Mostly wear JLC at the office and love getting the Sub out for weekends.

OP- get another!

[Sy1441]

Have both, prefer the sub by a long shot.

[ChrisSow]

Wish I could afford another, would have to be the newer model though, which is even more expensive. Blowers is a five minute walk from my house. May have to participate in some tyre kicking and man maths. Anyone want to buy a 3 month old Speedie moonwatch?

[Sy1441]

Have both, prefer the sub by a long shot.

[Mr Daytona]

Vvroom, just read your previous post on the subject of the Speedie you used to have.

As I'll be (hopefully) buying one in the not too distant future, I'm intrigued as to why you went off of it so quickly ? Have to confess I've only tried the single one on and that was at the same time as I picked my current Seamaster chrono. Were it not for the fact that I'd wanted a Seamaster for years I'd have taken the Speedie there and then.

Ps, apologies to the OP for the thread hijack.

[Mr Aston Martin]

Sold my Patek which I have lived to regret, looked at buying back into the brand at the same level and simply can't justify that level of expenditure. Annual calendar with moon phase are nearly twice the price to my original outlay.

Entered the watch wilderness for a couple of years before the itch became unbearable and at that point looked at VC, AP, Blancpain etc and finally settled on a Sub date. It's been a strange journey to get here but it's never off my wrist and while it hasn't the emotional content, beauty or engineering behind it the Sub is simply a great watch.


It's only a temporary problem so relax and if you can't find a replacement keep your powder dry and wait till the itch starts.

[Vvroom]

Mr Daytona said:

Vvroom, just read your previous post on the subject of the Speedie you used to have.

As I'll be (hopefully) buying one in the not too distant future, I'm intrigued as to why you went off of it so quickly ? Have to confess I've only tried the single one on and that was at the same time as I picked my current Seamaster chrono. Were it not for the fact that I'd wanted a Seamaster for years I'd have taken the Speedie there and then.

Ps, apologies to the OP for the thread hijack.

There is a lot of 'speedy love' on PH so I was intrigued to try one. I understand the history and I'd not had a hand would watch since I flipped a Reverso so I was looking forward to it.

It's a good size, classic design etc but I just didn't gel with it. I mentioned earlier what I consider to be the clunky way the bezel sits on the head of the watch (in profile view) and a few other bits I didn't like included: the bracelet with the mix of brush and polished sections (not all speedy's have this; I know), the clasp- massive and emblazoned with OMEGA etc: lacked the subtlety of some of my other watches. It is a watch that looks best on a strap I think and I have wrists just under 7 inches. Because the head of the watch is of a certain size, it just looked odd when I stuck it on a croc strap. More strap than watch when sat on the wrist. This is a very personal issue, I appreciate.

Good luck to you- I'm sure you'll love it.

[Mr Daytona]

Vvroom, thanks for that - something to think about. Failing a serious bonus at work come Christmas though (in which case a Daytona will be mine) still looking at a second hand Speedmaster, though I suspect the 42mm version might be out of my price reach.

Do have a thing for a Tag Heuer Monaco on a bracelet though......

[hilly10]

I would never get rid of my Sub. Never

[PJ S]

ChrisSow said:

Anyone swapped out of their grail watch and really wished they hadn't? Changed my 2008 16610 for a speedmaster moonwatch and have regretted it since. God why did I do it....why? Worst bit is it'll cost me £3000 to get me back to where I was.

Sorry to hear you were convinced that you had to have a Speedy – you've unfortunately just found out what I've maintained all along, that it's a bland and uninspiring watch, and which has been wed out by Omega for numerous revisions from Schumacher to unimportant Anniversary celebrations.
If it wasn't for its somewhat historical relevance, it'd have been consigned to the annals of history with nary a flurry of protest.

As chronos go, it's on a par with dishwater for dullness – but at least they've other models which also cover the genre, and much better.

[HarrySmash]

hilly10 said:

I would never get rid of my Sub. Never

Same here.

[dom9]

My 16610 will be moving on, shortly (once I advertise it)... My Seadweller, on the other hand, will never leave the collection!

I do feel like I should try a Speedy at some point... There are just so many threads on here about them!

[MYOB]

Got rid of my PO and got the Sea Dweller - my supposed grail. It never felt the right move and I missed the PO whilst not being totally enamoured with the Rolex (for various reasons). Got rid of the Rolex, got a new PO and Aqua Terra and harmony has been restored.

Just trying to deliberate my next purchase to add to my modest collection...

[Vvroom]

PJ S said:

Sorry to hear you were convinced that you had to have a Speedy – you've unfortunately just found out what I've maintained all along, that it's a bland and uninspiring watch, and which has been wed out by Omega for numerous revisions from Schumacher to unimportant Anniversary celebrations.
If it wasn't for its somewhat historical relevance, it'd have been consigned to the annals of history with nary a flurry of protest.

I agree with this- no sense of occasion.

[yeti]

PJ S said:

Sorry to hear you were convinced that you had to have a Speedy – you've unfortunately just found out what I've maintained all along, that it's a bland and uninspiring watch, and which has been wed out by Omega for numerous revisions from Schumacher to unimportant Anniversary celebrations.
If it wasn't for its somewhat historical relevance, it'd have been consigned to the annals of history with nary a flurry of protest.

As chronos go, it's on a par with dishwater for dullness – but at least they've other models which also cover the genre, and much better.

Imagine how depressed he'd be if he'd bought a 'Grand' Seiko or something (ANYTHING) non-Swiss >shudder<

[marcosgt]

Vvroom said:

PJ S said:

Sorry to hear you were convinced that you had to have a Speedy – you've unfortunately just found out what I've maintained all along, that it's a bland and uninspiring watch, and which has been wed out by Omega for numerous revisions from Schumacher to unimportant Anniversary celebrations.
If it wasn't for its somewhat historical relevance, it'd have been consigned to the annals of history with nary a flurry of protest.

I agree with this- no sense of occasion.

Rubbish... No watch suits everyone and the Speedy's as hyped as Rolex's Sub, but it's a great watch in general.

Personally, I'd never sell a watch I really liked to BUY a different one. If I, perhaps, found I wasn't wearing the first one after a while I might get shot of it, but there's always a chance that you just won't grow to love any watch, be it a Speedy, a Grand Seiko or a Submariner.

It's funny that people seem to feel they HAVE to own any particular watch. I've seen and handled a number of Subs and there's nothing wrong with them, in fact the design is a classic, but I've never felt the need to own one because of it.

I know someone will say "Ah, well, you've not really experienced having one", but I'm afraid my answer to that will probably be obfuscated by the forum software

I'd never sell a watch I liked to get one others raved about...

M

Edited by marcosgt on Tuesday 12th August 17:16

[NickXX]

MYOB said:

Got rid of my PO and got the Sea Dweller - my supposed grail. It never felt the right move and I missed the PO whilst not being totally enamoured with the Rolex (for various reasons). Got rid of the Rolex, got a new PO and Aqua Terra and harmony has been restored.

Just trying to deliberate my next purchase to add to my modest collection...

Out of interest what did you not like about the Sea Dweller? I have one on my list and think I would really like it (currently have Seamaster coax 300m and Speedmaster Pro which I would keep).

[PJ S]

yeti said:

Imagine how depressed he'd be if he'd bought a 'Grand' Seiko or something (ANYTHING) non-Swiss >shudder<

Irrelevant Lewis, and well you know it!
We're talking specifically about the 'iconic Moonwatch', which as I've said, if it'd never been on the moon, practically all of the hyperbole surrounding it wouldn't exist and it'd probably have been discontinued at some point.
The only reason it's been a success, is because of the hyperbole over its association with Space. Remove that, and it's got nothing to boast about at all.
If it had a design as truly iconic as Gerald Genta's AP RO, then that'd be accepted, but it doesn't even have that going for it.

I can look at it, study it, and yet still come away with the same "meh" feeling – what it's renowned for is completely immaterial, and what it has to offer is mehness by the bucketful.