Jump to content


Omega Co-Axial MovementsHow good are they


17 replies to this topic

#16 OFFLINE   Igerswis

    Moon Phase

  • Member
  • 599 posts
  • Joined 05-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 28 December 2010 - 10:29 PM

I had my Omega Speedmaster 50th Anniversary model with the 3201 movement regulated by Swatch UK and it's been running around +/-1 second per day depending on whether I wind it or leave it.

On the other hand I had my Seamaster Planet Ocean Chronograph regulated a few months ago by Swatch UK and it was running +2 seconds per day consistently. In September they replaced the crystal under warranty and recently it has been losing -8/-10 seconds per day :o It's also just gone 2 days out of warranty so I'm not sure if they are going to charge me to re-regulate it.

If you get a co-axial movement I think you'll find that the timekeeping is much more consistent to many other movements no matter what position it is left in (upside down, crown up, crown down etc).

#17 OFFLINE   David Spalding

    Chronograph

  • Member
  • 2,387 posts
  • Joined 28-July 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere between 75 and 125 mph
  • Interests:Divers, straps, military tool watches; cooking; Internet apps, fast driving; replica prop building.

Posted 29 December 2010 - 03:02 AM

View PostIrfan, on 28 December 2010 - 10:29 PM, said:

... If you get a co-axial movement I think you'll find that the timekeeping is much more consistent to many other movements no matter what position it is left in (upside down, crown up, crown down etc).
And there's that bit of charm (about mechanical movements) out the window.

I never thought that the aim of a great mechanical movement was to get accuracy as close to a quartz model as possible. Long life, reliability, artful construction, economy of design, and oh pretty good accuracy (not having to reset it more than once a week suits me fine, and by that I mean +/- 8 seconds is acceptable) are the most I can ask from any mechanical watch. There are so many choices out there that satisfy that punchdown list it's dizzying.

#18 OFFLINE   Igerswis

    Moon Phase

  • Member
  • 599 posts
  • Joined 05-January 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 29 December 2010 - 11:46 PM

View PostDavid Spalding, on 29 December 2010 - 03:02 AM, said:

View PostIrfan, on 28 December 2010 - 10:29 PM, said:

... If you get a co-axial movement I think you'll find that the timekeeping is much more consistent to many other movements no matter what position it is left in (upside down, crown up, crown down etc).
And there's that bit of charm (about mechanical movements) out the window.

I never thought that the aim of a great mechanical movement was to get accuracy as close to a quartz model as possible. Long life, reliability, artful construction, economy of design, and oh pretty good accuracy (not having to reset it more than once a week suits me fine, and by that I mean +/- 8 seconds is acceptable) are the most I can ask from any mechanical watch. There are so many choices out there that satisfy that punchdown list it's dizzying.

Well that statement is a bit Irish!

The majority of people who have the means to purchase high end watches costing several thousand pounds do not want to monitor the timekeeping on a daily or weekly basis. They're too busy with work, family and life in general to care about such petty things. They'd rather have a reliable watch that keeps good time, and not have to worry about regulating it or moving it around in different positions just so it can gain or lose 0.002 seconds every night.

For the minority that are nerdy fanboys and freeks, ie anyone on here who are enthousiasts without a life (me included), we take more of an interest in things like timekeeping and which animal we need to insert our timepiece into overnight so it gains or looses that 0.002 seconds!

:tease:

Edited by Irfan, 29 December 2010 - 11:49 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users