Originally Posted by tomsdad
Oh, and my 49 year old example recently came back from Duncan running +3 secs / day - I can live with that:
OOOOhhhhhh!!! Shiny!!
Gorgeous! In fact, I'll be fitting the bracelet to mine now.I'm going to go with vintage on this one, having owned both. I did like my 2006 model 3570 but to me it just didn't have the 'warmth' of a vintage Speedy. Something to do with the dial contours, the tritium, the applied logo etc. If I was you I'd go with a nice '71 - you won't be disappointed.
Oh, and my 49 year old example recently came back from Duncan running +3 secs / day - I can live with that:
That pic makes it look somewhat shinier than it is - it sports its fair share of scuffs and scratches, but I don't mind that so much on vintage.
Many don't but I really like the old expandable link 7912 - very comfortable and easy to adjust.
I've had a Pre-Moon '69 1450-22 and a 2006 3570.
One's gone, one's still here and that's the 3570. The Pre-Moon had the lovely stepped dial and aged lume, but the modern one can be read at night (I've got a thing about lume...) and the movement hasn't had 40+ years of use.
The Pre-Moon had an appropriate amount of wabi and had the kudos of being of the Apollo era etc. however the 3570 was bought new by me and isn't going to be sold (barring very unforeseen circumstances) so any wabi added to it will be mine and I'll have the made the stories that go with it.
At the end of the day you pays your money etc. Go for what you want! :)
I'm looking to get a used Speedy Pro and like the OP still not decided fully the era but swaying towards less than 10 years. Perhaps incorrectly my feeling is there is less wear in general.
Would anyone else be concerned with parts availability as another consideration if you back too far in time. Where is the cut off in terms off general spare parts availability, the cal 1861 or could you go back farther without to much concern ?
One thing that is holding me back from a purchase is I can't fully tell if there a difference between how the the subdials are recessed. Some Speedys have a very obvious slope or edge to the subdial whereas others not so much. In particular do the current 3750's have a sloped subdial as I have seen pictures of ones that look almost flush and other with the slope/recess
Last edited by Bifl; 29th November 2013 at 07:53.
I meant "shiny" as in impressive . I was not suggesting t was over polished
No i didn't think you were, more that it looked rather 'new' due to its ultrasonic clean and new crystal! Thanks anyway!I meant "shiny" as in impressive . I was not suggesting t was over polished
Anything post '68 when they changed from Cal. 321 to 861 will be able to have parts sourced from most usual suppliers/watchsmiths. The current Cal. 1861 is basically same except a brake was changed to high strength plastic for longevity and the bridge etc were differently plated and again parts won't be a problem.
I don't think they will ever stop producing it :)
You can't go wrong with a Speedmaster Professional.
My variant is the 50th Anniversary Patch model.
It has a Lemania 1861 movt. inside it ... so has a nice individuality about it.
You won't regret owning one, some of the vintage pieces really do have a lovely charm about them.
Now that I would like to see! Given that the Speedy is still in production, would it be legally possible?
I have to say that I am really enjoying this thread, thank you to everyone who has contributed so far.
SpeedBirdMasterPro?
I can see Omega's lawyers doing another Broadarrow on that.
Lovely watch thatI'm going to go with vintage on this one, having owned both. I did like my 2006 model 3570 but to me it just didn't have the 'warmth' of a vintage Speedy. Something to do with the dial contours, the tritium, the applied logo etc. If I was you I'd go with a nice '71 - you won't be disappointed.
Oh, and my 49 year old example recently came back from Duncan running +3 secs / day - I can live with that:
Here is my Speedy on a 1450 bracelet from Nov 69
Hi
Vintage Speedy all the way....especially the straight luggers
Best - Neil
Love the almost graphite colour of that bezel insert - looks really nice. And the 1450... I tried unsuccessfully to source one of these to replace the 1998 on my 3570, but what few I found were all going for silly money.Lovely watch that
Here is my Speedy on a 1450 bracelet from Nov 69
A regular ref 145.022 on a 1171-bracelet is a great watch at a reasonable price.
Suffered a setback on my last remaining short term grail watch list.
Shelled out for lasik yesterday so my speedy fund took a hit.
Good news is I got the lasik done in India so it only cost me £500 for the equivalent of £1500 of treatment in the UK.
Quickie with my Iphone:
Ed White 1965, 105.003 cal. 321
50 m WR means that the watch should be able to keep water out in stable (!) position under the water. Even 50 m deep. How ever that doesn,t include any swimming movements.
So if the watch should be swimming proof (even few inch deep) THEN 100 m WR is minimum.
JP
PS: Vintage Speedys are 30 m WR if my memory serves correctly.
Localised pressure due to rapid movement of the watch through the water or even just the pressure from a shower or tap may well go higher than the stated depth pressure capabilities of the watch.
50m is not really enough to guarantee the watch won't have some water ingress is used during failry normal watersports.
Better safe than sorry ; for swimming I don't even wear my sub ...thats just because I'm chicken though , the watch is rated at 300m and subs generally have a good reputation for water tightness ..slight understatement there...as long as the crown is screwed down.
On top of that, the WR-rating isn't something static: ageing of the rubber rings, damage to case, wearing of the pushers and damage to the crystal or bumping the crystal that could result in incorrect seating and sealing of the crystal are things that can make a once 300 m WR watch leak like a sieve.
Easiest way to keep your valuable watches safe against water: keep them dry.
Buy a Seiko diver, or something similar from another brand and use that.
I have been diving with my SMP for years, but:
1) it was pressure tested yearly;
2) seals were replaced regularly;
3) the watch was 300m WR and I took it just a bit deeper than 50 meters...
Hey JP,
Do you have that in writing from an official source? i.e. Omega Catalogue or some official test from an impartial party?
"So if the watch should be swimming proof (even few inch deep) THEN 100 m WR is minimum."
I find that statement laughable but I am willing to be PROVEN wrong.
:-)
"]Localised pressure due to rapid movement of the watch through the water or even just the pressure from a shower or tap may well go higher than the stated depth pressure capabilities of the watch."
I totally disagree with that also...
Not my night is it! ha ha.
I think the point is why chance it
the originals are 30m they are not designed form swimming.
I have quite a few divers I use for swimming at 200m rating I am not worried about them, if I was a diver then I would get them checked.
I agree with your point mate. Just not some of the statements.
I prefer the Vintage Speedmasters, I like the feel, the patina and over all look better than the later versions...I swapped mine recently for a lovely 1967/8 Breitling 806, same applies; I prefer the older models over the newer versions... Here's a pic of my old Speedmaster..
Right, that's decided it! My 1972 Speedy MkII Racing is going on the chopping block in the search of a similar vintage Speedy Pro. Must. Resist. The. Temptation. To. Keep. Both.
How about just not sleep in school mate :-)
Omega itself states that "under water usage" min is 300 m wr. Why? Quite a lot because divers who wear these are not allowed to go deeper than 30 m. Yep mixed gas divers are. And Omega agree :-)
http://m.omegawatches.com/index.html...ang=en&guid=ON
But that was already told here.
JP
Sorry JP, I can't see anything in the link you posted regarding underwater usage and a minimum of 300m WR. Can you copy and paste it in here for me?
Also, your strange statement about divers doesn't make any sense, what do Omega agree on?
What was already told where? and who told it? are they just another person on a watch forum stating opinions or are they quoting hard facts and are able to quantify said facts with proof?
As for sleeping through school, I must have been in dream land during the class that taught others that if they want people to believe what they are saying then use CAPITAL letters.
Again, I am ready to be proven wrong if you can find me some written proof from Omega or an impartial test that states 50m WR on any watch actually means that the wearer can't swim even a few inches under water.
Where did you read that 100WR is the minimum for swimming? Show me that and I might believe you mate.
After the link you can find (later on that page) link to pdf-document where the information is. It says 300 m wr needed under water (!) and swimming usually happens in the water. Omega garantees water resistant up to 200 m wr watches but it not same as garanteed swimming/diving wr.
Of course "few inch" is only my way to tell that don't swimm with less than 100 m wr watch. Few people if any can or want to swimm so. Sorry if you don't get a point.
That information is all over the net so use just google.
Feel free to swim your Moonwatch if you get one. But I don't with mine because it is so stupid idea.
Just curiosity: Why all diver watches are min. 200 m wr if 50 m is more than enough?
JP
They do sell Omegas among some others....
http://www.prestigetime.com/page.php?water-resistance
WATER RESISTANCE GUIDE
No Rating - 30m/99ft Does not allow contact with water
30m/99ft - 50m/165ft Allows for contact with water such as washing hands and rain
50m/165ft - 100m/330ft Allows for light poolside swimming
100m/330ft - 200m/660ft Allows for swimming, snorkeling and showering (do not expose to hot water)
200m/660ft - 500m/1650ft Allows for impact water sports such as board diving and scuba diving
500m/1650ft + Appropriate for serious deep water diving.
I give up. I really do.
All the best mate.
Mine is a '71 145-022. Love the stepped dial and wanted an early one that had moon on the back. And the beautiful patina on the dial and hands really make it. Also a little different on the Mexico market bracelet...
that does look nice
can you explain the bracelet?
As far as I know, there was a period of time when Omega sourced bracelets in Mexico for the Latin America market. Probably as a cost saving measure vs. Swiss bracelets. There's not that much info available.
My UG tricompax originally came on a very similar bracelet!
Tried the 3570.5 on at an AD today. I was surprised to find that it wears smaller than I expected. I was also surprised by how cheap the bracelet felt. Maybe I'm missing something but this did not seem like a watch worth £2880 to me.
You don't have to spend £2880 if you buy a used one.Tried the 3570.5 on at an AD today. I was surprised to find that it wears smaller than I expected. I was also surprised by how cheap the bracelet felt. Maybe I'm missing something but this did not seem like a watch worth £2880 to me.
Then it does feel a whole lot better.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
