|
|
Post by JBHII on Oct 29, 2004 9:37:43 GMT -5
I thought I'd throw this question out there and get everyone's perspective: Should Omega replace the current cal. 1120 use in the Seamaster Professional with the newer, co-axial caliber 2500? On the surface it seems like a great idea, and I was all for it in the begining. The various upgrades in the 2500 make it a superior movement than the 1120 - the co-axial escapement, the free sprung balance etc. An SMP equiped with a caliber 2500 would be on a much more even playing field when compared with its competitors like the Submariner and the Super Ocean. But the 1120 isn't a bad movement - it's a GREAT movement! Equiping an SMP would drive up the cost of an SMP (I'm guessing about $500.00). What do you think? Shold Omega take the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it approach" to the SMP and continue to use the caliber 1120, or give us the highest degree of technological advancement available and switch to the 2500?  VS.   John |
|
|
|
Post by Aaron on Oct 29, 2004 9:53:43 GMT -5
John does the 2500 afford the same robustness as found in the Seamasters 1120. |
|
|
|
Post by JBHII on Oct 29, 2004 10:00:36 GMT -5
John does the 2500 afford the same robustness as found in the Seamasters 1120. It should - as they are essentially the same caliber: 1120=ETA 2892 with 2 extra jewels and some other minor modifications 2500=1120 with another 2 additional jewels added, free spring balance, co-axial escapement, different regulation system, etc. So, both movements uses the 2892 as a base. The 2500 is actually more robust in the sense that the co-axial escapement reduces friction (the 2500 needs much less lubrication and has a 1 year longer standard warranty from Omega than do other non co-axial Omegas). John |
|
|
|
Post by Aaron on Oct 29, 2004 10:19:41 GMT -5
Dear Omega,
I wish to be placed on the list as one of the first recipients of your new SMP with the 2500 movement.
Regards Aaron.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by JBHII on Oct 29, 2004 10:58:53 GMT -5
Dear Omega, I wish to be placed on the list as one of the first recipients of your new SMP with the 2500 movement. Regards Aaron. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D So far, the only implementation of the 2500 series in the SMP line is the all new "Bond" SMP GMT with display back. I don't particularly like the execution of the watch though....  maybe I'll change my mind when I finally see it in the flesh.... No word yet on where Omega will move the 2500 into the rest of the SMP line....I guess it's sort of innevitable. John |
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Oct 29, 2004 17:47:33 GMT -5
If one can justify paying $500.00 more for a watch that already has a superb movement I say ok. Otherwise like you said John "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Just my 2 cents.
Cheers
Bob Breznay
Niagara Falls NY.
Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day.
|
|
rgp
follower
Posts: 90
|
Post by rgp on Nov 2, 2004 3:18:37 GMT -5
The advantage I see based on what I've read is that the co axial is a lot more stable when subject to vibration etc.
However I'd prefer to see Omega switching to a lubricant free, zilch for maintenance movement, something like what Sinn and Damasko are working to develop with their Diapal movements.
Combine the Diapal technology with the co axial movement and it would be a winner. Given a choice between those two technologies, I'd rather have a lubricant free 1120 or 1128 in my Omega.
Richard.
|
|
|
|
Post by JBHII on Nov 2, 2004 7:11:42 GMT -5
The advantage I see based on what I've read is that the co axial is a lot more stable when subject to vibration etc. However I'd prefer to see Omega switching to a lubricant free, zilch for maintenance movement, something like what Sinn and Damasko are working to develop with their Diapal movements. Combine the Diapal technology with the co axial movement and it would be a winner. Given a choice between those two technologies, I'd rather have a lubricant free 1120 or 1128 in my Omega. Richard. Richard - that indeed does sound like an interesting innovation Richard. I'd not heard or read that the Co-Axial was more resistant to vibration. Where did you come across this information? John |
|
rgp
follower
Posts: 90
|
Post by rgp on Nov 2, 2004 13:35:48 GMT -5
John: There were two reviews which caused me to make the vibration statement. The vibration resistance is something that I concluded from the article, but I don't remember if it was specifically stated by the author. One of the reviews is located here: WatchRap General Watch Discussion Board www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=169624&messageid=1079898160Apparently some German guys took a bunch of watches on a trip through the Sahara and one of the things they were subject to was being strapped to motorcycle riders...every other mechanical watch varied considerably in rate after a day vibrating on the motorcycles, and took a few days to settle back to normal, but the co axial Aqua Terra maintained the exact same rate as it did every other day. The other item I read which causes me to believe the vibration resistance is superior in a co axial was a pdf file from a watchmaker and was not really a review, but more so a mechanical analysis of the movement, it may take me a while to find the link to that one. Richard. |
|
|
|
Post by JBHII on Nov 2, 2004 14:47:04 GMT -5
John: There were two reviews which caused me to make the vibration statement. The vibration resistance is something that I concluded from the article, but I don't remember if it was specifically stated by the author. One of the reviews is located here: WatchRap General Watch Discussion Board www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=169624&messageid=1079898160Apparently some German guys took a bunch of watches on a trip through the Sahara and one of the things they were subject to was being strapped to motorcycle riders...every other mechanical watch varied considerably in rate after a day vibrating on the motorcycles, and took a few days to settle back to normal, but the co axial Aqua Terra maintained the exact same rate as it did every other day. The other item I read which causes me to believe the vibration resistance is superior in a co axial was a pdf file from a watchmaker and was not really a review, but more so a mechanical analysis of the movement, it may take me a while to find the link to that one. Richard. Thanks for that link Richard - I need to add it to the Seamaster Reference Page. As far as I know, the AT uses the same Incabolic Shock Protection system that's used in all Omega calibers as well as most higher end ETA movements. The results they saw in the desert ride were very interesting, but I don't think necessarily atributable to the co-axial escapement. Sure, you'll see more stable results in accuracy, meaning less variance, but I don't think the co-axial is inherently more shock resistant. But I could be wrong. I'd love to see this sort of a test on a whole group of ATs..... ...which reminds me that I REALLY need to kick out the results of the Seamaster Accuracy Project....  John |
|
rgp
follower
Posts: 90
|
Post by rgp on Nov 3, 2004 15:09:50 GMT -5
John:
I didn't know the shock protection was kicking in at that level and I had assumed that the protector only did anything when the watch is dropped or hit. If the Incabloc protection kicks in for low level vibration does that mean that the shock protection occurs at an impact at any level of force and not just for serious knocks?
Also I haven't found the pdf file I had in mind which indicated greater stability of rate when subject to vibration, only found one on a rate comparison between the co axial movement and a ship's chronometer, which indicates that if a co axial could be regulated precisely enough, it could have potential accuracy on a par with quartz. If you want to see it let me know and I can email it to you.
Richard.
|
|
|
|
Post by JBHII on Nov 3, 2004 16:37:02 GMT -5
John: I didn't know the shock protection was kicking in at that level and I had assumed that the protector only did anything when the watch is dropped or hit. If the Incabloc protection kicks in for low level vibration does that mean that the shock protection occurs at an impact at any level of force and not just for serious knocks? Also I haven't found the pdf file I had in mind which indicated greater stability of rate when subject to vibration, only found one on a rate comparison between the co axial movement and a ship's chronometer, which indicates that if a co axial could be regulated precisely enough, it could have potential accuracy on a par with quartz. If you want to see it let me know and I can email it to you. Richard. Richard, That comparison with a ship's chronometer came out fairly recently, and is a facinating read.  You need to read it several times just to be able to track with all the statistical tequniques used...  John |
|
You need to read it several times just to be able to track with all the statistical tequniques used... 