On the Omega website, under Speedmaster there are eight choices:
Moonwatch
Speedmaster '57
Mark II
Racing
Speedmaster
HB-SIA
X-22
Z-33
Click "Moonwatch" and five different families come up, containing 30 different models:
MOONWATCH OMEGA CO-AXIAL CHRONOGRAPH (16 models)
MOONWATCH PROFESSIONAL 42 MM (7 models)
MOONWATCH NUMBERED EDITION 39.7 MM (2 models)
MOONWATCH ANNIVERSARY LIMITED SERIES (3 models)
MOONWATCH PROFESSIONAL MOONPHASE CHRONOGRAPH 44.25 MM (2 models)
Its understandable why Omega want to use the word to help sell a 44mm Co-axial watch for £1590 more than the 42mm Pro
Since Omega now use "Moonwatch" to mean all kinds of things, what's the correct, unmistakeable terminology for the actual moonwatch? "Speedy Pro 42mm Manual Moonwatch" isn't very catchy.
Classic moonwatch? Echt-moonwatch? Ur-moonwatch? FMWOTM? WMTAWTTM?
Tell me about it, I thought I want a Speedmaster and was faced with the kind of choice that you have highlighted. In the end, I ended up with one not on your list, the automatic reduced which is no longer in production.
And I thought the choice of Submariners was bad enough.
The Swiss Government probably has one :)Originally Posted by Der Amf
Seriously, there isn't. It depends how fundamentalist you are really.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
I was wondering on behalf of people who are trying to sell them on the SC, and want to be quite clear in the thread title.
I'm probably going to be flamed to a crisp now, but my answer would be: none.
The watches worn on the moon were c.321 Speedmasters.
Flight-qualified perhaps (for the Shuttle etc), but even that is somewhat debatable. It's a brilliant marketing strategy from Omega. The Speedmaster started out as a racing chronograph, a competitor for the Daytona. That's why it's a Speedmaster, and has a totally useless tachymeter.(at least for astronauts). By chance one survived an early, informal NASA test. In comes the marketing hoopla.
There were already watches made to spec, like the Breitling Cosmionaute, and arguably the Bulova Accutron Astronaut. For the Cosmonaute the spec actually said to ditch the tachymeter in favour of the 24h indication. The reason the Breitling wasn't kept at NASA? "Cosmonaut" is what the Russians called their astronauts....
And it's continuing. ESA recently put out a technology transfer contract for a watch with mission alarms (nothing very revolutionary, and nothing a 50 quid Casio couldn't do). It just happened to be picked up by Omega.... The result you all know. The patent holder is an old colleague and flight buddy of mine, I don't hold this against him at all. I just loathe the Omega marketing hot air.
Can I still post on Forum of the Banned if I'm banned on this forum? ;)
Well there goes any hope of getting a useful answer to my question
Well, there was a bit more to it than that (see many threads passim). The tests were tough enough that the five other candidate watches were eliminated (including Rolex).
I agree that Omega's marketing department has been dining out on the NASA connection for the last fifty years, though.
Hesalite Moonwatch would pretty much sum it up for me.
I get confused when serial numbers get quoted and then abbreviated and then changed by Omega.
If the only one truly a new incarnation of the Moonwatch is hand wind with hesite and a solid case back, what would you call the other variations that actually look the same?
I think Moonwatch family is ok there but the Darkside Greyside on all those are completely unrelated - I see no Moonwatch connection there at all. They could just as easily been put in the 57 family cos they have no connection there either.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry.... :(Well there goes any hope of getting a useful answer to my question
What I meant was that the watches were bought anonymously in a local jeweller's, they were not procured according to spec for a competitive shake-down, which is standard procedure. if I had done this at ESA I would be put on spreadsheet compilation duty for the rest of my career (I almost was, but that's a different story).
And yes, many a Cordon Bleu and Bollinger was bought based on this...
I don't think the astronauts got a box of tricks with their watches, but in terms of watch family, the current heir is the 311.30.42.30.01.005
(i.e. 1861 manual wind movement with hesalite crystal).
I believe the crystal may be the only item the same, compared to a ST105.012 (?)
i.e. the movement, case, pushers, bezel, dial, hands & bracelet will have changed/evolved.
Hi,
Very interesting and as this is my favourire subject;
Following my research and late articles here https://monochrome-watches.com/exclu...ame-moonwatch/ and an older reference here https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/omega.html I would like to say that the only 'real' Moonwatches were
ST 105.012 and ST 145.012 (although the latter is not confirmed but it would be logical)
The most similar modern watch (still being certified for EVA AFAIK) is the Speedmaster Professional Hesalite with actual reference 311.30.42.30.01.005 https://www.omegawatches.com/de/watc...1130423001005/
If you want to hear the whole story, this is a good and comprehensive sum up:
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/un...r-professional
If you want my opinion, go vintage, find a birth year watch and then a nice 105.012 and live happy ever after..;-)
my birtyear 145.022 '71 with 861 movement and original and rare 1175 bracelet
Speaking of dining out, the commentariat know how to make the most of their learning too
Regarding the currently-available model closest to the actual moonwatch, would "Hesalite Speedy Pro" be unambiguous?
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, other than a gentle speedy bashing one. That Omega have massively over promoted it, special editioned it to death and even worse, called a bunch of watches that have nothing to do with it Moonwatch is pretty obvious. But the fact NASA tested these watches rigourously, Omega won, that then they issued them and made them the only watches to be worn on EVAs is beyond dispute.
And of course the jewellers shop story is purely apocryphal https://monochrome-watches.com/exclu...ame-moonwatch/
DD
Here's a list of NASA flown Speedmasters:
https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/omega.html
As has already been said, the current closest successor to the c.321 105.012 and 145.012 'pre-Moon' watches is the c.1861 311.30.42.30.01.005. I'd go with 'Speedmaster Professional Hesalite'
I don't think DerAmf was speedy bashing just brand stretch bashing
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
God I hate the Omega website, until you click on the two seemingly identical photos, both labelled "steel on steel", there's no way of differentiating between the 311.30.42.30.01.005 (Hesalite, solid back, £3340) and the 311.30.42.30.01.006 (Sapphire, display back, £3950)
I'm not even bashing that - I know that all language usage mutates - I'm just trying to identify the current term for one specific watch.
If I was going to pick a fight with one mutation of usage, it would be tarnish now being called patina. (And it would be a fight I would lose - that horse is *long* bolted)
The Mrs is in marketing and Brand Stretch refers to extending the name over more products that are more or less related to the original. Rather than to change in use of a word.
A dark side of the moon bears no relation to the "Moonwatch" other than it is made by the same company - so not an evolution of the historic model which is the current Speedy pro with hesalite, evolution could also cover the sapphire crystal and even into gold and titanium models.
Don't know why they didn't just put them in their own category of Ceramic Chronographs.
Re: A dark side of the moon bears no relation to the "Moonwatch" other than it is made by the same company
Really?
Very contentious issue.
Watches ARE similar but yes, technically not a moon watch.
The whole debate is a storm in a tea cup.
Omega does what it thinks is working for the company.
Don't like it, don't buy it.
No point whinging.
Not whinging just discussing watches on a place called Watch Talk
I was clearly quoting someone else. Knocking Omega marketing is fair enough, and often deserved. Knocking the history of the Speedy itself, which is so well documented now, is just trolling.
Re: Knocking Omega marketing is fair enough, and often deserved. Knocking the history of the Speedy itself, which is so well documented now, is just trolling.
+1.
Not going to stop some,though.
You wouldn't really want the visual difference to be obvious would you? As it is there is a visual difference, there is a slight frosted appearance at the outer edge of the crystal on the sapphire version. You can't miss it when you know what you are looking for.
Whatever about the Breitling, Bulova pushed hard to get their watches made "official". Lots of lobbying going on to buy "American". Plus many of the astronauts wore them as private purchases and as the mission timers were nearly all accutrons they had some previous experience. The sticking point was at that stage they had no tuning fork chronographs(ESA(the other one :)) later built one) and the specification called for that. They did get one of their (mechanical)Bulova's to the moon and on EVA and it functioned fine, but that's a story for another day. They were also battery driven which may have raised concerns in the O2 environment. Leaks and potential shorts. Batteries also don't do well in the wild temperatures of the EVA environment.
The Speedy is a great watch, a true "icon" IMH and I'm glad the space connection has kept it going for so long. I'd suspect it would have gone from the line up before now without that connection(the name would continue, but the design would be different. Kinda like the Seamaster). If non watch type folks ask my advice on what to buy, my choices are narrow enough. Rolex Sub, Omega Speedy(for the cheaper end G-Shock, Seiko divers).
That said as an actual practical "space watch" there's not a lot to recommend them, or any over the counter watch for that matter. Too small for a start(Buzz Aldrin noted this). The buttons would also be extremely impractical to operate in a pressure suit. Something like a WW2 German oversized B-Uhr would be more practical as a timekeeper, or just a simple stopwatch in that kind of case. The between the wars bomb timers another style. Both had unpressurised cockpits, worn over bulky flightsuits and thick heavy gloves operation in mind. It does seem like NASA viewed the EVA watch as an afterthought. Their use inside the craft was a different story and one helped time the Apollo 13 lunar burn to get them home.
Ah got it thanks
sorry double post
Really interesting thread here. I wonder how my Krink G-Shock would fare journeying off planet? It's kinda moon-like :) Evolution of the DW-5600E?
http://watch-tanaka5.sub.jp/casio/DW...00KR-8JR_8.jpg
I know. That really winds people up.
;)
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Thanks for clearing that up! Makes more sense now.
Is that right that no 861's went on the moon? They were kicking in weren't they from '67. Certainly 321's , 861's and 1861's have been worn in space / EVA. Does anyone know if the X33 is still being used?
Having looked at the photos on the website it would appear there has indeed been a cock up. They have used the same photo for both versions...and the leather strapped Speedmaster uses a different identical photo for the two versionsAh got it thanks
maybe you could have a try? your Krink G-Shock is very cute! ha....
Great thread so far. Have always been confused by all the model numbers flying around and this helps.
All brands stretch stuff that works, that is normal business practice. Look at the Tudor Black Bay lineup, all the submariner models or even in other industries. I have a colleague who buys new versions of Nike Air Max on a weekly basis. Often some kind of re-edition.
Different note: took me a long time to grasp the term Speedmaster Reduced. Especially in sales corner, I always figured someone had lowered the price but then I couldn't see any reductions in the thread.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Glen Goyne; 8th April 2016 at 06:55.
This was in fact what prompted me to start thinking about this - on the SC is a "FS... Speedmaster Moonwatch.... Reduced..."
Is the ...006 the watch people call the Sapphire Sandwich?
Yes I believe so and if you see the old reference number used that is 3573.50.00
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There is also a 3572.50.00
Hesalite crystal + sapphire display back, but this variation has been discontinued.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
