Return of the 321 movement - I don't get it...

[samson66]

OK I am new to the Omega scene so I could use an education on this.

I see all the celebration on the return of the 321 movement and it's possible reintroduction into the steel Moonwatch.

Other that the connection to the original watch 50+ years ago, I just don't get (forgive me) what the big deal is about it? Is it superior to the movement in the current Moonwatch? Is it more accurate? Does it look better for the see-through casebacks?

I mean, I get when they change something on the exterior of the watch that you can see, AND I get when a company like Omega or Rolex comes out with a new and improved movement that is maybe more accurate, longer power reserve, more anti-magnetic, etc. But what exactly are we getting with the return of the 321???

[Swiss Mad!]

I don’t profess to know enough about all the different moon watch movements there have been over the years to comment on whether it would be more accurate or not but logic would suggest the 321 was replaced with a better version.

I think this would be a ‘nostalgic’ move by Omega but not an improvement by any stretch of the imagination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JParm]

Also new to Omega, also don't get it!

Seems like a step backwards to me, and another money grab by Omega by pulling at the heartstrings of those that are in love with all things moon-related.

I'm interested in getting the moonwatch, but really it's on looks / versatility alone. Could care less about the history or connection to the moon itself.

[mwc5k]

Definitely a connoisseur’s piece. People more in the know could probably explain how elegant and perfectly designed the movement is. Not for me though, I like the modern ones.

[watchmaker]

In terms of accuracy the new (modified) 3861 found in the new gold and steel 50th moonwatches is a huge improvement. It’s a master chronometer. The 321 won’t outperform the 3861, but will likely be as good as the 1861.

As for the reintroduction of the 321, it’s all about nostalgia. But people have been begging Omega to rerelease it for years so they are only giving the people what the want.

[_speedmaster_]

This isn't that hard to understand. Some people like having a connection to the past and important historical events. It's the very reason a vintage markets exist for virtually anything. Singer Porsche built a business solely around this concept ($500k for an air cooled 911 that can be beat by a new base gt3). Not everything is about having the most technologically advanced thing.

[samson66]

Good comments everyone. I like the connection to 1969 and the moon landing - it's one of the main reason I picked up a Moonwatch. But if I really wanted the exact watch and movement I could have picked up a vintage model. Having a older movement that you can't see, and for all intents and purposes is less advanced than the current one, doesn't seem like something I would be clamoring for.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S10 using Tapatalk

[exador]

Montblanc sells chronographs with Minerva movements designed in the 20's.

Of course there are better modern movements, but just look at it:

[77T]

Originally Posted by samson66

Having a older movement that you can't see, and for all intents and purposes is less advanced than the current one, doesn't seem like something I would be clamoring for.

I get your overall opinion, but there will be a sapphire caseback.

And based on the premium nature of the case, and other accoutrements, I expect it will be singularly embellished.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MORA]

This isn't that hard to understand. Some people like having a connection to the past and important historical events. It's the very reason a vintage markets exist for virtually anything. Singer Porsche built a business solely around this concept ($500k for an air cooled 911 that can be beat by a new base gt3). Not everything is about having the most technologically advanced thing.

Very true - and really isn't that the whole reason people still appreciate mechanical watches in the first place?

You often see people getting caught up in discussions about which movement is more technologically advanced when in reality they're all dinosaurs - outdated by modern electronics. Mechanical watches are now an art or a hobby, not a necessity. Like any hobby it gets as expensive and intricate as you could ask for it to - or it can be relatively fun and affordable too.

The 321 has an irreplaceable connection to the past. It's the only speedmaster movement that walked on the moon. The architecture is more complex and arguably more beautiful than the more current, yet similar 861/1861. It's a bit more rare/unique - and it's just a special piece of not only horological history but human history.

I think what Omega has released is pretty special. It's definitely not a piece that will be attainable by everyone but it's a very cool watch nonetheless. Will be interesting to see what they do with the movement in the future.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by 77T

I get your overall opinion, but there will be a sapphire caseback.

And based on the premium nature of the case, and other accoutrements, I expect it will be singularly embellished.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I'm talking more about if/when they put the 321 back into the standard hesalite Moonwatch without the see-through caseback.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S10 using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by samson66

I'm talking more about if/when they put the 321 back into the standard hesalite Moonwatch without the see-through caseback.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S10 using Tapatalk

That’s not in the roadmap - this was a one-timer methinks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[texasmade]

Originally Posted by samson66

I'm talking more about if/when they put the 321 back into the standard hesalite Moonwatch without the see-through caseback.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S10 using Tapatalk

Given the time and effort it takes to make a 321 movement, there’s no way it will go into a standard Speedy. If anything it will be a SS special edition and sell for a serious upcharge. Omega will have both in the lineup to milk as much $€£¥ as possible.

[Justindo]

Not only is the 321 far more beautiful and labor intensive than the 861 and its variants, the 321 also has the superior, more complicated, and more expensive to produce column wheel as opposed to the cam actuated lever in the 861. The 861 was devised as a cheaper replacement for the 321, not as a superior replacement.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by Justindo

Not only is the 321 far more beautiful and labor intensive than the 861 and its variants, the 321 also has the superior, more complicated, and more expensive to produce column wheel as opposed to the cam actuated lever in the 861. The 861 was devised as a cheaper replacement for the 321, not as a superior replacement.

Outside of marketing chat, a column wheel is not superior to a cam actuated chronograph. They both have distinct advantages and disadvantages.

It is more labour intensive to manufacture and therefore more expensive as you state.

[1William]

I would think that Omega gave the collectors what they had been asking for on the most significant anniversary of the Speedmaster. We will see the movement in other cases beside PM as time goes by and eventually we might see it in a regular production watch as soon as Omega has milked the movement out for all it is worth in PM and LE/SE. I like it but it would not move me to get a watch with it. I am a huge Co-Axial fan and have it in my Speedmaster Racing and in my Seamaster 300. One thing Omega does do well is give you a lot of options and choices.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by 77T

That’s not in the roadmap - this was a one-timer methinks.

Originally Posted by texasmade

Given the time and effort it takes to make a 321 movement, there’s no way it will go into a standard Speedy. If anything it will be a SS special edition and sell for a serious upcharge. Omega will have both in the lineup to milk as much $€£¥ as possible.

OK understood. My impression was that this was going to first be (re)introduced on the 50th Anniversary model, then be pushed out to all the standard Moonwatches a year or two down the road. But I didn't realized there was a big cost difference between the 321 and the current movement. If this 321 is truly a limited release I can understand why collectors would be interested and excited in its return. It wouldn't motivate me to get one, especially for the associated cost, but I imagine this is aimed at the serious collectors.

[Chester01]

I mean if one buys a moonwatch there is some nostalgia involved and the 321 movement is more inline with the original watches they actually wore on the moon, though the current model is NASA certified/approved and past the same torture tests that that 321 did. There is also the fact that the 321 movement was used by PP, VC, and AP-so there’s that.