***Omega Speedmaster Cal. 321 Ed White - Review and PHOTOS***

[logo]

TLDR: The Ed White 321 is amazing. If you are a space fan, a movement fan, or speedmaster fan I recommend you buy one.

INTRO
The Omega Speedmaster Cal. 321 Ed White is a very unique watch. So unique that it’s easy to miss the details in this watch if you don’t know what to look for, and I think it is that exact reason why some feel it is over priced. I myself have posted on TRF previously about my reservations - it’s a Speedmaster priced at 2x the 3861, positioned as a throwback to the glory days but with some modern features (which I’ll touch on shortly). On paper, it’s perhaps easy to ask the question “is it worth it?” Like ALL luxury items, this an emotional decision and not a rational one. However, this is one watch where the on-paper specs do not adequately capture the details and beauty - not even close. And I would like to formally withdraw any indication to the contrary that I may have described previously.

HISTORY
I think the best place to start this review is with the history. Omega was synonymous with chronographs, long before Rolex even created the datejust. In the 1940s, Albert Piguet creates the Lemania 2310, the worlds smallest manual wound chronograph movement for use in a wrist watch at 27mm diameter. Lemania is the exclusive supplier to Omega, and the 2310 is used as the Omega Cal. 321 in their new wristwatch, the Speedmaster in the late 50s. It is a column wheel movement as opposed to a cam-shaft horizontal clutch as in the 861, 1861 and 3861 movements that Omega later used. The difference is that a column wheel is harder to make (more expensive), with the benefit being that the chronograph starts/stops more smoothly. I won’t go into the engineering of it, but there are many good YouTube videos on how this works.

In 1964, NASA tests several candidate watches for space missions and as we all know the short story is the Speedmaster with a 321 movement wins. One of its competitors is the Rolex Daytona, with a Valjoux 72 manual wind movement. The Valjoux is 29.5mm, and this larger diameter forces the subdials to get pushed laterally on the Daytona, so they look quite spread out. Additionally, the Valjoux was originally a single pusher design, and the second pusher was added later. This created an asymmetric design where the bottom pusher is further from the crown relative to the upper pusher. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it…


Rolex Daytona 6263 Paul Newman - note the spaced out sub-dials and the lower pusher being further from the crown...


In any case, the first 27-28 watches NASA received from Omega were a 105.003. A fun science fact, NASA invented the “Technology Readiness Level” classification, or TRL. This is used EVERYWHERE in science and technology, where level-9 is equivalent to a technology being flight qualified….. as in the Omega Speedmaster with Cal 321 being “Flight Qualified for All Manned Space Missions.” Pretty cool.

In 1965, Astronaut Ed White wears a 105.003 Speedmaster for the first American Spacewalk, in 1969 Buzz Aldrin wears a 105.012 on the moon, and in 1972 Astronaut Gene Cernan wears a 105.003 as the last man to ever walk on the moon (at least, for now). By this point, Omega switched over to the 861 movement in the new Speedmaster professionals and lost Lemania, keeping most other parts similar apart from cosmetic differences.

Features of the original 105.003 AND the 105.012 were an aluminum dot over 90 (DON) bezel, hesalite (plexiglass) Crystal, stepped dial, a slightly yellow lume (that was original, not age decay), and vintage omega logos. The 105.003 had straight lugs and no crown guards, while the 105.012 had lyre (twisted) lugs and crown guards increasing the case size, and “Professional” on the dial. This came about in the late 60s after NASA officially flight qualified the movement but Omega had actually launched that term before NASA qualified it. Just coincidence. I say movement qualification specifically because I do not believe that NASA requalified watches with case changes, only with movement changes (eg the 861).

So that’s the history…. Part 1. The 321 was gone, but not forgotten. High horological brands like Patek, Vacheron, Roger Dubuis, Breguet etc all utilized the Lemania 2310 (Omega 321) as inspiration for their manual wind chronographs, where they used a 21 jewel version as opposed to Omegas 17 jewel 321 (more jewels = less friction). A photo below shows the 321 movement vs the Patek 5070 and the Vacheron Constantin Corne de Vache. THESE ARE $60,000+ watches. Funny enough, Patek used a Valjoux movement for their manual wind chronos in the 60s/70s (same as the Daytona, notice the uneven placement of pushers and the spread out subdials). They SWITCHED to the Lemania based movement later around the time of the Patek 5070. And of course Rolex left Valjoux in favor of Zenith for their Daytona in the late 80s - an automatic movement and it was not until recently that Rolex made their Daytona movement in house. All this to say, the rare/high-end manual wind chronograph watches we prize today for their movements all really started with the Lemania 2310/Omega 321.

Lemania base comparison.jpg


THE *NEW* ED WHITE 321
Then, on the 50th anniversary of the moon landing, the 321 returns. Shortly before, Omega (swatch) takes back control of Lemania and opens the door to remaking the 321 movement. The new Speedmaster Cal. 321 “Ed White” is developed by using Gene Cernans own 105.003 and archived records to recreate the watch movement with exacting specification, with the major difference being a Sedna gold coating instead of the original copper coating. The watch case is dimensionally the same, and a new flat link bracelet is developed that is period appropriate (also used on the Apollo 11 50th anniversary bracelet, with different end links). The watch features an applied metal logo, stepped dial and indices that are colored off white, like the original. Modern features include a ceramic DON bezel, an open display case back, and a sapphire Crystal instead of hesalite.

I’ll be the first to admit, I was worried about the ceramic bezel and sapphire not looking or feeling the part. But in real life, Omega has done an outstanding job - you wouldn’t know it was ceramic vs aluminum unless you were told, and the sapphire is curved nicely to avoid a milk ring and look similar to hesalite, and still with a stamped old school logo - a nice touch, and this carries over to the crown where the old logo is seen again. There’s some historical notion that NASA required hesalite, but that was more of a secondary benefit rather than a design requirement. Indeed sapphire crystals were not common on watches then. Likewise, ceramic bezels were not a thing. So, I do not see these features as being an inaccuracy, but more of a modern version of the same. All things considered, it looks and feels like the original, with the added benefit of durability for daily wear. A big victory.

321 front 2 copy.jpg

321 front copy - Copy.jpg

321 front copy.jpg

321-side.jpg


Now the movement..... WOW. What an absolute feast for the eyes. The sedna gold coating is just so radiant, contrasting with all other metals and catching light in every way. There's depth and detail at every edge. Watching the chronograph function execute is just so cool. To see this, and know the tests NASA put it through before ending up in space and on the moon is just mind blowing.

321 movement.jpg

321 movement - Copy.jpg


REVIEW
So how does it wear? In a word: exquisite. The bracelet is phenomenally comfortable and beautiful to look at. It has a retro charm with modern durability and integration with the case exceeds Rolex tolerance IMO. The dial has incredible depth and detail and as much as I would have loved a true SS moonwatch 321 recreation with twisted lugs, the straight lugs give the watch a much more elegant stance on the wrist which I’m loving so far. The off white indices give a lovely but subtle contrast with the hands, while making the watch feel like it came out of a time warp. The crown winding is incredibly crisp and and feels more “substantial” than the 1861, all with a much easier winding experience. The pushers operate more smoothly as well, owing to the column wheel. The movement itself, what can I say - it’s drop dead gorgeous. Side by side, most will be unable to put their finger on the difference between the EW321 and a modern Speedmaster. But when you have it in hand, and you focus on the subtleties, the attention to detail that Omega put into this watch is amazing and it’s a joy to wear it.


THE PRICE VS VALUE DEBATE
Price is what you pay, value is what you get. The “price” of any luxury watch is high. So how do we “value” the EW321? On the one hand, the 1861 or 3861 speedmasters are half the price or less so it’s easy to assert that the EW321 is too expensive given the visual similarity. And make no mistake, the modern speedmasters are exceptional value, but the devil is in the details. Omega had to scan Gene Cernan’s watch to design and manufacture this, had to design and manufacture a new curved crystal, a new dial, a new ceramic bezel, a brand new bracelet and then of course hand assemble each 321 movement by one watch maker (something typically only done by very exclusive watch brands). There is no question that the finishing and detail on this watch exceed the 1861 or 3861, but it is not likely to be noticed specifically by the casual observer. The watch appears slightly different, but they won’t know why. Nonetheless, for a watch that has AT MOST ~1500-2000 units in circulation over 2 years, there is some cost that needs to get absorbed. So using the modern Speedmaster 3861 as a reference point, the EW321 is expensive, but I think not unreasonably priced given the work and detail that went into it at such low production volumes.

On the other end of the spectrum, we have the Pateks, Vacheron etc that use(d) Lemania 2310-based movements. These sell in excess of $60k, granted with a gold case and the movement is hand finished. As another reference point, the Canopus 321 is $80k for the same movement in an all-gold case/bracelet. By comparison in all cases, the EW321 seems like an absolute bargain.

Looking within its price bracket, we find the Daytona. Quite squarely in fact with the Daytona at $14,550 and the Speedmaster EW321 at $14,100. Of note, back in 1965 the Speedmaster and Daytona both had an MSRP around $500-600, and over time the Daytona increased in MSRP much more than the Speedmaster, to the point that a Daytona is ~2x the price of the standard 3861 moonwatch. I don’t think this new EW321 pricing is coincidence, the Speedmaster has been compared to the Daytona for decades and here is Omegas answer. I have held and worn Daytonas, I love the look of the Daytona. But this Speedmaster is in a different league IMO. Both have excellent attention to detail, but this version of the Speedmaster just goes the extra mile with so many design layers and textures to make it visually quite appealing for me. Every detail is executed to perfection on the 321, it really does carry with it the limited production tolerances that you find in haut horology whereas the Daytona has exceptional mass production tolerances. The subdials are clear, reading the time (like all speedmasters) is easy, and the limited production of this watch and beautiful movement is the icing on the cake. A good way to think of this, as a review on Hodinkee pointed out, the EW321 is like taking a time machine back to 1965, finding a pristine new in box 105.003, and yet somehow it has all sorts of modern details that make it more durable and the exclusivity of it being hand assembled - a true nod to the past. In contrast, the Daytona represents today with mass production prowess, a modern automatic movement and is the “it” watch du jour. They are both beautiful, but entirely different in nature and philosophy. To me at least, Omega easily takes this round.

My conclusion is that it is only because the modern speedmaster 1861 or 3861 is so damn good and deep in value that the discussion of the EW321 pricing ever comes up. Indeed comparing it to its proper peers, it too is great value with arguably more history behind it than ANY other watch currently on market by Omega or any other brand, with the exclusivity and precision that goes along with a hand assembled low production volume watch.

Thanks for reading!

321-1.jpg

321-2.jpg

321-3.jpg

[AEC]

Awesome watch

Thanks for taking time to write up such a thorough review.

[myporsche]

Excellent write up and informative yet enjoyable read, thank you for the effort.

[rootbeer7]

Brilliant write-up. Thank you so much. And now I can’t unsee the chrono pushers

I understand mere mortals can even purchase this chronograph!

[ratty]

Nice write up and photos, well done.

[1William]

Very interesting. One of the best viewpoints I have read on TRF. Thanks for sharing.

[ButtButt]

I love seeing posts like this, very informative and well written. Thank you so much for sharing.

[dbfagan]

Great post.

[Wahlberg]

Beautiful watch! I wasn't aware the bezel was ceramic.

I wish the hands were more off/broken white than the current white they are using. To make it pop a bit less. I understand why they chose not to or why it isn't needed.

[Goose 104]

Fantastic write up and I agree entirely. I picked up the 321 in January and have been blown away by it.

For me, the details are so important with this watch. All the relatively small changes add up to something really special: The straight lugs, the smaller case, the longer, warmer (more accurately coloured to original tritium) lume markers, the classic logo applied on the dial and on the crown, the less cluttered dial, the deeper subdials, and of course the movement and that bracelet. On the surface it looks similar to the Moonwatch professional but in reality as an owner it is in a different league. the only thing I would like is more adjustment on the clastp (but I love the design and logo on there).

[Goose 104]

Some of my photos:

[logo]

Thanks all, it was a fun write up to do - such great history with all speedmasters!

[logo]

Originally Posted by Goose 104

Some of my photos:

All great photos, I especially like this one. Shows the detail of the dial nicely with a deep black tone. Such a great watch!

[Travelller]

Originally Posted by logo

...Thanks for reading!

The pleasure was all ours - great write-up and nice pics to go with it; I like the above wristshot very much!

I think you already know I'm a fellow 321 owner and as such, I can fully back up your case re. quality-price ratio, etc.

I'd say the only (minor) issue I have with it is the clasp and the fact that it has the same minimal adjustment as the (1861) production Speedmaster. The fact that Omega used a (period-correct) shorter clasp makes removing the watch a hassle at times (especially after being out & about on a hot Summer day). Other than that, it's perfection and now the favorite of my Speedmaster Trio

Enjoy your 321 and keep those wristshots coming our way

[logo]

Originally Posted by Travelller

The pleasure was all ours - great write-up and nice pics to go with it; I like the above wristshot very much!

I think you already know I'm a fellow 321 owner and as such, I can fully back up your case re. quality-price ratio, etc.

I'd say the only (minor) issue I have with it is the clasp and the fact that it has the same minimal adjustment as the (1861) production Speedmaster. The fact that Omega used a (period-correct) shorter clasp makes removing the watch a hassle at times (especially after being out & about on a hot Summer day). Other than that, it's perfection and now the favorite of my Speedmaster Trio

Enjoy your 321 and keep those wristshots coming our way

Thank you! Your amazing photos were prime temptation for me to buy this watch! My own wrist shots and photos will keep coming as well, as truly capturing all this watch has to offer in a single photo is challenging indeed.

[htc8p]

beautiful watch! congrats but how is the rate? does the chrono hand look jerky when running?

[WatchEater666]

Congrats! The 321 is the only modern omega I am interested in. It really is a gorgeous movement!

[logo]

Originally Posted by htc8p

beautiful watch! congrats but how is the rate? does the chrono hand look jerky when running?

Looks good to my eye when only looking at the Speedmaster and not comparing to a faster beat rate watch. The 18,000vph is not so different that it’s perceptible compared to the 1861 which runs at 21,600vph. However, comparing the seconds hand on my datejust 126333 which has a 3235 movement at 28,800vph there’s a difference. The Rolex glides very smooth while the Omega 321 does have a perceptible “tick.” If I can figure out how to load side-by-side video to TRF I will. That said, we must remember that the 321 was originally from 70 years ago before modern lubricating tech was available. So the lower beat rate helped with longevity.

Nonetheless, when it looks like this, it gets a free pass to tick however it wants.

[djona]

This thread is making me reconsider the Moonshine Panda...

[rG2022]

Very informative and well written. Great pictures. Thank you.

[logo]

Originally Posted by djona

This thread is making me reconsider the Moonshine Panda...

A great reference indeed. Gold speedy with a master chronometer 3861 - can’t go wrong. I bet finishing will be superb on it.

[logo]

With all the MoonSwatch hate today, Speedmaster owners worrying about the brand need to remember the difference between the real deal “Flight Qualified For All Manned Space Missions” and the just for fun “Mission to Uranus.”

[vinny84]

Awesome write up!! I'm planning to add a Moonwatch to my collection but now I might consider picking up this 321 Ed White since I will only have one Moonwatch ever. What are the wait times on these? Do I even have a chance?

That movement is a thing of beauty!

[logo]

Originally Posted by vinny84

Awesome write up!! I'm planning to add a Moonwatch to my collection but now I might consider picking up this 321 Ed White since I will only have one Moonwatch ever. What are the wait times on these? Do I even have a chance?

That movement is a thing of beauty!

A bit variable depending on region - it won’t be quick, but you’d have to talk to your Omega Boutique (not AD) and see what they say. Definitely worth the wait if you can get on a list. If not, I don’t usually say this, but the 321 on secondary is a palatable deal IMO given the current watch market.

[vinny84]

Originally Posted by logo

A bit variable depending on region - it won’t be quick, but you’d have to talk to your Omega Boutique (not AD) and see what they say. Definitely worth the wait if you can get on a list. If not, I don’t usually say this, but the 321 on secondary is a palatable deal IMO given the current watch market.

Got it. Thanks for the info! I was hoping my local AD would be able to assist but I will try at the boutique and see what happens. This is a beautiful piece though, I would love to have one in my collection once I'm ready to pull the trigger!

[Chewbacca]

Beautiful write up and watch. Thank you

[Henry.hoe]

A very informative article. Writer did lots of homework coming up with is article. Thanks. I like the column wheel of these Lemenia movements. These days none. Have the 321 and putting this besides my 5070 and 5970 one can appreciate the movements very much.

[JTL31]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

Beautiful write up and watch. Thank you

+2. Wear it in good health

[logo]

Thank you all. A few new photos hot off the press for your enjoyment.

As an aside, if anyones looking for a good documentary, check out “The Last Man on the Moon” about Gene Cernan. Had the opportunity to watch it again this weekend, a great person and wonderful astronaut.

B3345360-0A01-4AB5-9B7B-AB879F5BAE58.jpeg

A6C9A041-022C-40F7-9570-B7F7F0E8F507.jpeg

[logo]

Just gonna keep adding here for 321 photo inventory. Anyone know how to load a video or make a high-res gif of a video for TRF?

front - Copy (2).jpg