Is the Omega Moon watch over rated?

[Cabaiguan]

I've owned a bunch of watches and if I had to keep just one, the Speedy would be it. Underrated.

[lapince]

I don't think so, the manual wound model, which is THE ONE to get, has a beautiful movement, a Lemania, which if I am not mistaken was used by Patek in the 5970, PP purists don't kill me if I am mistaken and if it isn't in the 5970 but another one but I think it was for the 5970, of course modified by PP, but same movement, so if to get the hand wound model I think on the opposite that at this price level it is on the contrary very underrated. I am getting one as a present for the 50th birthday of one of my best friends, he has been dreaming about this watch since he is about 18, but like many people who don't earn a lot of money he didn't even think of getting anything other than a 600$ Seiko, so getting him this for his birthday, quite sure he will be thrilled as it is really his dream watch for over 30 years. So no it really isn't overrated when you take everything into consideration, movement, iconic watch, excellent value and other things

[lapince]

Originally Posted by Atleo

The 9300 rattled and felt so cheap on my wrist I flipped it in les than a week. I could t rid myself fast enough of it. Astonishing to look at in pictures. I found the white hands looked cheap in person. It felt clumsy too. Too tall and ungainly on the wrist. Perhaps the other references are better.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When we praise the Speedy it's the hand wound version, not the auto wind, the hand wound is the one to get, and if it werefor me I would out the see through back to admire the beautiful Lemania movement, as it is an absolutely stunning manual movement for such an inexpensive watch, in any case you don't buy the auto movement, totally different league between the manual and auto IMHO

[wb55]

I bought one brand new 12 months ago and I think it's overrated. Will be trading it in for something else after Basel.

I think it's like buying a brand new vintage watch. Over the years Rolex have gone from four to five and now six digit models with improvements along the way. The Speedy is (from what I can tell) literally the same watch they were selling 30 years ago without the improvements so quite underwhelming when purchasing new if you are not into vintage.

[lapince]

Originally Posted by wb55

I bought one brand new 12 months ago and I think it's overrated. Will be trading it in for something else after Basel.

I think it's like buying a brand new vintage watch. Over the years Rolex have gone from four to five and now six digit models with improvements along the way. The Speedy is (from what I can tell) literally the same watch they were selling 30 years ago without the improvements so quite underwhelming when purchasing new if you are not into vintage.

Probably true, but my friend whom I am offering one for his 50th anniversary, is into vintage, cars and furniture from the 70's, and many other things, it has always been his dream watch and if it is really like the original from the 70's he will be thrilled to get it

[airchitect]

I'd honestly call a Daytona overrated far quicker than a moonwatch.

[Cabaiguan]

Originally Posted by airchitect

I'd honestly call a Daytona overrated far quicker than a moonwatch.

Yup.

[droptopman]

I struggle with chronos. I dig the looks of them in pics and on others but when I buy one they rarely see wrist time. Tried 4 different Daytona's, a Zenith, and currently have a 25+ year old mint Speedy but have only worn it a handful of times. Prefer the size and feel on the wrist of the Speedy to the other chronos I have tried but doesn't do much for me...that being said, at the price point for a sport chrono and with its long history, I do not think it is overrated.
From my perspective I prefer it more than a Daytona but not enough to keep it long term.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by airchitect

I'd honestly call a Daytona overrated far quicker than a moonwatch.

I own both, the Daytona is far better IMHO. Not even close.

[Le Chef]

Originally Posted by airchitect

I'd honestly call a Daytona overrated far quicker than a moonwatch.

The Speedy earned its reputation by qualifying as the only watch NASA would take for their space program, by doing something useful on missions, and on Apollo XIII saving lives.

The Daytona earned its reputation because it was worn by a famous actor. In terms of functional real life claims it has never done anything useful compared to the Speedy. Granted it's a pretty watch but it does nothing any better than other chronos across that price band. So you pay a premium for a watch that was once worn by an actor...

[speedmaster73]

Originally Posted by fmc000

I own both, the Daytona is far better IMHO. Not even close.

daytona also costs 3 times as much.

cost has nothing to do with being 'over' or 'under' rated

history? speedy pro slaps the daytona around like amanda nunez on ronda rousey.

[incontrol]

I have never owned a Speedy, I just could never pull the trigger. But I did get one of the Speedy Tuesday watches. I like the hesalite crystal, the reverse panda dial, and the 1861 movement. I also like that it is new.

We will see how I feel when I see it in the metal. That said I always felt like I should have one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Imajedi]

It was space flight approved by NASA and worn on the GD moon by US astronauts!!!! Is this a real question?

[EDL7]

Wasn't the Speedy originally a racing watch..just like the Daytona back in 57..? which got lucky and went to the moon.. And me thinks..it does not use the same movement nowadays as in olden times... but a cheapened out one..
You decide..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=athY5SehJW0

[bradj]

I had one for about a year. Great looking watch, but the current bracelet design is mediocre IMO. Cheapens the look

[arcadelt]

Originally Posted by EDL7

...but a cheapened out one...

Sheesh. Partial quotes are never helpful. Whoever the hell that opinionated and racist guy is, he also said a more reliable movement - I for one think that is a good thing.

[hedet]

I used to think it was overrated for a long time. Then I saw one on someone's wrist and it changed my perspective. After I got one it seemed nice but not mind blowing, and since then it has continued to grow on me. I get tired of lots of watches and tend to flip often, but for some reason I like the speedy more now than I ever have. Final verdict: not overrated. In fact I think it's a tremendous value--maybe the best value--in luxury watches.

[Le Chef]

Originally Posted by bradj

I had one for about a year. Great looking watch, but the current bracelet design is mediocre IMO. Cheapens the look

I took the blingey bracelets of both my GMT's and replaced them with a SJ and an Everest rubber bracelet as they were nowhere near as nice to wear as the Speedy bracelet.

[Cabaiguan]

Originally Posted by fmc000

I own both, the Daytona is far better IMHO. Not even close.

"Better" is such a subjective term with watches. Better at what? A tachy chronograph's primary function is to record time over distance and be legible at a glance. In this respect, the Daytona is not close. You can't even READ the sub registers on a Daytona. The legibility of the Speedy is superior. It's designed for function, from the matte dial to the black/white contrast. Daytona is jewelry. Nice jewelry, but jewelry nonetheless.

[Greg5512]

I think that there were 3 astronauts who would wonder why you'd ask that question as it saved their lives.

As someone who had a nice vintage transitional model who regretted flipping it, my opinion is a resounding "no!"

It looks great, is versatile and wears well on a variety of straps, has a vintage feel, perfect size, and, oh, I missed it so much I have a new one on the way. Won't let this one go.

[Seaswirl]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Cheap bracelet, just on-par case and movement finishing, no column wheel, stiff start and stop chrono functions are the first things that come to mind.

Why keep? It was one of my father's watch.

Have to agree. I own and enjoy my Speedy Pro, but it has its limitations. I particularly dislike the bracelet and swapped it out for a OEM croc strap and deployant. At over $5k retail now, it's not as much the value proposition it once was. It is, however, incredibly legible.

[submorstua]

Can't see how it's overrated either. It's a classic watch with an epic history.

[Richmondmike]

Originally Posted by namussuz bilo

Is the Omega Moon watch overrated?

No. It's a classic design with a great history. Maybe there are a few too many variants available, but I would not hesitate to add one to my collection.