Ed White 321 vs Daytona: Which is the more special watch for a lifetime?

[JettyOne]

The problem with 321 Ed White is it looks exactly like every Speedmaster ever produced, since 1957. I’ll take a black Daytona please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WILLIWALKER]

Daytona over Speed every second of my life

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Babalaas

Both the kings of each of their brands. Which one is the more special watch if you had to choose only one? Assume one is going to keep it for a lifetime so resale isn’t a factor.

I don't see how someone could make this decision because whilst the name "Ed White 321" covers at the most two models, the original 1960's version and the current version, the name "Daytona" covers many different watches.

I would much prefer the 321 over the large majority of 4 figure Daytonas. I do not like the Paul Newmans at all.

I have a pair of 5 digit 16520 Daytonas and I prefer these over the 321.

I don't know about the 321 compared to the 116520s. I really like the thin hand versions of the 116520s not so much the later ones. I would struggle to make a decision about if I would sell my 321 or later 116520 first.

I simple do not like the ceramic 116500 versions of the Daytona, so I would always take the 321 over one of these.

I have not seen the new 126500. I know it looks a like the 116500 but, but I really like the look of the pictures I've seen of them! I suspect that it would be a close thing between one of these and the 321.

[amh]

Since the movement in the Speedmaster is manual I'd never wear it:
- Don't want to wind it
- Want the watch to remain waterproof - winding will wear out the crown seals much faster vs an automatic

The speedmaster is really only for those who want the 'heritage' associated with it. It's something, but not for me.

[J!m]

Originally Posted by njlam

While I hope to own both someday, I think the 321 is a better watch and is harder to get.

The 321 has the history and was designed to work in zero gravity, hence the manual wind. Do not like enough other Omegas to get the spend history to get a 321 at MSRP

The modern Daytona is only sought after only because it is hard to get. It is more of a status symbol than a watch...The pushers are screw down which makes the watch waterproof but less functional as a chrono. Most of them are hard to read, however I do like the new LeMans version...hard to get (for anyone).

Well, the Speedmaster was not designed for zero gravity; it (as well as several other brands) was purchased from local Houston jewelry stores and exposed to the same tests. And the Speedmaster was the only one that survived all the tests. At one time I had a copy of the test methods as well as the reports indicating how and where the others failed.

Now, the Bulova (Lunar Pilot I believe it is called) watch WAS in fact designed specifically for space missions but was not able to pass the NASA tests. That was a mess for Bulova (who invested heavily to capture that spot), and probably began their demise. Some did hitch rides on astronauts but was never officially approved for space flight (so could not be a sole timepiece).

The later Omega X33 was also designed in conjunction with pilots and astronauts specifically for space flight, and it is also an approved space flight timepiece by NASA. I have a first-gen of that watch and it has functions I have no hope of ever understanding... I think the big difference here was Bulova was trying to meet the criteria on their own and Omega worked closely with NASA and pilots, with subtle improvements being made until everyone agreed it was "done".

So, for me, the 321 powered Moonwatch is the one chronograph to own, if you own only one chronograph. Based on pricing and availability of the "new" 321 I will likely be getting an original and/or collecting parts to resurrect one from the ashes.

[J!m]

https://www.christies.com/features/D...33-7025-1.aspx

Fun read, if bored.

[gamingdoctor]

Hype for the Ed White will die down when Omega re-releases the 105.012 with the 321 movement - the actual "apollo 11" watch.

[J!m]

Are they going to do it?!? Will a pauper like me be able to afford it?

[ratty]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Hype for the Ed White will die down when Omega re-releases the 105.012 with the 321 movement - the actual "apollo 11" watch.

I really hope they do do this, but it would be very similar to the current professional model apart from the movement. I doubt that many people would pay way over the professional’s price just for a 321 movement.

[J!m]

I'll pay a premium, but I'm not foolish...

[gamingdoctor]

Originally Posted by ratty

I really hope they do do this, but it would be very similar to the current professional model apart from the movement. I doubt that many people would pay way over the professional’s price just for a 321 movement.

If I know anything about Omega, they love making reissues of everything. The apollo 11 remake is a "when" and definitely not an "if."

I can see them making the same changes as they did with the EW 321 - 321 movement, exhibition caseback, ceramic bezel, upcharge by $8k, and an obligatory waitlist.

[Daytonaboy1977]

The 321 is a stunner, wears superbly well. Love both equally.

[Gearjockey]

Originally Posted by JettyOne

The problem with 321 Ed White is it looks exactly like every Speedmaster ever produced, since 1957. I’ll take a black Daytona please.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Take what you like but this is a silly, hyperbolic and untrue statement.
If you’re not familiar with Speedmasters that’s ok, but at least be honest.

[logo]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Hype for the Ed White will die down when Omega re-releases the 105.012 with the 321 movement - the actual "apollo 11" watch.

Nope, the first 321 reissue was a 105.012 resurrection, in platinum. Then the SS 105.003 Ed White in SS, then the broad arrow in Canopus. I suspect we’ll see a CK2998 with 321 in Sedna gold to complete the 321 collection across metals.

[AJMarcus]

You’re asking TRF? C’mon…it’s gotta be The Daytona.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by logo

Nope, the first 321 reissue was a 105.012 resurrection, in platinum. Then the SS 105.003 Ed White in SS, then the broad arrow in Canopus. I suspect we’ll see a CK2998 with 321 in Sedna gold to complete the 321 collection across metals.

[SearChart]

Love the Daytona and the 4130, but a modern speedy with 321 is what my heart desires.

[Stevec14]

Originally Posted by Gearjockey

Take what you like but this is a silly, hyperbolic and untrue statement.
If you’re not familiar with Speedmasters that’s ok, but at least be honest.

In all fairness, to many the fact is they all look the same. Most won’t have actually seen a 321 in the metal.

When you see the 321 next to a 3861/ other speedy you really start to see the differences in Finish, materials etc

[Navin Johnson]

That’s a tough choice. If both were offered to me at the same time?……I’d probably lean toward the Speedy.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Stevec14

In all fairness, to many the fact is they all look the same. Most won’t have actually seen a 321 in the metal.

When you see the 321 next to a 3861/ other speedy you really start to see the differences in Finish, materials etc

I agree, and can see where that OP was coming from.

I also agree, side by side in real life, there’s quite a difference even to the uninitiated

[gamingdoctor]

Originally Posted by logo

Nope, the first 321 reissue was a 105.012 resurrection, in platinum. Then the SS 105.003 Ed White in SS, then the broad arrow in Canopus. I suspect we’ll see a CK2998 with 321 in Sedna gold to complete the 321 collection across metals.

I stand corrected. Maybe a reissue that isn't $60k then!

[Gearjockey]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

Hype for the Ed White will die down when Omega re-releases the 105.012 with the 321 movement - the actual "apollo 11" watch.

That’s good. However this (Ed White 321) is the actual “Apollo 17” watch 105.003 which adorned Commander Gene Cernan’s wrist and was the last Speedmaster on the moon. Even better, when they produce the new 105.012, it will bookend the entire project.

[INC]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

You do realize that a lot of the four-digit Rolex models were only 50m, right?

I didn't knew this. To better understand this, I wish to ask you: what was the difference between the 100M Oyster cases and the 50M Oyster cases at that time?

Even Omega themselves say 30m and 50m is ok for swimming when new:

Please refer to your own data: "when new" and "water surface activities". This latter descriptions belonging to the 100M watches and not the 3-5ATM ones. Also please note, that not the gaskets are the only ones which gets "older", but even the casing material too. Upon this, the more times you open the back, the screwing will be weaker and less waterproof. Also let me reimind that also the pressing of the buttons or the winder will make the gaps wider between the buttons and the casing, so the water resisntance will be lowered day by day. But that's what is normal, it's follows from the daily use of a watch.

That's what they mean "when new".

Now, the seals of a manual wind watch can degrade faster, but that’s another issue.

No, that's the primary problem. The secondary thing is that even if the seals are perfect, the back and case must fit perfectly, just tight enough for the seal to ensure flawless closing. If this force decreases, even due to a bad movement, a gap will open between the back and the case, and water could get into the watch. Sometimes you will see only some vapour, sometimes you will see the water.

So in my opinion no one can seriously think that a watch will be ruined just because of the depth, so it is silly to test the water resistance based on that. Therefore, you should not think that the water resistance of the watch changes proportionally with the diving depth. But it is therefore worth noting that "swimming" and "water surface activities" belong to a different category even according to Omega's own table, and the latter require greater water resistance, despite the fact that these activities - as their name suggests - do not include nor snorkelling.

However, I think, even this conversation is sees to be interesting and fair, but it became quite off topic here. Accordingly I wish to suggest, that If you want to continue this converastion, then lets start or reopen a topic related to this casings... er... cases