I ordered the new Ed White a week ago having had a few Speedies in the past, craving an original 321 for>5 years. Being a Rolex guy myself I love Speedmasters and their history, not much of a Daytona fan(had one >10y ago flipped it with a profit)
Question: If the new 321 is 'just a copy' which it is literally, what about the Singer '911' based cars or even a probably better analogy, the
Aston Martin DB4 GT /Zagato Continuation they released a few years ago? A 60s (gentleman) racer produced 'today' with all the eye to details like it was from the 60s?
They're sold out already:)
In other hand, theres no new inventions in this watch, movement is old, case style is old, bracelet design from -50 or -60, ceramic bezels and sapphire has been seen in many watches before. Nothing new much to offer for the price. But I guess the trick is, these things have never earlier been seen together in a Speedmaster (not to mention in a watch), its like vintage piece in steroids. considering all the features in this piece, its no wonder it has been already referred as "the best Speedmaster ever built". I want it, but not at that price. And yes, it looks clearly like a collectors piece.
Last edited by Anthony; 2 Days Ago at 09:41.
IMHO it can only be called ‘faux’ in a historic context, I.e if it was made new to look 60 years old, but if it was made new to look almost exactly to look new 60 years ago then it’s not ‘faux’, it’s historically accurate. Ofcourse one needs to know what the original looked like when it was new. My feeling is manufacturers should know.
It's hard to say for sure though, as photo colours and how our brain perceive them is quite complex, and everyone perceives them differently.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Or maybe you were looking at that Rolex ;)
So my take... when the 321 made its debut roughly one year ago, I wanted to see the 321 placed in a SS case... (and) I wanted to "see" it... literally . Enter the 321 Ed White - Omega has essentially delivered what I asked for (and I suspect, many others as well).
All-in-all, I think they put together a pretty nice package for us (or me...). Granted, the decision to go with sapphire was baffling... and I would have preferred white lume although this was not much of a surprise given the overall trend with tributes / re-creations.
Aaand then there's the price*. Who wouldn't like to see it much lower. But, in the words of The Irishmen's Russel Bufalino, "...it is what it is."
So yeah... I'm in for one
*Re. pricing vs. business strategy... I have no own business experience to support existing theories (Day-to-na... ) and/or wanting to go further upmarket.. . I will say that both "theories" will be better supported / discredited once we see what Omega does with the 1861 / 3861 and their standard production SMPs. If the 3861 will completely replace the 1861 (in time), what will be the price for the SMP + Hesalite?
The 321 Ed White is not, imho, an indicator of Omega's business strategy. Rather, I see Omega reaching out to their Speedmaster fan-base with this tribute. This is not a new concept but unlike other houses, they took it one step further by re-creating the movement. So ...about that price tag. My machining / factory / tooling know-how is up there with my business experience (in other words, not a whole lot), so I'll just pass on an interesting comment made by someone who has more experience in both sectors (F. Mandelbaum, of Breitling's 806 fame). He asserted* that despite the hefty price tag, Omega is taking a loss on the 321 Ed White...
*FB SpeedyTuesday Group
My very short remark about the current production Daytona (because this is an Omega thread in an Omega subforum and I don't see what the two have in common aside from the Chronograph complication); the 4130 is certainly an excellent, modernized movement (the 3235 in my 126600 is exceptional) Other than that, I have nothing positive to say about the reference - I can't stand the dial and while the screw-down pushers certainly have a functional / technical benefit, they make the watch look all the more convoluted.
As for the choice of SuperLuminova color; either you like the "aged patina" look or you don't. I don't ... but I'll live The suggestion that (new) Tritium paint /lume was never really white is plausible. However, based on my own recollection and the photos being circulated, if anything, the tritium paint had a green tinge to it. That green shade was most likely due to the fact that it was constantly emitting (green) light - regardless if seen in a lit room or in the darkness. A product photo-shoot usually takes place in a studio and despite the strong lighting, it's not sunlight and so there's a possibility that the tritium's (green) "illumination" will be (slightly) visible...
*Patina is the result of tritium's effect on the phosphor-component over time. This is even more evident with Radium, which was extremely destructive - hence the "burnt" colors of markers, etc.
I will learn to live with it much like I've learned to live with the SM300MC...
Here are I think two of the better photos on the Omega forum due to lighting:
Compare that to the new one:
The old ones look more off white with mainly a green colour, may be a very slight pastel yellow tint to it.
The new ones are more like orange/mustard yellow and looks more like aged lume to my eyes.