Marcus Hanke
[PuristSPro Moderator]
11296
Well, depends on the definition of "best"
If accuracy and robustness are the sole criteria, I fully agree with you. Up to now, the cal. 9300 was the most accurate fully mechanical movement (which leaves out Spring Drive) I have ever tested.
If you include the legible presentation of the measured data in the definition, then the cal. 9300 already shows a major flaw by stacking the chronograph's hours and minutes counter, resulting in a barely legible combined indication. I credit to the movement, though, that general watch design can influence that. So the DSOTM is - its overall huge attractivity left aside - by far the worst in this respect, with its tiny counter hands, that are even barely visible above the shining black dial surface. On the other hand, the 1957 series of the Speedmaster has a substantially increased diameter of the subdial and better distinguishable hands. The major problem of this combined counter is that the small subdial is now subdivided into 60 increments (compared to the standard 30) and the minute counter hand does not jump, but advances steadily, as in a modular 2894. Consequently, interpreting the exact amount of time stopped without a loupe is next to impossible. Since there might be a few people adding legibility to the job description of a chronograph, this issue does deduct a few points.
Aesthetic considerations are more or less subjective, so I will not lose words about proportions, bridge design and decorative finish ...
But I plead guilty myself, since I am steadily thinking about acquiring a Grey Side of the Moon ....
Marcus
Omega Dark Side Of The Moon (DSOTM) - The First in Series ...
Well, depends on the definition of "best"