Omega

When OMEGA created the first Speedmaster in 1957, no one could have imagined what adventures lay in store for the watch that would become the world’s most famous chronograph.

The new Speedmaster Broad Arrow Co-Axial collection introduces some stylish additions to the classic design of the watch that has been part of more than a hundred NASA missions including all six lunar landings.


The dial, available in black or silver, features a distinctive “Geneva Waves” pattern. The familiar chronograph counters, or sub-dials, are characterized by three applied rings which surround a unique “beehive” structure, giving the Speedmaster Broad Arrow Co-Axial its own personality. The sub-dial rings on the silver dial are blackened and those on the black dial are silver for a particularly appealing contrast. There is a date window at the 4:30 position on the dial.


The hour and minute hands, which are either blackened or rhodium-plated, are coated with white Super-LumiNova which makes them easy to read in all lighting conditions. The central chronograph hand has a red tip as do the hands of the sub-dials.

The 44.25 mm stainless steel case has the shape which has been associated with OMEGA Speedmasters for more than half a century.  The Speedmaster Broad Arrow Co-Axial is presented with either a stainless steel bracelet or an integrated black alligator strap. The Speedmaster Broad Arrow Co-Axial is powered by the exclusive OMEGA Co-Axial calibre 3313.

The accuracy of the self-winding chronograph is independently confirmed by its status as a COSC certified chronometer. The movement is equipped with OMEGA’s Co-Axial escapement on three levels. It delivers outstanding chronometric performance over a long period of time which increases service intervals and has allowed OMEGA to guarantee it for three years. It also allows the possibility of changing the hour hand independently of the minute and second hands – ideal for travelling between time zones. The movement is visible through the sapphire crystal case back.


The outstanding chronograph performance of the Broad Arrow Co-Axial is ensured by its column wheel chronograph mechanism. The watch is water resistant to 100 metres / 10 bar / 330 feet.

The OMEGA Speedmaster Broad Arrow Co-Axial watch is a fashionable interpretation of a chronograph which has gone to places no other watch has ever been. It artfully combines the Speedmaster’s rugged, adventurous spirit with some dramatic features which will make it one of the most popular members of the line.

apart from that though, its not much different from any other broad arrow. Omega, please give us more innovation, you know you want too

graham

But I love the subdials and the vertical lines.. yummie
Cheers
Hans

Although I am a past owner of Omega (on five occasions) and generally admired the brand (particularly for its ability to bring horological innovation to us affordably), this model disappoints me on several levels:

1. At 44.25 mm, this watch is a bit too big for my taste.  It's disappointing to see Omega use the iconic Speedmaster name to pile onto the "bigger is better" bandwagon ("...et tu, Invicta??"), especially when the longer-term trend may be in the opposite direction.  I once owned the 45 mm Planet Ocean and had much the same reaction to it.
2. I'm disappointed the Caliber 8500 movement (or variants thereof) remains absent from most of the company's model line-up.  Admittedly, it's entirely possible the 8500 caliber does not (presently) lend itself to a chronograph function, but I'm still disappointed.
3. From my vantage point, the dial design strikes me as "problematic" at best...the model's biggest weakness by far.  On one hand, you have the "busy-ness" of a Geneva Wave dial combined with their self-described "beehive structure" on the subdials.  My reaction is...well, "ugh..."  (my mother always told me not to combine stripes with other patterns when you get dressed; now I see why this was good advice....)   I see confusion, contradictory design cues and excessive "busy-ness".  I simply don't like it ("et tu, Renato??).
4. This is just me, but I am not a fan of the Broad Arrow design for the hour and minute markers....

It seems to me that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is the phrase that runs through my mind here.  I know the name of the game is often to cycle-through new models to maintain interest in the brand and perk-up sales, but I can't understand why Omega would choose to mess with the iconic Speedmaster name by giving this that appellation.  The name deserves better. 

I no longer have the brand in my collection and this particular piece isn't going to change that.

Cheers
DB Darien

No message body

. . . regarding the aesthetics of this particular model. The sizing isn't to my taste, but it's not objectionable, either. Here are two Speedmasters in the identical case with the same movement as the featured Broad Arrow . . .

. . . and a third variation on my wrist . . .

. . . for perspective. All three, especially the first, are much closer aesthetically to the Professional, even though there are significant departures. My preference for compactness would tend to sway a decision away from acquiring any of these, but wouldn't be an overriding factor if the balance of other considerations was favorable. Basically, if I needed a rattrapante, this particular Speedmaster would be at the top of my list, and the jumbo sizing wouldn't inhibit a decision to purchase. This Broad Arrow, on the other hand, evinces so many aesthetic departures from the Professional that it really should be judged on it's own merits rather than in comparison with the established icon. Stylized applied markers, wave pattern on the dial juxtaposed with honeycomb subdials, hands with red tips, and offset date window combine to create a design that's far removed from the paradigm. The favorable prejudices that Speedmaster fans have toward the Professional will likely not come into play when considering this particular offering. I'm sure there's a receptive audience for it, just not a purist (small "p") audience. Cordially, Art

Let me respond in the order you wrote.

1) The first criticism relating to size fails to hit the mark in a number of ways. Most importantly, the iconic speedmaster, i.e. the moon watch, is unchanged and is still at the traditional size of 42mm. Your remark about trending in the opposite direction is misguided too. Omega will never decrease the size of the classic moon watch either. The speedmaster professional is a classic, meaning it will not change. You complain about 44.25mm and yet you went ahead and bought an even bigger 45 PO when, lol, a 42mm version was available. I think your criticism about size is confused and is confusing and misses the mark entirely. Personally, I can't see your point either because I enjoy wearing my 40mm Daytona as much as I do my 44mm Aqua Terra.

The classic moon watch is its own category within the speedmaster range, as indeed is the broad arrow. You know, they are different models. To criticise one model against the other is plainly mistaken because the 'beehive' broadarrow sits just fine within the broad arrow category, just as the moon watch sits in the different category of professional. In summary, you failed to compare like for like and have confused apples with oranges. The broad arrow is meant for a different demographic. It's meant for people with a contemporary taste in larger watches. This is entirely legitimate. However, and this is the important point, that in no way affects the classic speedmaster professional. It changes absolutely nothing. Because of this, it also reduces your criticisms to absolute nothing as well. Speaking more strictly, your argument is both redundant and unnecessary.

2) The 8500/8520/8601 is available in a lot of different watches, for example, in the mighty Proplof, the versatile Aqua Terra and that wonder of wonders, the Hour Vision. Omega haven't forgotten about the ladies either and have given them the absolutely stunning cal 8521 with Si 14 spring. It's obvious that the enormous effort Omega put in for the ladies is entirely lost on you. Together, this already amounts to a reasonable range of watches. You are also assuming too much as well because not everyone can afford those watches for themselves let alone an additional one for their partner (Lol, I exclude myself from this!). I also question the personal value of this criticism with respect to yourself. What is it to you anyway if Omega doesn't put an 8500 in everything because you'll not get an 8500 Omega regardless. These 8500 watches will most certainly, I fear, be beyond that affordabilty thresh hold that you so fondly speak of. I think this will be even more true of the 9300 that will rock the horological world next year. Never mind, there is always something affordable for you from, say, fossil.

3) Geneva waves are not busy, it's as simple as that. I also can't see what's problematic about combining that with the 'beehive' subdials. It's different alright and kind of interesting in many ways. You fail to notice that the design is meant to display a bold character set in strong relief.  In this, the design is entirely successful. The design is not confusing because one can clearly see the time, the date, all the hands, and subdials. All the minute and hour markers are clearly set out. What's even worse for your criticism is that the design is the classic tri compax layout. Tri compax is a classic and logical layout that's used by the moon watch and Daytona, the two all time classic sport chronographs. The other advantage of the tri compax layout is the CLARITY of the design which precisely avoids any chance of confusion. There is just nothing to your claim that the design is confused except its shallowness.  However, your next claim about the design being contradictory is obviously plainly confused. It's like saying that a square contradicts a circle. Does a dog contradict a cat? A male, a female? Does a wave pattern contradict a honeycomb pattern? NO! NO! NO! 

4) God only knows what you mean by not being a fan of the broad arrow hour and minute markers!!!!!!! What is wrong with them. Can anyone else tell me? Lol, is this one of your 'contradictions'? It might well be. Whatever you were trying to say, it's best put aside and forgotten about. You can save that one for a rainy day.

Well, the moon watch was never broken in the first place and so never needed fixing either. It has remained unchanged. This simple fact  makes everyone of your criticisms pointless. The broad arrow is a different watch, intented for a different demographic. You have overlooked the fact that not everyone wants a classic moon watch and yet they may still want a speedmaster, one that is more contemporary looking and horologically up to date. You know, just like the broad arrow you were looking at!!!!!!

Finally the broad arrow design was the first and original column wheel speedmaster. Lol, how can the broad arrow be a 'mess' when it is in fact the original classic speedmaster. That is what you're arguing about aren't you? It's the original 60yr old design. You ask how can it have that appellation. Well that's what it actually was!!!!!!

This message has been edited by Pistol Pete on 2010-09-17 12:19:20

A straight, honest ball delivered right down the middle of the stumps.

No-one should be attacked for offering a personal opinion, and I note that DBD delivered his in a way that took personal ownership of his points and allowed that others may think differently.  Quite a contrast from the declarative and insensitive drivel of his attacker, whom from my perspective point appears to have used every post as an opportunity to inflate his personal vanity more than often at the expense of others.

I'm shamed to think that this individual might well be an Australian, as the type of bombast and vigorous self-promotion seen in his posts is not regarded as part of the national character.

It just wouldn't be cricket!

Cheers

desmond

You must have been having a bad day but it is entirely unacceptable to demean or criticize one's opinion about a watch!  I do not agree with everyone's opinion and I am sure all do not agree with mine but I like to read how people perceive different manufactures and their wares.  

I would take exception to the tone and content of your criticism if I had been on the receiving end of it and I think you should apologize to the object of this highly critical post and to the forum in general.

This is a hobby we all enjoy and we all enjoy each other's company.  Let us be civil!

 

HI Pete...

Well let me just say it simply .

Do not post on my forum anymore.   

You are not welcome here .

Regards

Bill Sohne

PS ....  No need to PM me either.

This message has been edited by amanico on 2010-09-18 01:56:38

.....you are probably one of the nicest and most polite people I have ever come across.
What you wrote was correct and to the point. But also to the point so it finally should be understood.
I have to admit. I have been "attacked" a few times on this forum from the same personage...and I have to admit, I have not really been so interested in posting here for a while due to this.

Graham, Thankyou so much for cleaning the air in here.

Best
Hans

As one of the (evidently many) wronged parties, I thought it best to stay out of the fray and let the process work itself through.  And it has.  Thanks to all (especially Bill and Graham) for dealing with this matter in a forthright and appropriate manner. 

Now to the subject at hand....feel free to take substantive, watch-focused dispute with my posting!!  Back to the debate!!

Cheers
DB Darien

got as far as your number 3 and wondered why you need to be so offensive to the op?

thanks graham. ive been awol for a while.

... by adding always more design elements, more frames, more stripes, more facets, more geometric shapes, more surface treatments, following the ornamental dogma of "more is better". This  was the case already with the De Ville "Hour Vision", the new AquaTerra, completely leaving the predecessor's very clean and sober dial layout, and now the Broad Arrow, that, too, is a rather radical departure from its predecessor's absence of dial features.



Without doubt, these designs are widely intriguing at first sight, the eye gets a lot to see. However, the danger is that one becomes oversaturized by features, growing weary of it over time. This is certinly not an economic problem for the manufacturer, and also not for people who are used to swap their watches after a short time. However, for those who tend to purchase a fine watch with the firm intention to own it for a long time, like myself, these recent designs are rarely hot contenders for the numero uno on our lists.

Interestingly, Omega is aware of these people as well, otherwise the new and pure De Ville, completely different from the busy "Hour Vision", could not be explained:





Regards,
Marcus

...the other aesthetic choices on this piece (large case dimension, Geneva waves dial, broad arrow hands), er, not so much.  Why does this watch need to be so large?  Not Omega's best effort IMO.

Cheers,
Daos

The original is so iconic. This is such a deviation.