That being said, I still REALLY wants Omega to make it with more premium materials, they still don’t feel as high end as an Daytona, but I believe they’ll do it.
The new sapphire version is fantastic. I think it would look pretty good on a Forstner Flat Link bracelet. I've also changed my mind about the Speedmaster Calibre 321. It's really beautiful the more I have seen of it (shame I cannot afford one). It would be great if Omega introduced an updated FOIS with the Calibre 3861.
Then it'll narrow down the difference between the 321 and 3861 versions. I wish atleast their full gold versions had the ceramic but aluminium on such expensive pieces feels like a total gimmick.
Thank you for this great video! I'm not sure if you mentioned this, but another difference is the new hesalite bracelet is fully brushed, and the sapphire has polished center links.
20+ years of watch collecting, and much to my shame, I still haven't owned a Speedmaster (though I came close with a 145.012 many years ago). This might just be the iteration (in hesalite, of course) that does it for me. Looking forward to see it at an Omega AD.
The Sedna gold and Canopus gold versions should have had ceramic bezel as the Moonshine version did, the Moonshine version feels to be of better value than the other two gold versions.
Since the movements appear to be identical between the Hesalite and Sapphire models, did you check to see if it was possible to screw-on the exhibition caseback from the Sapphire mode onto the back of the Hesalite version? Sadly the only “Hesalite sandwich” available are previous models like the 3572.50 or 3592.50
The thought of this makes my teeth itch. The worst of both worlds, a $10k watch with a crystal that scuffs easily and a caseback that sticks to your wrist like a limpet in hot weather.
Thank you for the great video! Great watch, no doubt! But nevertheless it is supposed to be true that new Speedy is not flight qualified by NASA, at least for now. We have to understand that certified and qualified is two totally different things. Exactly that is why OMEGA changed the text on the caseback. I found the information that 3861 movement was tested by OMEGA with the same standards and steps like 321 and 861/1861 was, but only NASA can initiate the flight qualifying. It is also true that only 321 and 861 was officially tested by Mr. Ragan in NASA, nevertheless all three movements (321,861 and 1861) were flight qualified by NASA and 1861 is currently-in-service also for EVA on ISS. 1861 was also qualified because it is basically the same movement as 861 despite of Copper VS Rodium and additional Jewel 17vs18. Interesting fact, that first 861 movement had metal chronograph brake and it was qualified only after it got Delrin chronograph brake instead. 1861 movement has also Delrin chronograph brake, the 1863 movement however has metal chronograph brake, and as we know is not flight qualified. One more interesting thing about 3861 flight qualification: Quote:- "...I asked Omega if there were any plan to discontinue the 1861 for the 3861 - would that not mean that "flight qualified" would no longer be true for the Moonwatch? Omega's former CEO, Stephen Urquhart, had once told me over a breakfast years ago that the Moonwatch must always have an 1861 movement, for that reason. " Jack Forster June 27, 2019 I am concerned that exactly "not flight qualified" is the biggest change in the new model. Because of that Speedy with 321,861/1861 was special, first of all as an official astronauts equipment that could be bought by those who love this watch but would never manage to go to space.
That's a lot of questions ;-) The new Speedmaster is not flight-qualified by NASA, neither was the previous one. The last time Omega had a watch qualified by NASA was in 1978, thus with the caliber 861 movement. The caliber 1861 is not that much of a difference, and kept the same case back. The new Speedmaster is therefor, not qualified nor claims it to be. However, Omega informed us that they did test the watch according to the set of standards that NASA used in 1964 to perform on the 105.003. And later on, on the 145.022 (1978). The watches in 1964 were tested by (or under management) James H. Ragan, he has told us numerous times about the procurement process and the testing. In 1978, the watches were tested by Omega themselves, and NASA qualified them nevertheless, based on the outcome of these tests. After that, Omega sent 56 145.022 watches with caliber 861 and the special radial dial to NASA. That was the last time they shipped a batch of Moonwatch models to NASA. So again, the 1861 movement (reference 3570.50) was never qualified as such. The NASA astronauts who use these watches on board of ISS received them from ROSCOM (Russian Space Agency), as most of the NASA astronauts are launched via Russia. They also receive a X-33 Skywalker. The only watch NASA hands out to astronauts is the X-33 2nd generation. All of the above has been confirmed by OMEGA.
@@FratelloMagazine Yes, I totally agree. That is what I also wrote in my comment. 1861 movement should not have been flight qualified separately (retested and requalified) because it is technically the same movement as 861 that already had the qualification. But 861 was retested and requalified because despite that both movements 321 and 861 are based on Lemania - 861 has some technical changes. The same thing with new 3861 movement, it is also Lemania based but with technical changes. I am concerned that is why OMEGA changed the text on the case back.
@@manulandtime I think Omega realised that this new movement and the flight-qualified wording would lead to discussion. So they found a compromise and changed the test of the flight-qualified engraving to "in 1965", to make it historically correct. As always, you can't please everyone.
Nice but I prefer the older gen bracelet. Also the lines on the clasp don’t get with the design and why they didn’t use the micro adjusting clasp already used in the 1857 I don’t know!
Just a logical sense update of the Omega Speedmaster by using the new 3861 master chronometer movement, very interesting for a new generation of Speedmaster fans who want a brand new wristwatch, but no so interesting for the diehard 321 "Moonwatch" aficionados.
Thanks for your comment. We think that even those who love vintage Omega Speedmasters will appreciate this new version (aside from the fact if they want to buy one or not..).
Excellent review. Does omega do actual shock resistance tests on these new 3861 moonwatches as part of their METAS certification? I would expect that, since the original moonwatch was shock-tested. Omega states that the METAS certification includes actual shock resistance for “certain” watches.
So the only real shortcomings would be to wish for a ceramic bezel and non-tool bracelet adjustment system. Overall, fantastic. I prefer the Sapphire, though I suspect many will prefer the Hesalite because of the grey “ring” caused by the sapphire crystal.
Correct, I prefer the Hesalite because of the fully brushed braclet finish, the magnifying effect of the plexi and the printed logo. The milky ring is not really bothering me though.
Am I the only one that sees the sapphire ring as a “moonlight ring,” instead of a milky ring? Let’s change that narrative please and call it a moonlight ring. Speedy fans would appreciate a positive description of their beloved icon. Repeat after me, “moonlight, moonlight.......... lol
Hmm the new sapphire Speedy or the 321 Ed White for double the price? Never owned a Speedy myself but always admired them from afar. I love how beautiful the 321 movement looks in this new Ed White... but as a daily wear watch... I kinda like the antimagnetic, more precise, and hacking seconds of the sapphire 3861. So hard to choose.
I just wish some of these channels would spend some more time on the movement other than reading the specs. I mean, we spend about as much time talking about the movement as we spend talking about the new box. So many people post about it, but if you want to get details of how the architecture has changed and how exactly they implemented the new features in a movement that still looks very related to the old Lemania movement, there are very few options out there. I have heard enough about that butt ugly tank track bracelet without microadjustment by now.
We will do a follow-up video on this movement, don't worry. Meanwhile, we did publish more here: www.fratellowatches.com/hands-on-watch-review-omega-speedmaster-moonwatch-new-vs-old/
Thank you for this presentation! I'm not entirely sure if I like the new watch more than the previous, not because of the step dial or the indexes so much but because the loom looks a bit greener. Just puts me off, but I guess I'll have to see the watch up close to make up my mind. Also I like that they introduced gold versions, but what about a two tone? A steel and moonshine gold, but with a two tone bracelet. Not like before where they just made two tone cases but a steel bracelet! I think it would be a cool watch! I think I should also congratulate you on influencing Omega to adapt the moonshine bracelet in this version! I don't know if its the case but it feels like you had some part in that!
People who watch your videos would love to see the details of the watches you talk about instead of seeing your face - no offence! So, please make sure your camera zooms in to the details of the watches when you show them to your audience. ✌🏻👍🏻
As a omega speedy owner. I get the price increase but I wish they would have hit a few notes on the new updated speedmaster like 200 m water resistance and a micro glide adjustment clasp. The two gold versions should have had a ceramic bezel. That’s just my 2 cents
Assuming the sapphire see-through case back fits on the hesalite version, will it increase the overall thickness of the watch? I.e. is the sapphire caseback thicker than the solid caseback? Thanks!
Correct, there's a little notch or lip on the bracelet that goes in. It does fit on older Moonwatch models, and for a perfect fit you might need to file it down a bit on the bracelet. The new bracelet will also fit the Snoopy 50th anniversary model.
I love the durability of the sapphire but the bracelet, full brushed, on the hesalite is much more appealing.... need input from the community... I can't decide...
The polished center links break the monotony of plain mass of grey on the bracelet imo. Try both on at an AD and decide for yourself. Plus it would be a shame if you don't get to flip the watch over and admire the 3861 movement every once in a while
Great in-depth review mate, I especially like the time stamps for different topics. However, I must say watch reviews from a distance are horrible. You held the vintage bracelet up and we couldn't even see it, such a shame. The camera needs to be looking over your shoulder so we can see all the goodies.
Of course I can, for the same price I can get a Speedy Racing w column wheel, vertical clutch, automatic, ceramic bezel, full balance bridge, date complication, sturdier bracelet, micro adjustments and free of cheezy moon watch marketing.
An investment in joy for sure, especially a pre-owned one. Prices do show a slight bump already, but we’re not a financial advisor so it’s tough to say... ;) Keep an eye on the prices using Chrono24’s Watch Collection tool.
Great review RJ, you have the Omega Speedmaster mini museum. I like that! Lol! BTW, Omega shows them as Sold Out, I wonder if we can purchase the bracelet separately.
The Omega website only shows the (online) stock in your market or country. Assuming you are talking about the new one, it will be restocked (of course).
Not many people know more! Would be nice to learn more about the movement - some pretty big changes! Now might finally be the day a Speedy makes it into the collection...
Thanks for the video and website review. As you mentioned that you took the caseback off the hesalite to compare movements, do you believe an exhibition/sapphire caseback can be applied?
@@FratelloMagazine Sure? Because the lugs and the case profile are pretty different. I can't wait to get one of those bracelet for my previous moonwatch!
Thank you for this superb review. I have a question: you always said in the past that 1861 was qualified by. Nasa, now suddenly 1861 is not qualified by NASA. Why? If 1861 was not qualified how was it possible to use it in different space missions? Thanks.
We never said it was qualified. In our article on the fratellowatches.com we explain it in-depth. The last official qualified Moonwatch is the 145.022 with caliber 861 (in 1978 for the shuttle missions). The 1861 was never officially issued by NASA to astronauts. Astronauts that leave earth via Russia did (and do) receive a Moonwatch from ROSCOM (Russian Space Agency). NASA only issues the X33 to their astronauts.
@@FratelloMagazine since the cosmonauts used it though in space, it has proven that can take the punishment...so being officially “qualified” by nasa is a moot point.
Omega price increase in the UK shows they are chasing Rolex figures. In the US there are equivalent increases are around £740 and £590 but the increase in the UK is £1,120 on both bracelet models. Feels like a chance to increase margin profit coming on top of an 8% price rise last summer.
How does the 39mm speed master fair to the 2021 42mm. In wearability and comfort. Also, is it worth getting the new one or look for a deal on an older model used under 4k? Also, what’s your recommendation for a white dial speed master that’s not in precious metal or the racing version.
I assume you are talking about the 39.7mm Ed White model with caliber 321? It's a very different watch from the modern Moonwatch with Master Chronometer movement. I answered your question basically in this article: www.fratellowatches.com/one-year-with-the-omega-speedmaster-calibre-321-would-i-buy-it-again/. With regards to the 42mm new versus old, I would go for the new one. But if you already would have the old one, I wouldn't trade it for the new one, if that makes sense. I covered the old vs new Moonwatch discussion in this article: www.fratellowatches.com/hands-on-watch-review-omega-speedmaster-moonwatch-new-vs-old/. Last but not least, regarding the white dial, there's currently no white dial Speedmaster in the collection. The Snoopy 2 (2015) was a full white dial, and the 40th anniversary model in 1997 had a beautiful white dial (slightly off-white), but those come at serious prices. You can have a look at the '57 collection perhaps, or one of the discontinued Reduced models with a white dial, but these are different from the Moonwatch, of course.
@@FratelloMagazine thank you, very much for the information. Yes, was referring to the ED white model. I feel the perfect one is the 2021 Canopus gold with the white dial but that’s a whole different price range. I currently do not have any speed masters as of yet. I saw the reduced models but as you mentioned very different. Love the fit of the new bracelet. Feels similar to my PSR MTX bracelet. Think I am going for the 2021 model speedy, sapphire crystal model. Thank you, again!
@@FratelloMagazine Yes, it is as though they are trying to hard to look special, in reality they are just another watch. Special, in my eyes is like the 321 Speedmaster.
Because of the composition of the special WG alloy, using a lot of (expensive palladium). Also, the tooling and processing of grey precious metals like this is more expensive.
@@FratelloMagazine omega are using platinum in there white gold,, and palladium in there sedna gold, rolex does palladium in whitegold and platinum rose gold, platinum is less expensive, rolex keep the same price in those 2 metals,,, fratello can you possibly find the the real reason for such a price spike, because i cant see the logic unless they are using 75% gold and 24% platinum. in that white gold
@@FratelloMagazine You are technically correct, Robert-Jan, but I highly doubt that these differences make more than a few 100 EUR. Such a price difference is unjustified.
@@johnnyguitar6697 Ok, we asked Omega for explanation and that was their answer. The composition with lots of palladium, the tooling and the additional time it costs to process these materials compared to yellow and rose gold.
Hello RJ 🙂 the website on fratello and the blog speedy Tuesday led me here on searching on RU-vid. / incredible and impressive as always - thanks for this . RJ ? In principle - do u agree on changing bracelets from one model to another ? Or u prefer keeping all original ? I intend to lean on the latter approach .
@@FratelloMagazine thanks 😊 speedies are such an amazing time piece - affordable to most and can go up to connoisseur collectors - u r wearing the gold 3861 in this video ?
Hey RJ, I found some information, you might be interested in, in the book about Omega Speedmaster („The Moonwatch“ years of production 1994 to 1996, Miller,Richon (in association with Omega-Museum), you also wrote about this book in your Article: „Speedy Tuesday - An Overview of Speedmaster Books“. On the page 107 it states that in preparation of Shuttle-Program NASA on September 1978 started to test the Speedmaster again. The same was stated by James Ragan himself in the video „Moonwatch Memories“ (time 03:30-04:00), namely that he had to do the tests (some of them) in preparation for Skylab and Shuttle Program again. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-STwVXrnAKy8.html
That’s what really confuses me. I have already found this information a few times before, and now James Ragan stated this one more time in the last interview. I think there is no reason not to believe the man that personally was involved in whole story. I read enormous amount of controversial information but I think they are really just two sides of the same coin and Speedmaster with 861 was tested as by Omega and then also by NASA, just how James Ragan told - numerous times. But I believe that it was (also as he mentioned) just some (most important ones) of the tests and not all of them, that could be explained with the personal responsibility for the product that had to be qualified for the programs.
One comment, please show more watch close shots in the video and less of you. Dont get me wrong, great video, but I think the audience want to see more close up shots of the watches!
@@FratelloMagazine still not quite enough.. just a suggestion. Better take a closer look to the watch most of the time instead. It will help the viewer get more understanding
@@danielharyanto6713 More closer becomes tough I think, if you look at one of our more recent productions: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HcguT48bX5c.html
A ceramic bezel would crack and fly all over the place in space. So that’s a stupid idea unless you want to make the Moonwatch anything except a Moonwatch. Sapphire glass and case back can be changed to hesalite and steel case back with relative ease while changing the bezel isn’t that easy, especially a ceramic one. So no, a ceramic bezel watch should be called something else. Earthwatch, maybe.
I only want the saphire version because it's the most expensive version. Period Also it's the version that sells out so it's clearly the most desirable one.
That Dial Recalibration from Fifths to Quarter-Seconds is just The Deal-Breaker for me. It ruins The Tooladelick look of the Precision Astronauts's Timing Instrument. It makes the Dial look like A KnockOff Fake. On my '57 Broad-Arrow " ReEdition" from 1998 i can easily time Fifths of A Second on the Chronograph. Such A Shame to see An Updated Speedmaster with Improved Movement & that Lovely new Bracelet, with A " Dumbed-Down" Dial! 😢
Actually, I like it better. Makes the minute ring less busy, more readable and from a strictly practical standpoint, no one will use a Speedmaster to time sports competition at any significant level.
The previous calibration actually makes no sense, it was meant for the 2.5hz frequency of the 321 caliber, not for the 3hz of the 861 and subsequent calibers. Now every tick should line up with with the markers, whereas previously it would skip over them rendering them useless. I The current calibration is thus actually more useful for precision timekeeping, not less.
Your camera guys is not very professional. I clicked on the video to get a glimpse of the watch, but saw more of the host than the watch. Hopefully, next video the time pieces get more exposure.
i can absolutely afford to miss it, considering for the insane price they're now charging, you can get an actual moonwatch (and not a pretend moonwatch) with a bit of patience...
Glad I bought an 1861 powered Moon Watch shortly before they were discontinued. These co-axial movements are deeply flawed, and have never been to space!
@@Brian-ee1gx While it’s occasionally assumed that the earliest Co-Axial movements were prone to defects, the feedback on newest generation I.e. last decade or so is only positive. But I am genuinely interested in any info re flaws you have come across.
In truth in the booklet of the previous reference (005) it was written: International Space Station: Today, the Speedmaster is still flight qualified by NASA for all piloted space missions. Since November 2nd, 2000, the International Space Station has been continually occupied by scientists, engineers and astronauts from all over the world. More than 200 visitors from 15 nations have made the trip. The Speedmaster has always been part of their standard equipment. I'm very confused.
To be honest, I do have a feeling that someone is trying to hide something or at least keep it in the shadow. When the question is raised whether the new Speedmaster with 3861 is flight qualified or not, everybody starts answering question with questions and pointing that 1861 wasn’t also tested by NASA. 861 was tested and 1861 is technically the same movement. It doesn’t matter who supplied the astronauts with the watches, important is that 1861 is flight qualified by NASA and still used for EVA.
@@JC-fr6go I think it is very clear and answered already. Caliber 3861 is NOT flight-qualified. And NASA does not use caliber 1861 powered Speedmaster watches. That is a misunderstanding.
@@FratelloMagazine 👍🏻thanks! That’s what I thought on 3861 too... Referring to one of your previous comments that 1861 was never qualified for space missions- this is not the same as “not flight-qualified” at all. And that should be clear. 1861 being an successor of 861 needed no re-qualification (so yes, it was not qualified separately) BUT it is flight-qualified as being used in space by astronauts/ cosmonauts regardless the supply chain (NASA’s or ROSCOSMOS) and most importantly stated as such in the product information from OMEGA (the official booklet AND the case-back). Should they not be in use anymore also doesn’t change the fact that OMEGA sold the watches as “flight-qualified” for over 20 years. 🙂
I have a question... What was the thinking behind 'can you afford to miss it?' In the title? A little puzzling. Are you insinuating this will be difficult to get in the future? I hope not. I'm completely sick of the indignity of false scarcity and opaque waiting lists of other brands. I refuse to participate in that game. Hopefully Omega doesn't decide to join that party. P.s. couldn't agree more on the ceramic bezel on the sapphire. This generation with be around for a while and aluminium at that price point seems a bit outdated. It's a must on the hesalite, but sapphire should have been ceramic for me.
No, it is a little wink because we think this is an amazing watch! If you don't have a (modern) Speedmaster yet, this one is what you'd need :-). These won't be difficult to get in the future, they're Omega's bread and butter pieces. The Ed White and Snoopy models for example, are limited (production) and therefore more difficult to get.
@@FratelloMagazine Excellent. I appreciate the reply. I'm glad Omega is continuing to sell watches to people that want them. It's honest and dignified. I do think this is the Speedmaster to get too. I disliked the bracelet on the last generation, and did think the movement had been outpaced by many others. This new Speedmaster gets so many things right........if only that ceramic bezel.
