There is a certain segment of the horological population that is genetically susceptible to the moonphase complication and if you're one such person, stay away from these watches, because you're going to find yourself working very hard to not lose all ability to be objective. 85 mm for the addition of a date hand to the sub-dial at 9 o'clock, and a moonphase disk, seems reasonable. The Speedmaster Co-Axial is already a 16 mm thick watch (and the Moonwatch, at 13.5 mm is not anyone's idea of extra flat either, for that matter) and an extra. I think at least partly the extra thickness is an unavoidable consequence of the movement construction. Despite the fact that these are both cosmetically significantly more formal than the Moonwatch, I think a lot of gents might find them challenging to wear with a dress shirt at 16.85 mm, unless you like your cuffs so loose that they're cuffs in name only, these won't slide easily out of sight. Whether or not a watch feels too big on the wrist, however, is more complicated than just numbers a lot has to do with how well the watch is matched to its strap, and whether it stays properly centered on the wrist, and while both the Sedna gold and steel versions feel as large as they look, once they're strapped on they don't feel awkward or uncomfortable. The standard Moonwatch is 42 mm x 13.5 mm and these are noticeably bigger, at 44.25 mm x 16.85 mm. Still, more power to Omega for offering the only widely produced alternative to the lever out there right now (all other current alternatives to the lever, such as the various versions of the Breguet échappement naturel, or the AP escapement, are made in very small numbers).įirst impressions in terms of handling: these are big watches, and thick ones too. A well adjusted lever watch can keep an awfully close rate and especially if you get a little lucky with positions and regulation, may perform at least as well in daily use as a co-axial watch. Whether or not it offers a really noticeable advantage to consumers is an open question, though. It's extremely intellectually appealing, and I've always felt that anyone who considers themselves serious about horology ought to have at least one watch with a co-axial escapement and, at the very least, god knows an Omega is a much less expensive alternative to bespeaking a wristwatch from Roger Smith. The only major disadvantage to the co-axial relative to the lever is that it's more complex. The problem with the co-axial, of course, is that it's not such an easy thing to understand from a consumer standpoint – basically, it was created by George Daniels to combine the advantages of the chronometer detent escapement (no need for lubrication) with those of the lever escapement (good resistance to physical shock).
0 kommentar(er)
