My new watch: Why I bought a seventies Speedmaster
Back in August, I wrote an article with some reflections on my watch collection, and mentioned that I was thinking of replacing my IWC Portugieser with a steel sports watch. I also asked horologically minded readers what their suggestions might be.
The flood of comments and recommendations took me a little by surprise. There were over 200 comments in 24 hours, and many of them in depth, offering wide-ranging thoughts on watches and value, as well as specific suggestions.
I guess this is what happens when you step from one hyper-geeky area to another.
As I read through them all though, and answered each in turn, the thing that started to surprise me more was that I didn’t like any of the suggestions.
Even though I’d set out some fairly specific criteria, in terms of material, rarity and budget, none of the watches readers were putting forward - from a Cartier Santos to a Tudor Black Bay - really appealed.
Now, sometimes that was just because people hadn’t picked up a detail I mentioned. Given I was replacing the Portugieser, a similarly sized, similarly dressy chronograph was never going to be right.
But the bigger issue was that the thing I value most in watches is design, and design is highly subjective. It involves a lot of preferences and prejudices - some of which are irrational, and many of which are subconscious.
As suggestions started to come in, I quickly realised I don’t like sports watches with big dials and pushers - the kind that you only actually need if you go diving. They look a little silly and pretentious to me - but that rules out quite a few sports watches.
I realised I have a particular dislike of watches that look like they’re cheaper versions of more famous models. I’m at a point in my life where I would rather have nothing at all than something that’s a stand-in. And while I know Tudor has its own rich history, too many of its and other brands’ designs look like they’re trying to be a Submariner.
I also realised I particularly prize the quirky and unusual. There’s plenty of that around in watchmaking, but the models don’t tend to be the ones people suggest initially. But then I hadn’t been specific enough about any of this, mostly because you don’t really analyse your preferences unless you spend a lot of time talking about the subject, or are actively looking to buy.
With this in mind, my next move was to turn to a friend who was not a watch expert, but whose eye I valued from a design point of view. He showed me a few vintage pieces he had his eye on, and we were immediately on a better track.
The watch I ended up going for is pictured here. It is a 1977 Omega Speedmaster, reference ST176.0015, an automatic chronograph with a caliber 1045 movement.
The first thing that drew me to it was that it had such a distinctive design, with enough of the Speedmaster feel but unlike any other model I’d seen. On closer inspection I liked the deep case - which gives it a very different feel to my GMT - and the slightly yellowed seal, which shows its age (it varies between models).
All this was quite instinctive. But given I was going to write about it, I thought I should know a little more. So I spoke to Petros Protopapas, a PS reader and head of brand heritage at Omega, who knows his way around the Omega archive better than anyone.
“The design with its integrated bracelet [meaning the bracelet runs up into the case, forming a continuous line] harks back to the 1969 introduction of the Speedmaster Mark II,” said Petros. “Also to several proposals for NASA’s programme office from within the legendary ‘ALASKA Project’ series of prototypes.
“While they were eventually not chosen for adoption by the American Space Agency, the design itself trickled down to several new and rather professional iterations of known models – hence the Speedmaster Mark II, the Mark III models and the automatic models like the one in your possession.”
This was all quite interesting, as was the background on the caliber, but it wasn’t until we started talking about the design of that period that I hit on what appealed to me.
“The watch is very much a ‘child of its time’,” said Petros. “The deep ‘tonneau’ shape of the case - what Omega called the ‘pilot’s line’ - was distinctive of the early to mid-seventies. And even more so is the thick integrated bracelet and big links.”
He was putting in expert language what had appealed to me instinctively - that this felt like a very seventies watch. In the same way that I love my Reverso for its deco influences, I liked the Speedmaster for its distinct and time-specific design language.
Watches appeal to me as pieces of jewellery rather than engineering, and jewellery is always driven by a combination of individual flair and broader cultural influence.
A nice thing about preferring uncommon designs, often, is price. This watch cost me £2,700 on Chrono24, which is well within the £5k budget I set out in the initial piece.
My experience with the seller was not great, in that one of the pushers for the chronograph was faulty when it arrived. I was able to take it to the Omega branch on Oxford Street, who have a watchmaker on site, and they fixed it immediately with no charge.
But if I ever bought a pre-owned watch again, I think I would always try and do so in person, both for the reliability and to see it physically on the wrist.
I’ve found this process fascinating, and I’m very grateful to PS readers for taking the time to give their advice and suggestions. Even if I took up none of them, I feel I know my own taste a lot better now than I did before, and I’ve reached to a very satisfactory outcome.
As ever, I feel there are parallels here with clothes, in that finding the right person to give you advice - whether it’s a friend, a writer or a shop founder - is invaluable.
In particular, we should value shops (online or not) not just for how keenly they price their cashmere sweaters, or flannel trousers, but what advice and style they inject along the way. It’s all nothing without style.
P.S. yes, the days of the week are in Spanish. One more quirk that I liked - though I realise for some people it might be the oddest choice of the lot!
Thank you to Silas and the team at A Collected Man for their advice with this article. For details of the clothes shown, see article on loafers and jeans here.
Photography: Milad Abedi
Very good choice, it suits you well. I especially like the case.
That’s a very beautiful watch and so interesting to read about the journey behind your decision. I’m sitting here wearing my father’s 1970’s Omega Seamaster chronograph 176.007 and I always enjoy looking at it. I hope you get the same enjoyment as the months of ownership turn into years.
One question I had – does the luminescence on the hands still glow? I can’t read mine in the dark but am advised not to have even the slightest refresh on the hands. (I’ve been thinking about a small dot at the end of the minute and hour hands.)
I wonder if other readers have a view?
Yes it does, which is nice. It also sits up well, as in the stock picture, which makes it quite an effective bedside clock
I think there are primarily two divergent views on that. The first is most common in the online watch community, which is never touch or change anything, in order to retain the watch’s re-sale value as an investment. The opposing view is that it’s your watch. Do what you want with it, especially if you do not intend to sell it. I own three watches, none particularly valuable, and one, like yours, an heirloom that will not be sold. If I needed to re lume the hands, I would just make sure that the color of the lume is right. Good luck!
As a vintage heirloom piece I wouldn’t touch anything. I understand you are trying to add functionality but for something more legible I’d rather just buy another watch.
Not to refresh the lume has certainly been very good advice, as the watch industry used Radium (Ra-226), Promethium (Pm-147) then later Tritium for the lume up to to 80/90ties – all more or less radioactive. And I think you don’t want anybody have to deal with these materials now.
Hi Simon,
Your blocky, high tech (for that era) watch looks like something Roger Moore might have worn as THAT swinging secret service agent.
That’s intended as a compliment.
Cheers
Think Roger Moore wore a Rolex in Love and Let Die .
Lovely watch!
Would be interesting to know what other watches your friend suggested and which you seriously considered before choosing this one?
To be honest there weren’t any others I considered once I saw this one – I can’t remember his other ideas but they were steel sports watches
I like your new watch on you. Its a great piece of history and it looks very nice on your wrist, whats for me the most important on a watch of such or higher price. I also understand that your point in watches is a bit different from most. You have so many clothes and so many watches too so a new one has to fill some criteria that arent the same as some suggestions from
people who own one or two watches. Have you tried a leather strap yet ? If no i would imagine the hodinkee shell cordovan one giving a different vintage tone to it.
Interesting, no I haven’t but thanks for the suggestion Georgios
Simon,
If you ever consider having your Speedy fitted for a leather strap, please keep John Glance (Berlin) in mind at https://dangerous9straps.com. He fitted my Daytona stainless steel sports watch with a black leather strap. Did a great job!
Best,
Robert
Thanks Robert
Super cool choice… Had my eye on one myself after seeing a friend with one. Now I just might have to take the plunge.
Nice watch but personally I much prefer the more refined and elegant Rolex ‘Airking’ (mod 11400).
In my not so humble opinion, this is the most overlooked watch on the planet.
It manages to be simple, elegant, tough and refined and is just about the only watch that looks right on every occasion.
Maybe you can get one with your budget saving ?
Thanks David. That’s never quite appealed to me – perhaps because I see it around more, or perhaps because my tastes diverge between dressier and sportier. I can certainly see the appeal though
Hi Simon, I am surprised that you did not look into Grand Seiko. Amazing value for money, timeless and subtle designs, great history… A lot that PS could relate to. I understand that you were looking to replace a very specific spot in your collection, so maybe not for this one, but definitely worth digging…
Gab, yes, I wear a Grand Seiko and am very happy with it.
I am also surprised – classic, understated but the very highest levels of craftmasnship.
“I don’t like sports watches with big dials and pushers – the kind that you only actually need if you go diving. They look a little silly and pretentious to me – but that rules out quite a few sports watches.” I agree totally. Unfortunately, the big brands are moving towards even bigger versions of their classic models, e.g. Hamilton’s khaki and aviation ranges.
I’ve gone the opposite route and gone for analogues without unnecessary dials that are often hard to read. My last purchase was a Hamilton’s Pilot Pioneer on sale – thin, 36mm width and manual mechanical movement. With a slim leather strap, it’s perfect to wear with a dress shirt as the cuffs don’t get frayed. It’s also a classic example of my KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) philosophy. For me, a watch is just for telling the time and a mobile phone is for making and receiving calls.
, Gary, I LOVE sports watches with big dials and pushers (tho when I actually went diving, I was wearing a G-Shock). There’ s a 43mm diver on a Bond NATO on my wrist right now. That’s my standard rig with blue jeans or a blue suit. As for my dress shirts, on the right sleeve I move the button half an inch (12mm). That gives you enough room to wear a large diver on a bracelet.
It looks great and interesting to go down the second hand route (I’d be nervous about getting a broken watch – glad Omega looked after you- or one where the ownership was disputed).
Could this be worn with tailoring or will this be for your casual/workwear occasions only?
Just for casual really. I’d be more likely to do things the other way if anything – something like my Reverso with jeans and. T-shirt
Thank you Simon. When buying a dress watch I’ve seen “rule” which says a leather strap should match the colour of your belt / shoes. I could see an argument that a brown leather strap may not look sufficiently smart for a dark navy suit if that is the look you are going for, but should one apply this rule to a black leather strap? There are only so many items one may wish to own, and so much time one may have to change straps.
Have you seen this article on matching leathers like that Alex? I would be similarly relaxed about it – don’t think about matching, more about whether the strap fits with the rest of the tone of what you’re wearing.
Simon most vintage Omegas have the day wheel in two languages. If you spend a little time exploring it, I suspect you will find that the version you have uses both Spanish and English.
This has piqued my interest – how does that work?!
CJ, instead of turning the crown one click to advance the day, you move it two clicks. The first click will be Spanish, Japanese or whatever, The second click will be English.
Hi Michael, that doesn’t seem to be the case on mine. Moving the crown on two clicks just advances the date by two days. Pulling the crown out further just means you adjust the date rather than the day?
Nice watch! Love how they arrange all the tiny numbers and words on the dial and manage to make them look rather cool but not too much or too crowded. The brushed stainless steel-ish look case is also my favorite. And I fully understand that you wouldn’t want any of the more prominent/modern sport watches because the fact that they’re all trying to look like Rolex. You either get the genuine thing or nothing at all. Good choice.
Very interesting… and great value, Enjoy your new acquisition.
I also bought my first Omega last month. What’s your opinion on this 30s art déco design? The watch is very small with just over 30mm. But this destinct „scarab“ case, to my eye, stops it from looking too small on my small wrist. Would be interested in my opinion.
I think it’s nice Alexander, I like those lugs
„Would be interested in *your* opinion.“ of course. Thanks
Hello Simon!
Great choice. Not for me personally, but I can clearly see and appreciate the choice and niche you wanted it for.
On another note:
Which chinos are you wearing in the second to last picture?
Is that your old army chino?
No they’re Rubato
Lovely choice and really enjoyable to hear about your personal thoughts going through all the way to purchase. Hope it gives you a lot of joy and thanks for sharing Simon.
Pleasure Alan, pleased you liked it
Since 1990, I have a ’71 Speedmaster 125. From a number of angles it looks very similar to yours. I love it yet have a love-hate relationship with it as it’s so damn heavy on the wristI have phases of up to a year where I don’t wear it but keep coming back. Right now I’m enjoying the freedom of the Mission to Mercurey Moonswatch – obviously with a better strap!
It’s a lovely watch, and it’s always nice to hear that Omega will treat vintage owners well – the *other* brand has a patchy record in that regard. Just curious, did you ever consider checking the vintage Omega dealer at the end of Burlington Arcade? They have a lovely collection, although the pricing is in keeping with having to pay those Burlington Arcade rent rates.
I did look in there, yes, and they have some lovely pieces – though slightly more on the dressy side. As you say, the prices are also reflective of the location
It’s a lovely quirky watch and I’m glad you were able to find something to YOUR liking from a design perspective. There’s nothing more boring in the watch world than homogenization of taste where everyone seems to be going for the same handful of models all the time.
Very interesting point regarding homogenisation Ben. I recently read an article in a UK broadsheet’s news website which stated that demand for one well known watch brand is so great they will not sell their most demanded models until you have “built a relationship with them” on less popular models, which meant spending c100k. It seems there is a lot of demand for the same thing.
Hi Simon
A great choice of watch and era,i have a bit of an obsession with Omega watches from the 1970s.
The variety of different designs and willingness to be creative and sometimes perhaps a little off the wall,is fasinating to see nowadays.
Your watch is a real beauty,with the cool bar bracelet that features on quite few pieces from that time.
Have a peek at the web page http://www.old-omegas.com/ which gives lots of infomation about Omega from days gone by.
With old catalogues and lots of other good stuff.
Ive attached a photo of my small collection which is quite modest,i bought them at auctuion and had them refurbished at Omega
Another is in Switzerland right now.
WARNING its quite addictive.
I enjoy the articles you publish very much.
Best regards.Peter.
Thanks Peter, and thanks for the link
Is the misalignment of month and date just a photographic illusion?
No, they’re just in the process of turning to the next day and date
Simon day/date watches almost always have a date wheel with two languages. If you simply scroll through the days using the correct stop position on your winding crown, you will, I am sure, see the language change from its current Spanish to English. Once it is set in English, it will stay in English until such time as you manually intervene again.
Hope this is useful.
Thank Johnny, but no that’s not the case here – I have checked. I think it was intended only for the Spanish market, which might explain why
I like the watch quite a lot, Simon! I too am a big fan of the 70’s tonneau cases, although I don’t own one. In any event, I’m glad you didn’t end up with a modern Speedmaster.
As an aside, I was among the chorus who suggested Tudor. For me, I like Tudor not because their watches are relatively less expensive than Rolex, but rather because they’re less pretentious and still retain the feel of true tools as opposed to a piece of expensive jewelry masquerading as a tool. That being said, the majority of Tudor’s customers probably fall into either the camp of “it’s like a Rolex, but more affordable,” or hardcore watch enthusiasts. You clearly don’t fit into either camp, so your aversion makes perfect sense.
I bought a Tudor and it was also nothing to do with being relatively less expensive than a Rolex; it was love at first sight and largely because it was something that Rolex didn’t make (and indeed no-one else made at the time). It was new, exciting but still a classic and several years later it is still my “only” watch. I do like watches and look from time to time but when it boils down to it I can never find anything to make me want to take my Tudor off my wrist.
I enjoy most of your articles, but I have to call you out in this instance. You lost me at calling watches with big dials or pushers silly and pretentious. Perhaps your own statement was pretentious and exclusive. I do not like big dials myself, but my Omega Seamaster has a helium escape valve. I think it would have sufficed to just say you do not like those attributes as they are unnecessary. Maybe I misunderstood you.
Sure Dan, perhaps that language was a little over the top. I apologise. Still, I do think in a literal sense those watches are pretending to be something they’re not – if they’re not being used as a tool for any of those functional purposes
Surely it’s not the watches pretending to be something they’re not? I would say it’s the people who wear them pretending to be something they’re not, eg a deep sea diver.
Yes, good point Peter. I guess it’s only the watches’ fault (or their makers’) in that they’re clearly aimed at that mainstream market
chortle chortle – pulling your leg slightly: do you find the tachymeter useful? I love the case shape and the way the strap integrates; I don’t happen to like the three big pushers or all the gubbins/sub-dials on the face but I think it is great that you have found a watch that you have connnected with on a deep personal level and I think it is a great way to purchase a watch.
Cheers Mark
It’s a nice watch. I am pleasantly surprised that Omega rectified your problem on site and for free too.
There is a guy on Instagram, mr enthusiast you might enjoy following. He loves watches for their design too.
Thanks Dan, already a follower! I agree, he has a great eye too
Looking at the pictures of the watch on its own and my reaction is “not a fan personally”, yet seeing it on you it looks great and perfectly natural. Strange how things can vary like that, even when there’s no element of fit that there is with clothes. I wonder if it’s because it makes the case look proportionally less bulky when on your wrist?
It might do, yes. I also think it’s testament to trying on watches before buying
Lovely watch but I think that in your analysis you are underestimating fashion and trends. I have been checking for similar watches recently and I do not think that that is a coincidence 🙂
Hmm, yes you may well be right Diego. Although certainly my Reverso and Tank haven’t changed in terms of how they seem in relation to fashions, the Portuguese has.
Although, I also think as you get older you start to become more immune to these things, often as the rest of your style settles down as well
70’s Omega has some of the last truly great values in horology. You should take. look at some of the Andrew Grima-inspired constellations. Truly awesome pieces and some can be had at still-decent prices. (That said, they’re not great timekeepers… but who’s buying 50 year old watches to keep time?)
Really cool watch Simon, and very strong 70’s aesthetic. The very first thing that popped into my head when I saw the watch is the Lotus Esprit, which it turns out dates from 1976.
If you’re paying $2.5k for a watch what you value most is probably not design. I’m sure there are watches that costs a fifth of that price with 95% of its design elements. Even recognizing that $2.5k is very conservative in the watch market, what you’re mostly paying for are the movement and reputation of the piece. Frankly, what you’re mostly paying for is what other people are willing to pay for it. That’s mostly the luxury watch business as I see it.
Context: I love watches and wear one at all times—often to tell the time.
Thanks Ben – I agree on the design, you’re right, I’m a big fan of something like the Junghans Max Bill for example. Although it does tend to be that there aren’t as interesting or elegant designs at the lower end of the market – perhaps because design does cost something, especially when it comes to something that you see as a piece of jewellery.
On what other people are prepared to pay for it, I’m sure that’s part of it too, although much less so with an unpopular model like this – a popular one trebles or quadruples the price for only that reason.
“Although it does tend to be that there aren’t as interesting or elegant designs at the lower end of the market – perhaps because design does cost something, especially when it comes to something that you see as a piece of jewellery.” With regard to this I strongly recommend to have a look at Orient Watches, specifically at “Bambino” series. You will be surprised to see an very elegant design, high quality & very affordable price. For your reference: https://longislandwatch.com/orient-ra-ap0004s10a-bambino-watch-ra-ap0004s10a/ or https://longislandwatch.com/orient-ac00002w-watch-ac00002w/
Thank you. At a glance they aren’t really my style, but interested to hear what someone who wears more that type of watch would think
I like the Max Bill as well—the Meister Chronoscope even more so (Junghans fit my taste very well). And then I look at something like the Timex Fairfield, which is less than 10% of their price, and see something very comparable in terms of design and durability. Most likely, then, that 90% is made up by brand status.
I’m no watch expert Ben, but if the price difference is that large then it’s not going to be pure branding. One is an automatic and the other quartz at the very least.
I also don’t think, from what I can see briefly online, that the Fairfield really is as elegant – it looks squarer, a less elegant hand shape, and the date position looks a little odd. They might be superficially similar in design, but design is all about the details, and it doesn’t look there’s much guiding design intelligence there
If this was a watch blog, that one line about Tudor would have caused all the Tudor apologists to come crawling out of the woodwork, all wearing the same BB58 and yelling something about “french military divers” ?
“I’m at a point in my life where I would rather have nothing at all than something that’s a stand-in.”
Congrats on the watch, Simon.
“…the thing I value most in watches is design, and design is highly subjective.” I couldn’t agree more. A watch should be bought – in part – because of that feeling that you get when you first see it in person and try it on. For this reason, i don’t think it’s a good idea to buy a watch based on hype/recognition from others, or without trying it (you were brave, Simon!).
For example, i recently tried a PP Nautilus and was completely underwhelmed. Likewise with an AP Royal Oak – it did nothing for me. When i tried (and bought) a Girard-Perregaux Laureato chrono though i absolutely loved it, and got that special feeling that watch collectors will know.
A watch is a personal thing and, i think, should be bought based on a love of an individual piece or brand, not because of perceived societal value.
One other brand that i haven’t seen mentioned here that PS readers may like: https://www.glashuette-original.com/en/
They are German made, but if you are ok with that then their designs/mechanisms are top-class (SeaQ in particular is lovely, though they are best known for dress watches rather than sports).
Just out of interest – what’s there to be “ok with” about being German made? Watches from Saxony tend to be among the best there are at every price point surely (from Nomos -> Glashütte -> Lange/Grossmann)?
Simon – nice watch, it reminds me of the Oysterquartz case which I always found very appealing. I just wonder how “permanent” this choice will turn out to be, it seems a little trendy. Let’s see what you say about it in 3 years 🙂
Yes very true. My taste has done pretty well so far, so I have faith. But it’s very hard to know with certainty
Thanks Felix. What I meant is that not many people are willing to spend 10k+ euros on a watch that is not Swiss made. No discrimination of German made watches intended, but they don’t have the wider recognition (beyond watch enthusiasts) that Swiss watches have. Of course, that is the part of the charm of them – at least for me – but not everyone will feel that.
Nice watch, but on the casual side only. On the other hand, very few watches with steel or gold bracelets remain elegant with a suit, except if you are an active spy…
Something that PS has done for over the years is convince me of why certain items if clothing are worth what can seem to be a very high price tag to those who lack the knowledge. There are convincing arguments about quality, sustainability and supporting the right type of merchant etc which I find very persuasive. As a former cocktail bartender and whiskey fanatic, I can make these arguments for drinks if needs be…
I am yet to be convinced with this for watches, which seem to be outrageously priced. I am sure that this is to some extent about my ignorance of the subject – I have two watches (brown/black straps) which I inherited from my grandfather and I wear it most days, depending on my shoes. Can you (or readers) recommend a source to help me understand how watches are priced and why?
Very masculine watch choice. Somehow I guessed you will gravitate towards vintage.
If anyone is interested in something with aesthetic kind of like this, do check out Brew Watch Co. Metric. It doesn’t have the brand cache but its a lovely everyday beater watch that I think looks quite good, has it’s own identity and is decently made. Plus it’s affordable if you are on a budget or just don’t care for fine watchmaking.
http://www.brew-watches.com/watches
Interesting read, Simon, even if I disagree on many points. The one where I agree is that tastes in watches are quite individual and that is a good thing. I would for instance never wear this watch but I understand why it may appeal to others. On the other hand, I have no issues with Rolex and Tudor pointed out and happily own both brands for their strong sides (bold design and sportiness for the former, timeless classic design for the latter).
I love how Rolex in the 70s stuck to their guns with their iconic designs but Omega went a bit bonkers with their watches; so many weird and wonderful creations. I hope you enjoy your “new” watch. It’s not for me though – too much mainly unnecessary information crammed into a small space (does anyone really use a tachymeter or need a 24hr indicator?) But, hey, it would be a boring world if everyone loved the same thing!
In space you would need a 24hr indicator 🙂
Simon, really nice post, made me reflect on my time working in the watch industry. Could you comment please on the “trainers” you are wearing with the chino, brand and color.
Many thanks, greeting from NYC.
Cliff
There’s a piece coming up specifically on those Clifford, but they are Doeks
Big fan of this one. I have a Omega “hummer”, otherwise known as an electric watch that resonates to make the hands move. Needless to say, the tech didn’t take off and it’s usually quartz or automatic as a choice. It’s really something different. But it’s seriously delicate. I want to wear it more, but I don’t think it’s up to it.,
Congrats Simon, lovely watch. How is the time keeping? Did Omega service it as well?
They didn’t, no, but I may well pay for that at some point.
The time keeping is fine – not perfect, but good enough
Am sure when the time for a service comes, Simon, you’ll proceed cautiously; you might want to consider a good independent watchmaker rather than Omega themselves. I have heard from a few sources (including a worker at my Omega boutique) that Omega can be bullish in what they do to an old watch, with things like doing a bit of polishing or refinishing potentially non-negotiable! I’ll be taking my ‘90s Seamaster to an independent person soon.
Thanks Matthew, yes been through that with my GMT
“hyper-geeky area”
Very amused by this thought – the tendency of men (nearly always men) to delve deep into a subject, and get all a bit obsessed.
Just waiting for your take on coffee, and a collab with James Hoffmann on vintage espresso machines!
Yes!
As ever, I feel there are parallels here with clothes, in that finding the right person to give you advice – whether it’s a friend, a writer or a shop founder – is invaluable.
INVALUABLE – SIMON CROMPTON ?
Now you need an Aston Martin Lagonda to go along with your watch.
Great choice I’ve always admired the speedmaster variants, just never bold enough to use chrono24!
Congratulations. I got myself a MARK IV about 18 years ago. It has become my everyday watch, love the heft and the functionality. It’s taken some bumps but it keeps on ticking. I originally thought it was going to be the first “good watch”, the beginning of a collection, but no, fully sated.
Looks cool and suits you.
As much as I love the more current crop of sport watches, there’s something incredibly inviting and rich about getting a vintage piece that speaks to my proclivities. You have quite the piece!
The watch craze of the past 15 years or so (maybe it has peaked?) is fascinating by itself. It has had its elements of absurdity – all of which you have avoided by buying a somewhat out-of-favor 1970s watch. At its best, the craze has brought to the fore the fascinating technology—much of it developed in the 1600s in England—that sits inside your 1977 Omega. And even with the extremes of the recent watch bubble, there is something special about a watch.
Beautiful piece of wachmaking history… but not my taste, too strong connotations for me.
I asociate it with my childhood and my grandfather, who bought a steel Omega with similar case shape —although not a chronograph— when he was more or less my age now, 50. It was so cool then, in the Spain of the 70s….
I loved chronographs for many years, but nowdays I cannot rationally justify the complexity of the mechanism and the fuzzyness of the dial.
¿The reason? Unlike in the days of my youth, nowdays everybody carries a smartphone.
And, as much as I love and am used to consult the time in my wrist, if I need to measure acurately a short period of time, I use my phone.
To my eyes, this kind of chronos can look not less slightly silly and slighty pretentious than a diver watch, if you are not a gentleman race driver or a plane pilot.
And “desk divers” even have and advantage: their great readabillity.
The time I need, measured with an acurate, beautiful and not-too-seen watch made in the time I live, is now my philosopy. ?
Good day, I have seen a similar watch in the Drake’s newsletter. Coincidence?
Looks like it, yes!
Maybe a “sports”-watch must somehow be pretentious to define the stye – sporting “functions” instead of decent and coherent style, gaining compatibility with casual wear.
But while the chunky bracelet-style already refers to sporty jewelry on its own, particular this model tends (at least in given pictures) to look a bit overloaded with functions (never used, I guess): 5 hands, 3 pushers, crowded face and bezel. Maybe the effect recedes in natural wearing, getting more “ornamental” in distance.
The 70s (and to a lesser extent 60s and early 80s) were a great era for sports watches. I love a lot of the designs. Unfortunately I do not trust myself with any watch without a sapphire crystal which I assume yours does not have. There are some retro models out from various manufacturers that have the look with a sapphire crystal but I can’t bring myself to buy something non-authentic and then I also can’t bring myself to buy a watch without a sapphire crystal. I’ll probably go with a Rolex Explorer when I finally get around to upgrading the old Tag Quartz diving watch I have, but with the expense of watches I can take care of other more pressing needs with that money at the moment. But congrats on your purchase it’s certainly an interesting watch!
Cheers
Dear Simon, that is funny: Right after your article, I seem to notice the same or a similar model in other places as well. My co-worker has a similar watch from the late 70ies. Also, in the latest newsletter by Drake’s I spotted a similar one. I will keep my eyes open. Congratulations!
Out of interest, where has the IWC gone?
Sold to a friend Chris
Beautiful looking watch..enjoy wearing it..cheers
Don’t like it personally, but that doesn’t matter. If you do, that’s what counts.
That’s a very handsome watch! Integrated bracelets look amazing if you find the right one, I really really like the Rouleaux bracelet Bretiling use on the Chronomat 42. As you mentioned, you can usually find something that looks roughly similar for much less (although this is difficult to do properly). What are your thoughts on fake/replica watches to get the design you want when nobody makes a cheaper equivalent – especially if watches aren’t your primary interest?
It’s a good question Dan. I used to wear watches like that, back when I was a teenager, and I don’t think I ever would again. I don’t think I ever want to wear anything that’s fake – I’d much rather have a genuine design from a lesser known maker that was a lot cheaper
Very cool
Cheers Ollie
you might want to consider an oysterquartz datejust… http://oysterquartz.watch/ tonneau case, integrated bracelet, razor sharp, small clean dial at 36mm.
how would you describe the weight of the watch on wrist?
Heavy, the heaviest I have. But after a few minutes you don’t notice it
Great watch. Fully agree and very well described as an “object of its time” and all the better for it. Can be equally applicable to clothes and cars/motorcycles.
You can always tell when someone makes a watch purchase based on aesthetics without being very knowledgable about the underlying mechanics. The 1970s era Omega 1000 series calibers are among the worst they ever produced. Good luck with that.
Nice watch! Until recently my only watch was a Speedmaster Reduced which I bought in 1991 and wore daily. I bought it because I wanted a white dial, automatic movement and a small diameter as I have small wrists. Go with the retro look – not an Aston Martin, go for a Bristol 411
I have this very same watch even down to the day wheel displaying in Spanish. I came across this in depth article into this and related models which you may also find interesting http://chronomaddox.com/c1045_in_detail.html
Amazing! Thank you Matt, that’s so useful.
Great article Simon and a cracking Speedmaster.
This is one I hadn’t seen before, I’m no watch expert nor primary enthusiast, like you though I do appreciate a nice watch, mainly from a design point of view. This 70’s obscurity is a really cool one, similarly, I have my eye on the 57 for the same reason, I like those arrow hands and the slightly smaller dimensions too.
I’m pretty certain at this point the Speedmaster is my favourite Chronograph. Yes there may be superior build chronographs out there, more ‘iconic’ not going to name the one I’m talking about but you know what it is, however the Speedmaster is just a classic and when I see someone wearing one, I say to myself “I’d like one of those”.
Hi Simon!
I’m sorry if I’m asking a question that’s already been answered, but I’m thinking about how you would relate to the brand when making your mind concerning a vintage watch. So, you wrote that you had contact with friends that are knowledgeable about watches, but would you go to the omega flagship in London and ask them for advice concerning a vintage (omega) buy or would that be considered rude or inappropriate?
Good question Daniel. I’m not sure to be honest, I never thought about that. My instinct is that they wouldn’t be that helpful in that regard – I think it’s forgivable that they’re there mostly to give advice on buying from them, or on maintaining things they made. I’d stick with asking friends or reading online I think
Thanks for the answer! I have two more questions 🙂
First, would you visit a watch store to try different sizes even if you’re going to buy online in the end? This, I guess, especially concerns first time buyers or if you’re not in menswear business and are not surrounded by great watches 🙂 That’s pretty much the only choice, I guess (?), and you don’t need to tell them that you’re not going to buy from them in the end …?
Second, did you buy from a professional dealer on Chrono or from a private seller? Did you look for a watch with original box and/or papers? Was that important to you?
All the best!
Dan
Hey Dan,
Yes I would be happy to go into a store and try watches like that.
I did buy from a professional dealer, yes, but it did not have original box and papers. That didn’t bother me much – it would have been nice, but as resell is never at the top of my mind (I’ve had watches for over 10 years and not sold any yet) it wasn’t a priority.
S
Lovely choice Simon, you wear it well!
What are your thoughts on the new IWC Ingenieur from an aesthetic style perspective, rather than functional/technical perspective? It came to my mind upon seeing these photos of your new watch.
I’d say that’s rather more understated – nice, but not so much with this style angle, which is chunkier
Had an itch for a while to get a dressier watch to pair with my daily smart watch(currently absolutely gigantic huawei watch ultimate). noticed Tk max have a drop of Hamilton watches.
after couple days of thinking snapped up this one. https://www.tkmaxx.com/uk/en/gifts/gifts-for-him/black-leather-jazzmaster-viewmatic-analogue-watch/p/76937207
since I don’t want to (and consider irresponsible with my salary) to spend money for “horological masterpieces”, I think I made a pretty decent choice. especially considering discount. I’m a bit unsure about gold numerals, but if I get a brown strap should be better combination I think…
should be a good match for jacket and chinos.
also If I see it in person and can’t get on with it, I can always return it ..
“I’m at a point in my life where I would rather have nothing at all than something that’s a stand-in.” Amen to that. You must have hit fourty.