- Watches N+1…
Think I’ve definately completed my watch bore journey. Flew into Majorcca today, when packing couldn’t decide on the Seiko diver watch with the nylon strap – casual holiday style or Tag with the GMT function – world traveller style.
Brought both. 🙄 Seiko for the day. Tag for the evening.Posted 2 months agoathgrayMember
Mine’s from the 80s IIRC, USSR on the dial. Tiny wee things by today’s standards, aren’t they?
They are. Mine are both 36mm case diameter. That’s my sweet spot size. I have a selection of Raketas, Vostoks, Poljots and Pobedas. I love them.
I tend to get them on ebay looking a bit battered and scratched for £10-£20, but as the crystal’s are acrylic, a polish with poly watch really takes out scratches. Remove the movement and put the case and bracelet if it has one in a hydrosonic bath. It’s quite satisfying seeing the muck drop off them.
My daily watch for work is an inexpensive Casio F91-W.
I did splurge recently to dip my toe into the Swiss market and bought a used Tissot Visodate. It looks nice but feels huge compared to all the other watches I have.Posted 2 months ago
A “normal” (whatever that is – I’m pretty confused with all the models) Full size moon watch – auto or manual, hesalite, bracelet – Hackett are doing new for £3250 so I’m not sure why a mid 80s one – auto, Hesalite is going for £4k. I love the look of the watch and, owning a quartz Seamaster maybe I’m not a purist so I’m not sure why some are so much more than others (I get Sapphire instead of Hesalite) but thats about all I can cope with!Posted 2 months ago
I don’t know speedmasters that well but with any desirable watch, there are rarer versions that only ran for a short while and these are the more valuable. It can be a tiny change. the speedy ultraman is the example i know, made for about 18 months in about 1980, the only difference is an orange second hand IIRC. That makes it worth more…
If I see a speedy that might fit the bill I’ll try and remember to let you know.Posted 2 months agoplyphonMember
As above –
There have been many tiny (and sometime large) design iterations of the Speedmaster over the years. Anything from movement types, to rear engraving, to slight iterations of the bezel, to what materials the printing was done with..
On sapphire vs hesalite – it’s not as simple as sapphire being always more expensive. Hesalite was the original specification used by NASA for the Apollo missions, so carries a lot of prestige within the Speedmaster world as being the original, or closer to it.
I can’t comment on the rest of the watch without a link to the exact watch. Though admittedly my knowledge isn’t great, but there are looooads of vintage Speedie forums/sites out there.
I love my speedy, it’s a really, really cool watch.
It’s worth adding, the ‘Moonwatch’ only comes in a manual wind. There are plenty of Speedmasters that are automatic (and have the awesome Omega co-axial movement if modern) but they are not moonwatches.Posted 2 months ago
Thanks – I think I was aware that Moonwatches are all manual – I think I’m seeing Speedmasters that look similar but aren’t moonwatches
This is the one I saw – nice watch but I don’t know what makes it worth £4K (If it is!)Posted 2 months ago
The only differences between that one and brand new is that the lume is tritium, 861 movement and a short S dial. Collectors like tritium as it changes colour to a creamy yellow or brown over time but the luminosity has long since died. The 861 vs 1861 movement in the later ones are both exactly the same except the 861 is copper plated and the 1861 is rhodium plated. The short S dial refers to the Speedmaster logo but looking at that one vs the three year old one I have I’m struggling to see the difference. No bracelet on that one either and it would have originaly been fitted with a 1450. The 1450 is probably the most desirable Speedmaster bracelet and you’ll need to find another £2k if you want to complete the set.
I’m more of a vintage watch guy rather than latest and greatest but apart from some tiny details like listed above it’s the same watch they released in 1969, so rather than paying another 1k+ for something with a tritium dial I opted for an almost new watch in mint condition. I could’ve saved a few hundred by buying something 10-15 years old with the marks to prove it and possibly in need of a service but that didn’t make sense to me, plus I wanted the big stupid box with all the accessories and the latest screw link bracelet.Posted 2 months agoebikegumMember
Just to gauge interest and get a steer on price, I’m considering selling my year 2000 Omega Speedmaster. It’s the reduced version, automatic in good order with all boxes and papers including the original purchase receipt.
It is in need of a service as it currently doesn’t run.
Any advice would be appreciated.Posted 2 months ago
Rotors don’t wind in space.
The rotor in an automatic watch should in fact theoretically work more efficiently in zero gravity. It is not the weight of the rotor that actually winds the mainspring it is it’s inertia. If there is sufficient movement of the wrist to spin the rotor then it should, in fact, spin more freely without the effect of gravity to slow it down.Posted 2 months ago
The NASA omegas were indeed all hand wind though. The most commonly used watch in space is the Casio G-Shock so nice as Speedmasters are get one of them if you want a space watch 😝
Ebikegum, reduced? You mean the 36mm case? It’s worth a few hundred less than the 42mm. Which is daft imv,36mm is a good size. I paid £1050 to a dealer for one that we thought ran fine (turned out it didn’t and needed a service) back in January.
Billy err that depends. Yes inertia will swing the rotor relative to the case as the watch moves in the right ways but surely gravity doesn’t affect that. The presence of gravity adds another, significant, winding affect as slow movement where inertia wouldn’t overcome friction, still leads to rotor movement relative to the case as gravity pulls on the rotor. So while the rotor imparts some winding in space, it’s less than down here, and I assume not enough unless astronauts move a lot.Posted 2 months ago
Neil – Lots of automatic watches have been worn in space. Sinn, Bulova, Fortis and famously the first one, worn by Col. William Pogue, a Seiko 6139. (Which as Fudd rightly says ONLY winds automatically) Col. Pogues Seiko worked just fine for the duration of his 84 day Skylab mission.
From this article:
Col. Pogue also confirmed that the self-winding mechanism worked fine in zero gravity, saying: “I don’t remember having to use any extra arm motions to back up the self-winding feature
So the statement
Rotors don’t wind in space.
The reason NASA chose the hand wound Speedmaster for Apollo is not because they thought an automatic watch would not work but because they required a watch with a chronograph function. All other watches of the period with this function failed environmental tests that the Speedmaster passed. No automatically wound chronographs were tested. They weren’t commercially available until 1969 when the automatically wound chronograph movement was released (some dispute as to whether it was Seiko or the Heuer, Breitling and Hamilton collaboration “project 99” that was first)Posted 2 months ago
That’s the beauty of being a watch nerd (like me!) There’s always something interesting to learn (that is of absolutely no interest to anyone who isn’t a watch nerd 😂)
Thanks is due to you also – all this talk of space watches has caused me to dig out my NASA certified Casio G-9000 (currently £55 on Amazon if anyone wants a mudproof watch for biking AND occasional space missions) from the watch box to wear for the first time in ages ⌚👍Posted 2 months ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.