zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

: 1) so what a watch winder website says is true
: for you? Looks like I will never agree with
: you. I will wait Omega's answer.

Please read my previous reply. My previous experience happened to COINCIDE with Orbita database. Coincidence? Let us know the official answer from Omega.

Looks like I will never agree with you
That's very likely, maybe because we see things differently. I don't believe in hypes, I like to come to a conclusion by myself, instead of being told.
: 4) He services all brands and even restores,
: recreates spareparts for watches of brands
: that have disappeared. He is considered as
: the best master watchmaker of France.
: I regulated three watches myself: my 1930 Omega
: pocket watch, a 1965 Baume et Mercier and a
: 1896 Longines, I changed batteries in two
: watches as well, and whanged bracelt on some
: friend watches as well.
My comments on watches are not based on my experience, rather they are based on my understanding of basic design/engineering/manufacturing principles.
In the same industry, the technical advantage of one company over another is very slim (let alone "superior"), mainly due to the increased information flow nowadays.

I am a technical person and usually frawn over "superior" "absolutely" type of words.

: Rolex superior claims? No ask any watchmaker
: what are the most reliable and more robust
: movements on the market? You will see the
: answer.

Just search TZ posts. You can at least find a couple of reviews about 2892, 3000, and 3135, and as far as I can remember, are in depth reviews by watchmakers, and none rated one superior over another.

: How many etas are certified chronometers as
: compared to the 3135?
: About nearly 600000 calibres 3135 certified
: each year + 200000 calibres 2235 certified
: it is much more in terms of produced
: chronometer than all the etas certified as
: chronometer. Not to mention that rolex are
: since decades known to satisfy to cosc
: tests.

ALL the ETA movements I owned can easily be adjusted to chronometer standards. Many manufactures don't even bother to get chronometer certificates (such as IWC). Passing chronometer test is a piece of cake for two main ETA movements (ETA 2892-A2, 2824-2). Getting more COSC, means they sell more COSC watches, doesn't mean those without COSC certificate cannot pass.

: prefer a swan neck or a triovis or a rolex
: microstella regulating system, it is more
: stable and more reliable than the etachron.
: 5) a) not the case here, there have been quite
: a number of people who had problems with
: their 1120b) the review is one thing, the
: watchmakers opinions and their testimonials
: is another.
I believe different designs have their own advantages and disadvantages. Again, if there is one method has only advantage but without disadvantages, engineers will certainly be using the better one.

: the 3303 has been know to have lot of problems
: and they are far to be fully resolved.

I'm aware of the problems reported on TZ. But my 3303 turns out perfect over a 3 year span, super accurate too (<0.5 second/day). more accurate than my 2500, 1120, 2892, or 3000 (explorer I) and previous 3135. So, for me, 3303 is problem free, and really surpass my expectations.

: Despite their better finish the 2500 and the
: 1120 have not the same durability as a 3135
: or a 3035.
See, we do agree on something. 3135 or 4130's movement finish is too utilitarian. As for "durability", we have conclusions already? 2500B is only a couple of years old, and 2500C is even younger.

I wish Rolex can adds better decoration to otherwise good calibres. How about a little better bracelet (not changing the design.)? Rolex can address this very easily, but they just don't bother because their current product sell very well.

: 8)a)using the same base movement as everyone
: else is not being a manufacture. When Omega
: was manufacture, it made far better
: movements than by using etas than you see
: everywhere.Omega made its first inhouse
: series of movements with 28800 bph in the
: 1970's cal 100x, 101x, 102x and 103x
: b)using the same movements than everyone else
: is not the sign of making better watches.
I do not disagree with you on this one. I heard that Omega is moving towards that direction. Actually cal.2500 is a pretty good start. Omega need to have better workmanship on their dials and bracelets too. I am more forgiving for Omega than Rolex, simply because of the price differences.

In terms of performance, it's not easy to do better ETA 2892-A2 for any manufacturer (IMHO).

: 9)You make to much claims buy trying to compare
: a modified eta to a movement which is a
: reference since 18 years, nonsense.Rolex
: have always been known for their robustness
: and incredible accuracy of their movements
: over decades that is why they are superior.I
: can't compare seiko to rolex.

I never use the word nonsense in my online or offline discussions. ETA 2892 has very impressive record too. Ask around.

Hey, if we are talking about contributions to time keeping, Seiko's contribution and impact is much bigger than either Rolex or Omega.

This watch hobbie is never about watches, rather its about the art of time keeping. Please don't tell me that you buy your Omegas/Rolexes JUST to keep time.