<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: It really gets annoying now..</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fratellowatches.com/archives/2004/08/06/it-really-gets-annoying-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fratellowatches.com/archives/2004/08/06/it-really-gets-annoying-now/</link>
	<description>watchweblog</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:07:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chicagoland Chuck Maddox</title>
		<link>http://www.fratellowatches.com/archives/2004/08/06/it-really-gets-annoying-now/comment-page-1/#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>Chicagoland Chuck Maddox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:19:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=32#comment-23</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hello RJ, &#91;I'm going to have to investigate Mac OS X bloging software for my use!&#93;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A couple of observations about the c.3303 and c.3301...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The early c.33xx models produced by Omega utilized the c.330&lt;b&gt;3&lt;/b&gt; movement. The &lt;b&gt;B&lt;/b&gt;road &lt;b&gt;A&lt;/b&gt;rrow (&lt;b&gt;BA&lt;/b&gt; Seamaster &lt;b&gt;A&lt;/b&gt;merica's &lt;b&gt;C&lt;/b&gt;up &lt;b&gt;C&lt;/b&gt;hronograph (&lt;b&gt;ACC&lt;/b&gt; etc. utilized the c.330&lt;b&gt;3&lt;/b&gt;. Last fall, Omega discontinued the ACC and replaced it with what we call the &lt;b&gt;Non-ACC&lt;/b&gt;, because it omitted the America's Cup notation on the dial. The &lt;b&gt;Non-ACC&lt;/b&gt; utililizes the c.330&lt;b&gt;1&lt;/b&gt; movement, which supposedly is not quite as highly decorated as the c.3303.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There had been hopes that the change to the c.330&lt;b&gt;1&lt;/b&gt; might have also signified the inclusion of the revised parts mentioned in &lt;a HREF="http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&#038;th=303672&#038;mid=740166&#038;rid=146&#038;rev=&#038;reveal=" TARGET="_blank"&gt;Shaun Thorton's post 9 March 2004&lt;/a&gt;. However, since the &lt;b&gt;Non-ACC&lt;/b&gt; is a new model (since last fall) it would appear that 1) this is &lt;u&gt;not&lt;/u&gt; an "Old Stock" movement and 2) the parts in the Non-ACC movement (c.330&lt;b&gt;1&lt;/b&gt;) are either: a) unchanged from the older c.330&lt;b&gt;3&lt;/b&gt; models, b) the parts changed are ineffective in eleviating the issues Shaun covered, or c) the parts have introduced a/more issue(s) into the "mix".&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In any case, the c.3301 movement, sadly, does not appear to be the "perfected" version of the c.3300 movement series that we had hoped it would be.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sincerely,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;-- Chuck&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello RJ, &#91;I&#8217;m going to have to investigate Mac OS X bloging software for my use!&#93;</p>
<p>A couple of observations about the c.3303 and c.3301&#8230;</p>
<p>The early c.33xx models produced by Omega utilized the c.330<b>3</b> movement. The <b>B</b>road <b>A</b>rrow (<b>BA</b> Seamaster <b>A</b>merica&#8217;s <b>C</b>up <b>C</b>hronograph (<b>ACC</b> etc. utilized the c.330<b>3</b>. Last fall, Omega discontinued the ACC and replaced it with what we call the <b>Non-ACC</b>, because it omitted the America&#8217;s Cup notation on the dial. The <b>Non-ACC</b> utililizes the c.330<b>1</b> movement, which supposedly is not quite as highly decorated as the c.3303.</p>
<p>There had been hopes that the change to the c.330<b>1</b> might have also signified the inclusion of the revised parts mentioned in <a HREF="http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&#038;th=303672&#038;mid=740166&#038;rid=146&#038;rev=&#038;reveal=" TARGET="_blank">Shaun Thorton&#8217;s post 9 March 2004</a>. However, since the <b>Non-ACC</b> is a new model (since last fall) it would appear that 1) this is <u>not</u> an &#8220;Old Stock&#8221; movement and 2) the parts in the Non-ACC movement (c.330<b>1</b>) are either: a) unchanged from the older c.330<b>3</b> models, b) the parts changed are ineffective in eleviating the issues Shaun covered, or c) the parts have introduced a/more issue(s) into the &#8220;mix&#8221;.</p>
<p>In any case, the c.3301 movement, sadly, does not appear to be the &#8220;perfected&#8221; version of the c.3300 movement series that we had hoped it would be.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>&#8211; Chuck</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
