Comments on: The Purists view on Omega http://www.fratellowatches.com/archives/2006/05/25/the-purists-view-on-omega/ watchweblog Sun, 07 Sep 2008 07:37:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: georges zaslavsky http://www.fratellowatches.com/archives/2006/05/25/the-purists-view-on-omega/#comment-7531 georges zaslavsky Mon, 29 May 2006 17:25:12 +0000 /?p=481#comment-7531 Under hayek, many things went wrong. First Omega ceased to manufacture its own movements and replaced them by average quality etas who aren't modified by Omega but by Eta for Omega.The coaxial I don't really believe in it, more a marketing hype than something truely exceptional.Older Omega series of inhouse movements like the cal 100x, 101x, 102x and 103x are of far better quality than an eta 2892-a2.They didn't need that much tlc like the eta movement who needs to be serviced every 5 years.I am not even tallking about the catastrophic reliability of the cal 33xx which is far to me the reliability of a 861, 1040, 1045 and 321 chrono.Omega isn't what it used to be.Omega is an assembleur since 1984,an assembleur is far to offer the same quality of products as compared to a manufacture. Under hayek, many things went wrong. First Omega ceased to manufacture its own movements and replaced them by average quality etas who aren’t modified by Omega but by Eta for Omega.The coaxial I don’t really believe in it, more a marketing hype than something truely exceptional.Older Omega series of inhouse movements like the cal 100x, 101x, 102x and 103x are of far better quality than an eta 2892-a2.They didn’t need that much tlc like the eta movement who needs to be serviced every 5 years.I am not even tallking about the catastrophic reliability of the cal 33xx which is far to me the reliability of a 861, 1040, 1045 and 321 chrono.Omega isn’t what it used to be.Omega is an assembleur since 1984,an assembleur is far to offer the same quality of products as compared to a manufacture.

]]> By: Martijn http://www.fratellowatches.com/archives/2006/05/25/the-purists-view-on-omega/#comment-3929 Martijn Fri, 26 May 2006 06:04:15 +0000 /?p=481#comment-3929 Strangely I think that omega is a brand which most collectors have in their early days of collecting. The reasons for that are numerous; famous name, intresting history, lot too choose from, exspensive enough to have status, but not out of reach for most people. To me, it has been a while since I bought an Omega. Their current catalogue has nothing that I really fancy, and even the Planet Ocean is not my cup of tea. Have I moved on? I guess so... Last week I saw the DeVille Rattrapante. Although it is an intresting complication, I cant find myself in the dial. It is different....but I'm really affraid that within a few years it has lost all of its attraction. I guess for me it misses the timeless look of for example a Royal Oak. Strangely I think that omega is a brand which most collectors have in their early days of collecting. The reasons for that are numerous; famous name, intresting history, lot too choose from, exspensive enough to have status, but not out of reach for most people. To me, it has been a while since I bought an Omega. Their current catalogue has nothing that I really fancy, and even the Planet Ocean is not my cup of tea.
Have I moved on? I guess so…

Last week I saw the DeVille Rattrapante. Although it is an intresting complication, I cant find myself in the dial. It is different….but I’m really affraid that within a few years it has lost all of its attraction. I guess for me it misses the timeless look of for example a Royal Oak.

]]>