zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

Sam,
yes, Derek obviously speaks english very well. He had some nice words on me, although I know that my writing is sonetimes a little plain ;-).

: I have to be brief since my wife is waiting.

Don't let "LadySUB" wait or the money for the next Rolex might be in trouble :-), trust me, here I know what I am talking about.

: The SD uses the 3135 movement,

Ah, so the same as in the Submariner. 3135 obvioulsy is used throughout the Rolex diving watch range, which I would be looking at for this discussion.

: the GMT is a 35

No, GMT is as you said before 31, not 35. Patek is 35.

: Jewel movement. Patek is a superior
: movement.

Patek is superior, aha !. To be honest as said before I would not say such phrases myself, put look more on a type level. Patek also manufacturs "just" 27 jewels "drives". So as you said 31 of the Rolex should better this particular Patek (Caliber 240Q e.g.), shouldn't it ? ;-).

: I am not a watchmaker (nor even close)

I am what I am ;-).

and I
: can only tell you what I read in journals
: and books. Kif is superior (why exactly, I
: don't know),

Well, that's what I ment with "it's said" quotes. Maybe it was superior way back, when Rolex invented it and it got famous, but how is it performing in today's high precision world when compared ?.

Breguet is not always superior,
: but more adustable and more expensive to
: make.

And maybe redundant considering today's possibilities in "micro-manufacturing" ?. 3135 might also be prone to demage, flaws, less rigid. Keep it simple is the way to go for a successful sports watch that should be able to take it all.
I read that the 3135, well the wheel that jumps forth and back contains srews in it for ballancing the wheel's tolerances. This is something we all know from the tires of our cars, which are also ballanced. I really don't know, when a movement is built today as precise as possible, if such old fashioned features are still necessary and help to outperform other high precision movements. I really don't know. Sam, be honest, isn't it already more art than performance ?.

Omega Calibre movements are modified
: ETA, but the amount of modification is
: minimal in contrast with IWC et al.
: Breitling, like Omega has their own Calibre
: movements which are based on ETA, and are
: essentially considered ETA.

"Considered", I still believe that some journalists are trying to preserve the Rolex or Patek myth (no offense). They are more interested in the art of watchmaking than in real precision/performance relations, because they know that any cheap quarz can slay the best automatic. They also need the food to serve the rich, who don't know better and who need reasons to buy the next 100.000$ Rolex or Roth. That's why such statements are still alive. Can anybody reading this name a real precision/performance test between ETA (preferably modified ETA) and Rolex e.g.?. Both should be COSC!.

: ETA is not garbage, but not ETA movement has
: the technology found in a Rolex or Lemenia
: for that matter.

And still there are complaints with Rolex. Of course these watches can be adjusted, but maybe that is the reason why they have those adjustment features at all, just to be able to compensate what should work right from the start. Just kidding, but I had to say this.

: Sam

Take your time Sam and thanks again. Any info is highly appreciated. There are for sure some good things about Rolex, some I know myself.

Cheers,
Andreas