zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

hi ktown greg

this is as post done by d.n.ravenna the comoderator of zenith watch u seek forum, it is very informative and clear explained

First, let's start with the Rolex 4130 (not 4135):
Produced by Rolex since 2000, automatic integrated construction, 28,800 bph, 30.5 mm diameter, 6.5 mm height, 72-hr power reserve, column wheel design.

Now the Omega 3303 (note, this movement has design elements from the 1185, but is a completely new movement):

Produced by PQ ~2000, automatic intergrated construction, 28,800 bph, 27 mm diameter, 6.7 mm height, 55-hr power reserve, vertical column wheel design.

The venerable Zenith EP Primero:

Produced by Zenith since 1969, automatic integrated construction, 36,000 bph, 30 mm diameter, 5.7 mm height, 25 rubies, 55-hr power reserve, column wheel design.

Some additional side notes. The 4130 uses a balance bridge and a free-sprung balance. I imagine the hairspring is an overcoil design. The 3303 uses a standard balance cock, but also employs the free-sprung balance. Like the 400, the 3303 uses a high-quality flat profile hairspring. The 400 uses what looks to be a high quality glucydar balance wheel. The 400, beating at 36,000 bph, is more precise when timing events.

What does this all mean? For one, I think we have too much free time on our hands!

Seriously, the 4130 and the 3303 are babes not even out of the woods when compared to the 400. In production since 1969, Zenith has had the time to get it right. Only time will tell if the 4130 and 3303 are up the task.

I like the fact that the 4130 and the 3303 use free-sprung balances. When properly set up, they can offer more protection from shocks. The downside is that you will have to send it to the mfg'er should something happen. That is not necessarily true with the Zenith. The Zenith is more "field friendly."

The 4130 has a couple of items that are technically cool, but add little to the watch. IMO, they are the balance bridge and the overcoil. The balance bridge should add a little more sturdiness to the structure, but then again, when did someone ever complain that their older Rolex was not sturdy? The overcoil is supposed to add positional stability, but then again, when have you heard someone complain about their older Rolex having this problem?

Owning many pocket watches, I think it is great that someone today would still use an overcoil. However, owning many wristwatches, I am ashamed to say that a high-quality flat hairspring tends to exhibit no positional variation that I can tell while wearing the watch.

The 3303 utilizes a vertical clutch. This means that there will be less drag on the movement when the chronograph is run. I would rather have this than the balance bridge or the overcoil.

So that leaves us with the 400. At 5.7 mm in thickness, this movement should be delicate as heck. Yet, it was used in the Daytona for years and no one complained about its lack of robustness. As well, I have yet to hear about a Zenith owner doing the same. Its two drawbacks is that the design is old (1969), and it will require some servicing due to its high bph. Not a biggie as one can get 5 years easy out of this.

To sum it all up:

The Rolex 4130 -- a babe where only time will tell if the design is up to the task on hand. It has several technological features, which IMO, finally should make a Rolex buyer feel like they are getting something for their money (other than the resale value). I should know. I waited until they incorporated SELs, the balance bridge, and the free-sprung balance before I sprung for my EXPI.

The Omega 3303 -- a babe where only time will tell if the design is up to the task on hand. Watches using this movement are definitely a worth while buy. Omega has even launched a hand wind version of this model -- something which I am sad to say Rolex would never do.

The Zenith 400 -- the ol' granpappy of the bunch. Heck, when this movement was first introduced, no one wore seat belts and we all smoked cigarettes all day long while having unprotected sex! Unlike the last three, this movement has endured and continues to be sold. While one could nit-pick and say that it is not up to the level of technology exhibited by the Rolex or the Omega, one's collection would not be complete without this trend breaker. And based on my experience, it tells time and operates as well as the other two.

The above words are my own opinion, but based off of real life watch wearing and notes from timezone.com and chonometrie.com. As one would expect, they are all great watches with their own pros and cons. Anyone buying one without making sure it makes them smile first should be banned for the rest of their life from owning any mechanical watches

regards

georges