| Informational Websites | ChronoMaddox -- the legacy of Chuck Maddox | OnTheDash -- vintage Heuer website | Zowie -- Omega information |
| Discussion Forums | ChronoMaddox Forum | Heuer Forum | Omega Forum |
| Counterfeit Watchers | ChronoTools Forum | ChronoTrader Forum |
|
|
The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | |||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Feel free to discuss pricing and specific dealers. But 'for sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Full archive of all messages is accessible through options in the Search and Preferences features. Privacy, policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.
| For the answer to the NUMBER #1 most frequently asked question here--for details or value of a specific older Omega watch you have--go to: Tell Me About My Omega. | Learn more about How To Include Photos and HTML In Your Postings. | To contact someone with a question not relevant to other readers of the forum, please click on their email address and contact them privately. |
: Which do you guys feel will end up the most
: accurate thru daily use...The 300 M GMT, GMT
: Co-Axial, or the Planet Ocean?
Since each and every mechanical watch is different, there is NO WAY to predict whether the watch that YOU end up with will be more or less accurate than a watch with a different movement.
That being said, if I had to go out on a limb, I would predict that the co-axial movements in the Planet Ocean and the Bond GMT will produce the greater long term accuracy. After all, this is what the co-axial escapement was designed to do. By producing less friction and reducing the amount of lubrication required, the co-axial allows the watch to run more efficiently and with less lubricant to "gum up". The Planet Ocean and the newer Bond GMT movements also run at a slower beat rate than the 1120 movement in the standard GMT. This gives the watch a longer power reserve and doesn't force the movement to work as hard.
So, from a purely scientific standpoint, the co-axials SHOULD be the best timekeepers. However, you can't make conclusions without hard data to back them up, and the co-axial hasn't been around long enough to make any definitive statements.
| Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |