zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

1)My goal wasn't to open a can of worms but rather describe the problems encountered by Omega.

The topic of this thread was "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" Georges.

Not how “Omega perhaps badly concepted the movement, something which never happened when it was a 100% manufacture.” nor "Subcontracting movements is not the same thing than manufacturing them" nor "Manufactures make far better movements than subcontactors two exceptions however with Piguet and Lemania."

Continued imsertions of off topic rhetoric such as ,,Omega is beneath contempt since they stopped making their own movements,, and ,,ETA's suck,,. is very difficult to distinguish from internet troll behaviour. I'm sick of hearing from people who are sick of seeing such commentary in unrelated threads. I'm weary of seeing it myself too.

2)You didn't mention that the strong reputation of Omega USA was mainly due to the Norman Morris Corp who was the main importator of Omega from the late 30's till the mid 70's,

This too is irrelent to the topic of the topic of this thread: "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" Georges.

STAY ON TARGET! STAY ON TOPIC.

Besides, I've talked to several AD's who have exceedingly negative thngs to say about Norman Morris Co. but that is not the topic of this thread nor is it related to the topic of this thread either!

you also didn't mention that many ADs are not selling Omega anymore which is probably due to the horrible Omega service centers in the USA.

There are a number of reasons why AD's are dropping or being dropped as AD's, NONE OF WHICH is related to the topic of this thread: : "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" Georges.

Omega did a very good job when modfiying the lemania 1340 into the 1040 and when modifying the 861 into cal 910 and 911 for the flightmaster.

Nor is this the topic of this thread, It was "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" Georges.

So I am not in whole agreement with you concerning the modification of piguet movements by Omega.

And when did Omega accomplish the very good job when modfiying the lemania 1340 into the 1040 and when modifying the 861 into cal 910 and 911 for the flightmaster Georges? 1969? 1970?

That was thirty five PLUS years ago Georges!

And how is that relevent to the topic of this thread:
"Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" George?

3)a)perhaps should we say like Omega advertising it(the 36xx found in the coax rattrapante)is something flawless who will never fail (despite it shares the defective 33xx movement base)?

Where exactly does Omega claim that Georges?

b)No disagreement here.

4)No disagreement

5)a)The 3035 was phased out in 1988 and it had an eleven year reign from 1977 to 1988.Its successor is the 3135 in production since 1989.

Give me a percentage chance of Omega being able to obtain the rights to the Rolex 3035 Georges. What is Omega's chance of getting the rights to make that movement Georges?

If it's greater than 0% I would be surprised.

If Omega doesn't have any chance to use that movement the years that Rolex used it or which movement succeded which is irrelent, period. And it has nothing to do with "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" Georges.

b)That is my fault talking about vintage cars blame that on me but I like vintage cars and I assume responsibility for this off topic

I use car analogies all the time to make a point, that is not any one person's fault...

c)no disagreement

d) probably lot of money but as the end the quality would be way higher and the profit on the product will be higher as well

I had said: d)And producing something that was excellent with all of the features would require Omega (And all of the other firms who currently use the 2892) would cost them how much in Swiss Franc's Georges? At how much additional research, employee overhead, and management to ensure quality control?

Let's say for arguements sake that the profit on the movement would be higher if Omega used one of their own movements.

Answer me these questions:

• Would Omega/Swatch be able to produce them in enough quautity to fulfill their needs?
• And be able to produce enough of them at enough higher profit to make up for the loss in sales because of the "lot of money" higher costs that Omega would have to write off?
• Don't you think that Omega has crunched these numbers both in the past and every couple of years and decided that what higher quality and profit wouldn't balance out the added costs of production?
• Are low-volume, slightly higher profit watches in the AP, Bruget, Blancplan price tier really consistant with Omega's market niche and stated mission?

It is my contention that the answer two the first two quesions is likely NO! I suspect Omega has had cost-benefit accountants "run the numbers" on a number of scenario's multiple times the past 30 years. And I suspect the answer to the last question is also NO.

6)I got confused by your post at the beginning.

My post's point was that Omega discontinuing their own movement production and your low opinion of ETA movements are not germain to the topic of this thread:
"Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION"

a)ok

b)you have a big after market for vintage cars in the USA some people restore these cars and otehr still use them as their daily drivers.

Very few people drive cars older than about 10-15 years here in the states (at least outside of the southwest where there isn't snow, salt and other rust causing environments. Yes, you'll see quite a few 20 year old and older cars in Southern California and in the southwestern deserts, but you won't see many outside of those areas unless people are poor and can't afford to buy anything newer.

My uncle living in dallas still use his 70 fleetwood as his daily driver. He has reworked the valves seats in order to wrok wit hunleaded premium gasoline and also changed the camshaft for a betetr one, the engine has 170000 miles and is still running like a charm. It passed the exhaust emission tests two years ago without any problems,

Outside of Southern California cars only have to pass emmissions standards of the year they were made, and there were no federal emmisions standards until 1971. And most states will grant an excemption to any car over 25 years old if one asks for one after making a good faith effort to try to bring the car into compliance.

about safety it has massive front 4 piston disc brakes and heavy 11 inch drums who are very powerful,

Considering the fact a 1970 fleetwood probably weighs close to 5,000 pounds it'll need those massive brakes. No Anti-Lock back then either. Good thing your Uncle doesn't live in the snow belt.

you also didn't mention than all luxury and personal cars were fitted with assited power steering as well

Power Steering was optional on most US cars well into the 1970's... 3 of my first 5 cars (including my 1984 Bronco II had non-power steering. Had better road feel though!

No I didn't mention it, but then again the topic of the thread was "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION" and I didn't think I needed to transcribe my knowledge of vintage and classic American automobiles as if this was a doctoral disertation...

as assited braking.

Power Brakes were also optional into the 1970's on many American cars.

The first car which had airbags as optional was the buick riviera boattail and in 1971.

Somewhere off over the horizon somewhere I'm sure the original topic is sitting, looking neglected while we're off on this tangent that has nothing to do with it.

Myself I drive a 1999 Polo Match but I happen to drive the cars of my uncle who lives in Lausanne, a 1961 Imperial Crown Le Baron and a 1969 Charger R/T.

But you don't drive one of these which you have stated are: “you see some of tehse old cars still going and going strong as compared to the new cars who use more plastic more electronics and who aren't more solid or more reliable.”

You will accept no compromises on your watches (only c.1040 or Rolex in-house movement), but you drive a (what was it?) a 1999 Polo Match.

The problem is that in france insurance costs are insane and gasoline price is very insane too.

Exactly my point. A 1970 Fleetwood isn't a viable car for someone in Europe unless you are Uber Rich.

Chuck, for me everything I buy has to be very durable and very solid.

Save the car thing.

I know soemone who has a 92 town car and has more than 280000miles at the odo,

Which is a new cars who use more plastic more electronics ? and is that person driving it in Europe? Or in North America (or the Arabian peninsula)?

I also like cars of the nineties because some of them were exceptionnaly built or designed.

My 1998 more plastic more electronics Explorer served me better than any previous car I owned. But I might be an exception.

8) OK Chuck. As far as we know Motorcraft is a part of ford

I'm not sure if Ford spun them out or not. Let me check... Yes.

and AC Delco used and still uses (unless I am mistaken) to be part of GM

As far as I know, yes.

and both are spark plugs and other spare parts manufacturer.

and a subcontractor for Chevy and Cadilac.

9)That model costs 7850¤ less than a coax rattrapante or a coax in gold. Too costly maybe or perhaps the msrp would be too high for an Omega to have this movement adopted in mass production.

That's my point, it would be far too costly for Omega to adopt it across the board, and Piguet has enough problems to worry about with the c.33xx without having to worry about adding production facilities for increased demand from Omega to produce ETA replacements.

10)Valjoux is way superior to eta dubois/debra movements,

I prefer Valjoux to ETA/DD's too.

I am not saying the opposite. The dubois depraz being a modular chrono is not the best thing.

I'm not disagreeing. However, the LWO 283 movement, which is a Lemania chronograph module mated to an ETA 2890 or 2892 is not a bad movement, better in my opinion than the DuBBois-Depraz modules in my limited experience. I hear that Lemania sold the LWC 283 rights and tooling to Dubois-Depraz. Hopefully it'll be a learning experience for them.

But none of this is really on target with our topic is it?

The valjoux 72 spare parts availability is quite poor in France. Rolex also now refuses to service vintage Daytonas with the valjoux 72, the only way to service a vintage dayto is to go to a certified rolex watchmaker but they aren't many and there aren't many watchmakers who restore correctly the valjoux 72 as well as service it correctly.

I'll take your word for most of that. I haven't had any more difficulty finding a watchmaker(s) who will look at Valjoux 72's though. I mean over and above finding a watchmaker in the first place.

11)no disagreement here

12)My watchmaker who has many years of experience, told me that any lemania movement (except the lemania watch lorient 283 modular movement on the eta 2892) can go fine between 10-15 years without any service.

I have examples which have gone that long. My first Omega (the pawnshop Mark II) is one.

But I wouldn't recommend anyone stretch service that long for the movement (and the owners wallet's) sake. How long do you plan to run your 125 and Mark IV before a cleaning, lubrication and adjustment session with a watchmaker Georges? 3 years? 5? 10? 15? longer?

13)ok too early to make judgements but let's not forget that what Omega claims about the service intervals is confusing.

Ah finally, you are back on topic with this thread.

14)no disagreemnt

I had said:
14)Which is my point Georges... The problems with the Co-Axial and the c.33xx's are not due to Omega's ceasing production of their own movements in the late 1970's-early 1980's epoch. Nor is the confusion about the service interval's related to the fact the Co-Axial's have an ETA Base movement. It is due to the other factors I mentioned:
poor management, Iineffective) communications within the company, and an escapement that has no track record in mass production,among other things.

If you have no disagreement with my thoughts, then you seem to agree that comments about Omega dropping their own production in the 1970/80's and your perception of ETA are not germaine to the topic of: "Co-Axial Service Intervals: CONTINUED CONFUSION"

Let's not introduce unrelated topics into threads on different topics please, we're really sick of that same old song!

15)Ernst Thomke got rid of the whole tooling which was helping Omega too manufacture its movements in 1983, he judged mechanical movements as superfluous and said that the quartz will be the future of watchmaking. That same man was also one of the iniator of the swatch project.

So reviving those movements would have to be reversed engineered then wouldn't it? Do you honestly think Omega/Swatch could do that economically in today's business environment?

It's like pining for bringing back the Titanic or the DC-3. It just doesn't make sense in the 21st century.

16)a)no, some modern Omega like the deville with the 1120 or the older deville with the peseux base wit hsmall second at 6 was good model, the smp is a very good watch tough I am not a fan of its manual helium valve.

There's always an exception to the rule, it seems. The first two watches I bought in 2005 were Quartz Eco-Drives.

b)no disagreement

c)ok

d)no disgraeement

e)no disagreemnt

f)no disagreement

17)a)I know it

b)ok Chuck fair enough

Georges, if you want to start a thread where you can vent your thoughts about ETA's or the Eld Omega movements of old, feel free. I am asking you to try to stay on topic on unrelated threads though. Next time I won't ask.

have a great day

very best regards

georges

-- Chuck