Dr No[Moderator Omega - Wristscan]
34913
When is a chronometer . . .
Sep 29, 2014,04:05 AM
. . . not?
Or, to put it more precisely and objectively, which Omega chronometers deserve to be described as such?
I have five, or depending on your point of view, six Omegas that qualify on some level. Three Constellations - two cal 505 chronometer certified movements, a '58 . . .
. . . and a '57 . . .
. . . plus a '60 cal 504.
As the dials convey, officially these are chronometers. Their movements were certified as such. Yet, when compared to their nominally unrated stablemates, the calibers numbered 500 to 503, one would be hard pressed to find any significant differences other than jewel count, and those were mainly relegated to the winding system. Remarkably, there were chronometer rated versions of the cal 501. I'm not sure what physical differences set it apart from its non-rated twin.
Are these chronometers? Yes. Are they distinguished by the innovative movements and finishing standards as classic manual wind movements from Omega or many other manufacturers?
No.
Second example: the cal 602 Genève chronometer.
Is this a chronometer? Per the inscription, yes. Was the movement certified? Yes. What physically distinguished the cal 602 from its cal 601 stablemate? Other than the movement engraving, nothing.
Third example: ref 2179 cal 30T2SC. Some sources claim it's 'chronometer grade'. Omega's own online description reads "Special high precision adjustment of the movement (like a chronometer)". Is this a chronometer . . .
. . . because Omega suggests that it is?
Perhaps.
* * * * *
On some level, these could all legitimately be considered chronometers. Yet, if anyone were to ask me in casual conversation about my chronometer, I would assume they were talking about this watch.
That's a chronometer. Or chronomètre, if you prefer.
So, as an Englishman once famously said, what's in a name?
I'm curious to hear your thoughts. Especially Joe's.