Hey Guys
It's 5.03 in the morning - thought I'd hit the OMEGALand talk shop :biggrin:
I was wondering what you considered your first significant Omega purchase in horological terms. Looking back I think mine must have been the black AT in 39.2mm. I had begun to look at watches seriously after buying my first Omega - a TT Constellation 1202.30. Now some members may recall that I purchased this on that place by the sea. It must have been about 3 to 4 years old but was in pristine condition. Not a blemish and the cal1120 kept fine time. Then came a 2252.50 ( mid size version of the venerable diver ) but the first special watch really was the black AT.
I had seen it reviewed by Frank Nikolajsen http://213.237.13.198/nik/reviews/AT1/
and then of course there was John's glowing account and tempting pictures
http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/seamaster/atreview.html
Unsure if the 42mm might be too big for me I opted for the 39.2mm size only to wish I had gone for the large chronometer instead. Nevertheless it was a beautiful watch and significant too for me in that the cal 2500 Co-Axial movement was to be a stepping stone to Omega's future in-house calibre, the 8500/8501. The c1120 was already an excellent movement but the 2500 was something else.
As Mr Downtown Mike once wrote " .........it is a more precise movement. Specifically, it is more consistent throughout the entire power reserve range, and in particular, the performance drop off at low power is significantly less in the 2500C than in the 1120. The 2500C has better amplitude performance, especially when operating at low power reserve. You're getting more than just longer service intervals ".
My black AT was a 2500A but kept precise performance at +0.6 sec per day
![]()
How about you pals? Something in one of your red or indeed polished wooden boxes that was a significant number......
Y'all have a gr8 week ahead
![]()
ZIN
![]()
It's 5.03 in the morning - thought I'd hit the OMEGALand talk shop :biggrin:
I was wondering what you considered your first significant Omega purchase in horological terms. Looking back I think mine must have been the black AT in 39.2mm. I had begun to look at watches seriously after buying my first Omega - a TT Constellation 1202.30. Now some members may recall that I purchased this on that place by the sea. It must have been about 3 to 4 years old but was in pristine condition. Not a blemish and the cal1120 kept fine time. Then came a 2252.50 ( mid size version of the venerable diver ) but the first special watch really was the black AT.
I had seen it reviewed by Frank Nikolajsen http://213.237.13.198/nik/reviews/AT1/
and then of course there was John's glowing account and tempting pictures
http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/seamaster/atreview.html
Unsure if the 42mm might be too big for me I opted for the 39.2mm size only to wish I had gone for the large chronometer instead. Nevertheless it was a beautiful watch and significant too for me in that the cal 2500 Co-Axial movement was to be a stepping stone to Omega's future in-house calibre, the 8500/8501. The c1120 was already an excellent movement but the 2500 was something else.
As Mr Downtown Mike once wrote " .........it is a more precise movement. Specifically, it is more consistent throughout the entire power reserve range, and in particular, the performance drop off at low power is significantly less in the 2500C than in the 1120. The 2500C has better amplitude performance, especially when operating at low power reserve. You're getting more than just longer service intervals ".
My black AT was a 2500A but kept precise performance at +0.6 sec per day
How about you pals? Something in one of your red or indeed polished wooden boxes that was a significant number......
Y'all have a gr8 week ahead
ZIN
well, Mr Houston...
