Another punch for me, ouch. Seems like the Speedy Pro is always gonna win.
Quote from this week's Askmen Watchsnob article:
Any other Omega
Q: I thoroughly enjoy reading your column, which I find remarkably self-deprecating (as a reflection upon myself, that is) given my current state of horological knowledge. Here's my specific question: Why is the only Omega to buy the Speedmaster Pro? Although not much less expensive, I like the look of the Speedmaster Date a bit better (but not the look a true watch fan would give me for wearing it). Is there something about its case or mechanism that's not up to par? Has it come off the assembly line without the handmade attention of its bigger brother?
A: Omega painted itself in a corner with the Speedmaster. It created its most iconic and arguably best watch in 1957 and hasn’t really changed it since, and that’s a good thing. Meanwhile, it has churned out hundreds of versions of its other watches, most forgettable fads. The brand had its high point in the 1960s and, really, any of its watches from that era would be fantastic today, if they had been left unchanged.
Omega should have taken a page from Rolex and frozen its designs in time in 1967. Instead they’re still riding the wave of glory from the moon landing that is quickly becoming ancient history. But even without its space connection, the Speedmaster is Omega’s most honest watch, with the most undiluted DNA from its best years. While it is focusing on coaxial this and LiquidMetal that, the Omega everyone wants is the one that’s the same as it was 40 years ago. There’s something to be said for keeping things simple. Once Omega takes that to heart, I’ll start taking the brand more seriously. Skip the Speedmaster Date and get the real thing.
