WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

301 - 320 of 333 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
Trel
I’m pretty sure that the 8806 was chosen for two reasons. ...One is thickness....
...The second reason is cost...
I'm pretty sure that the second reason is the only one. ;P

If I remember correctly (I don't have my notes handy) the 8900 in the Planet Ocean is almost identical, in diameter and thickness, to the Rolex 3235. That would mean the thickness endemic to Omega's watches in recent years has been entirely a design choice rather than a restriction. (Those clear casebacks they love to use definitely don't help.)

My point being, though, with regards to this No-Date NTDT Bond is that the choice of the 8806 vs the 8400 means that users get the choice of a great feature or no features at all. Neither movement has a date feature that could be damaged.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
Pretty sure the only difference between the 8800 and 8806 is the no date function on the 8806. The black ceramic SMP uses the 8806 as well.
Becks

You are correct. The difference between the 8800 and the 8806 is that the 8806 doesn’t have a date feature. Or at least that is my understanding. Since the new Bond Ti doesn’t have a date window it uses the 8806. But the question was, why go with the 8806 instead of a 8400. They both are no date movements but one (8400) is bigger, thicker and has more features. Making it more expensive probably. The other (8806) is well... smaller, thinner, etc. An interesting point is that the 8806 is basically the same size as the 2500 which it replaces.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
I'm pretty sure that the second reason is the only one. ;P

If I remember correctly (I don't have my notes handy) the 8900 in the Planet Ocean is almost identical, in diameter and thickness, to the Rolex 3235. That would mean the thickness endemic to Omega's watches in recent years has been entirely a design choice rather than a restriction. (Those clear casebacks they love to use definitely don't help.)

My point being, though, with regards to this No-Date NTDT Bond is that the choice of the 8806 vs the 8400 means that users get the choice of a great feature or no features at all. Neither movement has a date feature that could be damaged.
Trel

I don’t know the thickness of the Rolex 3235. I know the thickness of the 8500 because I read up on it before it came out years ago. It was the newest hi tech movement on the market and it just seemed so interesting and cool looking. I remember most of the info on it. It is 5.5mm thick which was much thicker than the 2500 at the time. How thick is the 3235? It is also a 13 ligne movement compared to the 8800 which is a 11.5 ligne movement. The 8800 is also considerably thinner at 4.6mm thick.

Keep in mind that the 2500, which is also a 11.5 ligne movement was... I’m going to say 4.1mm thick. I could be wrong because I don’t remember that one. It is a little thinner than the 8800. I will look it up and correct the number in a different post if it is wrong. I don’t know how to edit posts .

Anyway, my point is that the 8500/8400/8900 won’t fit in the SMP case. They would have to redo that particular case just to fit the movement in it. Which is not going to happen. It would also mean that the watch would have to be thicker and probably bigger also. So, that is why I think reason number one is valid also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
Trel

I wasn’t able to find the height of the 2500 movement or the Rolex anywhere. I did find something that might help illustrate the point I’m trying to make. Keep in mind that the Omega 2500 and the 8800 are very similar in size. Here is a picture of the Planet Ocean 2500 and the Planet Ocean 8500 so you can see the difference in movement size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
I accept that the 2500 (which is really just a modded 2892) is very close in size to the 8800. I don't dispute that.

However, the 8900 is not so ginormous that a SM300 case could not be milled-out to fit one.
Consider, the Globemaster is 39mm in diameter and 12mm thick, with a clear caseback and the 8900 fits in there quite comfortably.
The Seamaster 300 Master Co-Axial with the 8400 is 41mm and 15mm thick, though that is mostly due to the bezel design and clear caseback, which adds at least a millimeter of thickness to the total case height.

The NTDT Seamaster is 42mm wide and 13mm thick with a solid caseback. The case was made specially for this model. They could have milled it out to fit any movement in there. I don't believe for a minute they couldn't have made the 8400 fit in there.

The 8400, being a two-barrel movement, is probably much more expensive to produce, which is why they gave it the 8806 and called it a day, since collectors would rush to buy it regardless of what was in there.

Edit: found my notes

8500/8900 movement: 29mm wide x 5.5mm thick
8800 movement: 25.6mm wide x 4.2mm thick

Rolex 3135 movement: 29mm wide x 6mm thick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
I accept that the 2500 (which is really just a modded 2892) is very close in size to the 8800. I don't dispute that.

However, the 8900 is not so ginormous that a SM300 case could not be milled-out to fit one.
Consider, the Globemaster is 39mm in diameter and 12mm thick, with a clear caseback and the 8900 fits in there quite comfortably.
The Seamaster 300 Master Co-Axial with the 8400 is 41mm and 15mm thick, though that is mostly due to the bezel design and clear caseback, which adds at least a millimeter of thickness to the total case height.

The NTDT Seamaster is 42mm wide and 13mm thick with a solid caseback. The case was made specially for this model. They could have milled it out to fit any movement in there. I don't believe for a minute they couldn't have made the 8400 fit in there.

The 8400, being a two-barrel movement, is probably much more expensive to produce, which is why they gave it the 8806 and called it a day, since collectors would rush to buy it regardless of what was in there.

Edit: found my notes

8500/8900 movement: 29mm wide x 5.5mm thick
8800 movement: 25.6mm wide x 4.2mm thick

Rolex 3135 movement: 29mm wide x 6mm thick
Trel

I agree with everything you wrote. I’m not sure what’s the height of the NTTD. I stopped paying attention when they said it would be $9000+. But if it is 13mm like you state, adding the 8400 would have made the watch around 15 to 15.5mm tall. Which seems to be contrary to what the design wanted to achieve.

Either way, you are correct, if you are going to charge $9200 for a watch that doesn’t have a display case back, has aluminum bezel inserts instead of ceramic or Liquidmetal, etc, might as well put the most expensive movement on it. Otherwise you are just taking away features that YOU (Omega) have conditioned us to believe are superior and more expensive and hiking up the price for what would otherwise be a less expensive watch. The only upgrade is the move to titanium and it is grade 2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
I tried the watch at an AD and really like the vintage look and light weight. Unfortunately the bracelet does not contour around my wrist properly so I had to pass on it. The lack of micro-adjustments and thick clasp was an unforeseen limitation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
I tried the watch at an AD and really like the vintage look and light weight. Unfortunately the bracelet does not contour around my wrist properly so I had to pass on it. The lack of micro-adjustments and thick clasp was an unforeseen limitation.
I can see why the mesh might not be for everyone. The sizing with the limited holes might be a problem for some. It can either be too tight or too loose. Some might be lucky to get it within the sweet spot depending on wrist size etc.

A good thing they have the nato strap option though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
Got this in from Topper yesterday. Just unboxed. The more I looked at the bracelet, the less I liked the mesh. I think the NATO matches the color of the watch perfectly and I like the look of it more.
Sweet! Congratulations! Looks so good!
 
  • Like
Reactions: solesman

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,326 Posts
301 - 320 of 333 Posts
Top