While we all enjoy thinking about how the speedmaster was simply the best made watch out of all that is tested, we have to be willing to admit to some extent that much of it was coincidence. The other watches shouldn’t be judged as inferior. They just happened to have some arbitrary features that can’t withstand some out of this world (literally) conditions.Yep, this.
My question has always been exactly why the Speedmaster was so durable and passed the tests (twice) while other quality brands didn't. I don't know what it is, but it (mainly) survived some real abuse in the NASA tests. I'm talking about the manual-wound Speedmaster Professional. The automatic versions are different watches and I don't know if they share the same robustness.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk