Quote:
Originally Posted by bungholio
I own quite a few Omega's and they are in my book one of the best watches made.
The point made about 2500 series watches are somewhat true, the early models of the 2500C's were noted to just abruptly stop. Although there have been reports, its not as a widespread epidemic as most forums have made it seem.
For one I had a 2500C Planet Ocean that was worn everyday for 5 years no service and still within COSC specs +3 seconds.
The 2500D was made for a very short time before they completely upgraded their movement away from the 2500 series. I dislike the movement due to the increase in case sizing and prefer the 2500 series overall for its thinner case profile.
Also having severe OCD, I only had my watches serviced at an Omega/Swatch service center.
|
You're right. It's not "epidemic" in scope, but it does happen. I felt that for someone who stated "In the Market for my first watch.." that their overall first experience would be better off without risking the misfortune of getting one of those early 2500s.
As I said, I would not have a problem buying a 2500 series movement, and even if it stopped, it wouldn't "upset my apple cart." Were that to happen with my first pricey-ish watch, it would leave a sour taste in my mouth, so to speak.
I liken it to the HPFP thing with BMW's, which, similarly, in fact affected about 5% of the 335i cars. Imagine yourself as someone who'd for some time lusted to get a BMW and then after buying your first one, it, with no warning (but even if it did give a warning), went into "limp mode" due to an HPFP failure. If, in addition, you had no warranty coverage for it and had to pay to have it fixed, I bet you'd be really pissed off. At the very least, you'd be quite disillusioned over BMWs, now, wouldn't you? I know I would be.
It's in that spirit of putting myself in someone else's shoes that I offered the info I did about the 2500 Series Omega co-axial escapement movements.
The other thing worth noting is that although Omega sell literally hundreds of thousands of watches, the PO is/one of their somewhat pricier models, and as such its sales volumes were and are lower than are less pricey Omega watch models. Indeed, it's among the models with which the 2500s were first introduced, so in the scheme of things, if one buys an older PO, one has a somewhat better chance of encountering one of those faulty 2500 Series escapements. The PO was never offered with anything but co-axial escapement movements, beginning with the 2500A right through to the 8500 Series, which as I wrote, has no hint of having the problems the early variants of the early 2500 Series. The 2500C models were thought to have "conquered" the "stopping" issue, and mostly it did, but not completely. The 2500D models were the first ones to finally do so.
Sidebar:
The first Omega co-axial escapement watches were in the DeVille line and they were introduced in 1999.
The co-axial escapement design represents a meaningful improvement in terms of reducing the effects of friction in watch escapements. The reason is easy to see in the two following schematics.
First pic: Conventional lever escapement; Second pic: co-axial escapement
The basic goal George Daniels had in mind when he sought to perfect the co-axial escapement was to create an escapement that didn't need lubricating. As one can see, the lever escapement experiences sliding friction whereas the co-axial escapement experiences radial ("rolling") friction and very little sliding friction. Indeed, lubing it was part of Omega's solution approach for the early 2500 Series movement stoppages.
Omega has based its caliber 2500 co-axial on the venerable Omega caliber 1120. Based on the ETA 2892, Omega has long added two jewels to the ETA design for the bi-directional, click-wheel automatic winding system. The escapement of the 2500 adds another two jewels, and another two are added to the mainspring barrel for a total of 27. The movement is 12.5 lignes (27.2 millimeters in diameter), and 3.6 millimeters thick. Omega cites a power reserve of 44 hours, typical for single-barreled automatic movements of this size.
Largely because of finishing differences, the Omega caliber presents a somewhat different appearance than that of a more standard 2892. The automatic winding system of the 2892 is largely contained within a module that lies under, and is attached to, the winding bridge itself. Bidirectional winding is accomplished through the double click-wheel system, introduced by Eterna in 1948, and now utilized throughout the ETA line.
With the winding rotor and bridge removed, the handsomely executed caliber is now completely visible. There is however, still sparse evidence of the technical innovation within.
Source: Walt Odets, Timezone,
http://people.timezone.com/library/h...70193290479607
All the best.