Currently, Speedmaster replicas offered by TDs are known to have the same problem — the subdials are noticeably too far away from each other. This is due to the fact that the Venus/Seagull movement used has its subdials spaced differently than the Lemania calibers used in the Speedy Pro.
Now, you're probably asking: "This problem has been around for ages, so why make a thread about it now?"
Well, I think we need look at no other thing than the increasingly prohibitive prices of the 321-equipped Speedmasters as well as the emergence of the 3135 and 8500 super clone movements.
It's entirely possible that someone's already working on a 321 clone, but if nobody is yet, I will explain why it should be a reality.
First, obviously, the aesthetics of Speedmaster replicas would be corrected, thus there would be an increase in sales — but that's just the obvious part. If someone were to clone the 321 movement, they would essentially be surpassing Omega itself. For those who don't know, Omega switched to the 861/1861 movement in 1969 for ease of production, and have not switched back. A replica Speedmaster with an accurately reproduced 321 would be more faithful to the first watch on the moon than any of Omega's current offerings.
Secondly, a clone 321 with gen-spec parts would be a godsend to watchmakers. Omega itself stopped making service parts for the 321 caliber, which means prices for chrono runners, blocking levers, and the like have shot into the stratosphere. A cloned movement which literally costs less than a replacement coupling clutch would save money for those getting their vintage pieces repaired whilst simultaneously elevating whoever clones the movement to a legendary status.
Thirdly, the Omega 321 caliber ought to be cloned because it is an exceptional candidate. Rolexes are free-sprung. Modern Omegas are co-axial and free-sprung. The 321, on the other hand, uses a classic fixed-stud + regulator type balance. No need to deal with concealing regulators and painting reversing wheels a purple color.
Fourth, a replica 321 would fulfill a growing demand. TDs could produce accurate CK2915s, CK2998s, 105.012s, with any combination of hands, dials, and other parts. Rare 145.012 "red" racing Speedys could become available to everyone. A 2915 replica with a true 321 movement would supersede that of the recent 60th-anniversary re-edition. Why buy a flawed replica of the modern CK2998 "Wally Schirra" when you can buy an exacting replica of the real deal?
So to everyone on the forum, I urge you to ask yourselves: If movements as complex as the 3135 and 8500 can be replicated — why not the first caliber to land on the moon?
Some food for thought
Now, you're probably asking: "This problem has been around for ages, so why make a thread about it now?"
Well, I think we need look at no other thing than the increasingly prohibitive prices of the 321-equipped Speedmasters as well as the emergence of the 3135 and 8500 super clone movements.
It's entirely possible that someone's already working on a 321 clone, but if nobody is yet, I will explain why it should be a reality.
First, obviously, the aesthetics of Speedmaster replicas would be corrected, thus there would be an increase in sales — but that's just the obvious part. If someone were to clone the 321 movement, they would essentially be surpassing Omega itself. For those who don't know, Omega switched to the 861/1861 movement in 1969 for ease of production, and have not switched back. A replica Speedmaster with an accurately reproduced 321 would be more faithful to the first watch on the moon than any of Omega's current offerings.
Secondly, a clone 321 with gen-spec parts would be a godsend to watchmakers. Omega itself stopped making service parts for the 321 caliber, which means prices for chrono runners, blocking levers, and the like have shot into the stratosphere. A cloned movement which literally costs less than a replacement coupling clutch would save money for those getting their vintage pieces repaired whilst simultaneously elevating whoever clones the movement to a legendary status.
Thirdly, the Omega 321 caliber ought to be cloned because it is an exceptional candidate. Rolexes are free-sprung. Modern Omegas are co-axial and free-sprung. The 321, on the other hand, uses a classic fixed-stud + regulator type balance. No need to deal with concealing regulators and painting reversing wheels a purple color.
Fourth, a replica 321 would fulfill a growing demand. TDs could produce accurate CK2915s, CK2998s, 105.012s, with any combination of hands, dials, and other parts. Rare 145.012 "red" racing Speedys could become available to everyone. A 2915 replica with a true 321 movement would supersede that of the recent 60th-anniversary re-edition. Why buy a flawed replica of the modern CK2998 "Wally Schirra" when you can buy an exacting replica of the real deal?
So to everyone on the forum, I urge you to ask yourselves: If movements as complex as the 3135 and 8500 can be replicated — why not the first caliber to land on the moon?
Some food for thought