Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster ‘Trilogy’ Watches Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster ‘Trilogy’ Watches Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

One hundred and forty-one. That’s how many new models Omega introduced this year at Baselworld. However, three of them in particular, for very good reason, have been enjoying the lion’s share of buzz at the show: the Omega 1957 Trilogy Limited Edition Speedmaster, Railmaster, and Seamaster – each, a pitch-perfect re-issue of its own CK29XX variant also released as a trio 60 years ago. Since they can be bought separately, or together in a singularly epic boxed set, we thought it best they be examined together.

Note that the watches sold as individual pieces and those in the set are identical for all but one detail that might bug some. On the dial under the Omega logo there is text that identifies the watch as those in the box set with their corresponding number out of 557. Practically, this makes sense to immediately identify the watches as part of the even more limited edition Trilogy set. I can imagine future "mixing and matching" being a problem, so it's a solution, for sure.

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

For this sixtieth-anniversary release that we originally debuted here, Omega dug deep into its own archives to reference its best surviving examples of each model to create a truly accurate and cohesive re-issue set. Therein, each watch is the end result of an impressive commitment to re-create most minute details on the source material, right down to the corduroy-lined presentation boxes and the etched Omega logo in the center of each crystal. Even the slightly nuanced differences between the Omega text fonts and logos between the dial, crown, caseback, and bracelet clasp have been recreated – a nod to an era where a lack of cohesive marketing assets led to subtle inconsistencies in type, size, and shape. Even in today's vintage re-issue mania, it’s still a dedication that’s not often seen in modern watchmaking, and a huge part of what makes this release exciting for many.

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Just as in 1957, there’s a fair amount of design cohesion between Omega’s “holy trinity.” Each carries Omega’s signature "Broad Arrow" handset, finished in the same hue of beige Super-LumiNova – a nod to the aged tritium look on vintage watches from that era. Much has already been said about this stylistic choice, but whether or not you like it, it can’t be denied that white luminous paint just wouldn’t have captured the warmth or the spirit of the originals in quite the same way. It also yields a comparative wrist experience to the vintage originals, except these are fully capable and ready for an entirely new generation to wear as they were originally intended.

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Like the SM300 released in 2014, the Omega 1957 Trilogy edition "tropic" dials (subtly lightened to mimic the fading common on many vintage dials) of the major minute indexes have been laser-etched out of the dial and then filled, thereby increasing the amount of paint used (and thus the intensity of the luminosity) while also neatly creating a subtle degree of depth despite the absence of any applied elements.

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

All three watches carry the same straight lugs and are fitted with the same three-link bracelet whose links carry screwed pins and are otherwise subtly beefier than the vintage editions. But instead of the polished center links found on the SM300 from 2014 (another highly divisive detail amongst collectors), which sought to emulate this look, the Omega 1957 Trilogy watches are brushed on the center links, and polished on the outside. It’s a subtle detail shift, but one that ratchets back the "bling" factor and feels much more in line with the utilitarian spirit of the originals. Each bracelet is finished with an overlapping Omega logo on the clasp – a detail that persisted on many Omega bracelets throughout the sixties and seventies.

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

But that’s largely where the similarities end and where each watch begins to truly stand on its own. The collection opens with the Omega 1957 Trilogy version of the Omega Railmaster – the vintage re-issue companion to a modern variant which Omega also introduced at the show (but more on that later). The new-for-2017 1957 edition is fully faithful to the original Omega Railmaster CK2914, right down to the 38mm case dimensions and 60 meters of water resistance. It does get a pair of key upgrades, though: an etched sapphire crystal, and Omega’s METAS-certified Master Chronometer 8806 movement – which kicks the significant (for its time) antimagnetic capabilities of the original into the stratosphere. This movement operates at 25,600vph, has a 55-hour power reserve, and is the same caliber used in the Omega Seamaster here.

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

Omega 1957 Speedmaster, Seamaster, & Railmaster 'Trilogy' Watches Hands-On Hands-On

On the wrist, the Omega Railmaster 1957 Trilogy edition is the purest and the most uncomplicated of the three – classic and capable, and after this year, Omega is betting on its collectibility. Even if Omega had only released this variant instead of a trilogy, it would certainly have been warmly welcomed, after seven or so years without a Railmaster in the catalog.

What do you think?
  • I love it! (145)
  • I want it! (72)
  • Thumbs up (37)
  • Classy (9)
  • Interesting (6)
  • Chaz

    Seems to be the standard Omega doctrine…launch hundreds of models and hopefully one or two stick to the wall.

    Oh yeah…and “limited editions” of tens of thousands…

    • The Old Watcheroo

      FAKE PATINA FAUXTINA EVERYWHERE!!

  • Word Merchant

    In at least one of the photos, the crown etched into the crystal isn’t vertical – that would irritate me greatly and I’d keep thinking it was a scratch. Apart from that, I’m afraid these watches do nothing for me at all. They’re just a bit dull.

  • outremer

    The Railmaster is pretty solid, wonder about the thickness though.

    • 12.7mm for the Railmaster, 14.1mm for the Seamaster, and 13.6mm for the Speedy is the word from Omega.

      • outremer

        Thanks!

  • JF Schnell

    Definatelly Trilogy Boxed Set. Why just keep one when you can get 3 great watches, nice straps and much needed tools. I hope I remember where I have hidden the money… out of jokes… if I had that money I would buy the whole set.

  • A_watches

    i rather have a nice real vintage for 20k than a box set of fake vintage.

  • SuperStrapper

    This was a good article with nice pictures, but I find this subject matter to be tedious. Omega can captivate and annoy in the span of a day.

  • jtambor

    Zach, 1861 is not a column wheel caliber…..

    • IG

      But at least hand-cranked.

      • haha This much is true. Apologies for my oversight – 1861 is cam-actuated, and the article updated to reflect this. Thanks for keeping me on the straight-and-narrow, fellas.

  • DS

    For some reason, with such an abundance of articles and a ton of hands-on photos on the net about those 3, NOONE will quote the BLOODY THICKNESS of the cases or show us a profile of the watches not-on-the-wrist.

    The Railmaster is gorgeous, but the CoAxial movements are pretty fat, and with boutiques asking for a 100% downpayment on these when we will not have seen them on our wrists, info on thickness would be invaluable….

    • SuperStrapper

      I didn’t realise that members of Herman’s Hermits were that passionate about the thicknesses of wristwatches.

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0d8c1cb11e1065dcf621a4afe607a2c131cb16070fa3844b0ee019a470e9b77c.jpg

      • DanW94

        LOL, took me a minute but I eventually got it : )

        • SuperStrapper

          I would have guessed that Bernt would have gotten it if anyone did. A little obscure!

          • DanW94

            Don’t hit the space bar and it gives the sentence a whole new meaning…

          • SuperStrapper

            If I said that was the first time I’ve used that, I’d be lying. The whole noone vs no one seems to be a common Internet virus Peter and I have been poking fun at for years.

          • DS

            Well thanks for passing on the knowledge, kind sir. I would’t have gotten your humour if it werent for this last comment. I suppose the artist above is from your time and age, when “noone” would also have been unacceptable.

            Anyway, I try to be an english perfectionist bitch myself, so I appreciate it, I do.

          • SuperStrapper

            hey, no problem. And to clarify, as this seems to elude you, knowledge and intelligence are not really age-specific, generally speaking. So you excuse of not knowing something because it was born in a generation before you time is laughable.

            Also, ‘noone’ has never been an acceptable replacement for ‘no one’. That’s just a grade 3 English fail no matter how you slice it.

            So you’ve got a long way to go to be an English perfectionist bitch. For now you’ll have to simply remain at bitch.

          • Shinytoys

            Really ??????

          • SuperStrapper

            really what?

          • DS

            You misunderstood me.
            I am actually grateful that you pointed it out. I care to polish my English beyond what the internet won’t mind.
            That said, I am sure your choice of anecdote comes from a time when the internet didn’t exist or it would mind anyway, which is not the case today, otherwise you wouldn’t be “using that” as often as you yourself proclaimed.
            The whole other “knowledge is not age specific” gems I suppose are what you fill the rest of your day with.

          • SuperStrapper

            You’re right, I did misunderstand. Your comment looked abrasive. Edited.

    • Permadi Kanapi

      12.7mm
      I think movement height is only 4.8mm.
      I wonder why they cannot keep thickness below 12mm while rolex op with 6mm movement managed to keep thickness below 12mm.

      • DS

        Right, thanks.
        Call me a nitpicker but I need to see a profile pic to decide what portion of the thickness comes below the middle case and what is just the crystal.
        Crystal=good.
        Thick fat bubbly case back=bad.

        I do wonder the same thing about Rolex OP/Explorer vs Aqua Terras and Seamasters….

      • Bfsp

        Because that’s the original thickness of the watches. Duh. ?

  • Greg Dutton

    These are very meh. Take classic designs and give them a modern twist, sure. But straight copies of old designs, complete with old cheese lume, that’s just boring and uninspired. Still, I’m sure they’ll sell like hotcakes.

    • Chris Rowley

      Uninspired or not, this reissue will put a lot of people’s dream watches within reach. Who can really afford a CK2915 anyway? And of those who can, who would risk wearing it?

      • This is the comment I’ve been waiting for in this thread. Nail, meet head.

      • PleaseSpellRoman4AsIV

        “this reissue will put a lot of people’s dream watches within reach.” – exactly how? Do you expect that this will drive down the price of a CK2915? Or bring out new ones to the market?

        • Chris Rowley

          To the wearer, the re-issue will be virtually indistinguishable from the original so if that’s what you plan to do with it, it’s a viable alternative. Serious collectors have a totally different set of criteria so the prices of CK2915s aren’t likely to be affected.

          • PleaseSpellRoman4AsIV

            Fixed 😉

            “To the observer, the re-issue will be virtually indistinguishable from the original so if that’s what you plan to do with it, it’s a viable alternative. The wearer will always know that it’s not the real thing.”

            Don’t get me wrong, if you feel the way you do, go for it. But be warned: deep down you will always know that this isn’t the real thing.

          • Chris Rowley

            Sure, and I’ll also know that it’s not fragile, rare or cripplingly expensive. Fair play to those that are, but I’m not interested in owning museum pieces. They’re just assets at that point, not something that can become part of your story.

          • PleaseSpellRoman4AsIV

            Too bad they didn’t make it an automatic, so you wouldn’t have to worry about winding it either?

  • BrJean

    Like all of these and my favorite detail is… bracelet!

  • As with Star Wars, the original trilogy is better.

    • Bfsp

      At least this is the seemingly “new trilogy” (i.e. JJ Abrams), not the prequels. Man, they were bad.

  • BNABOD

    not sure I want one, I mean the size at least the diameter is reasonable for once and the bracelet looks really nice. I also do like the engraved case back. the price as usual is too much for me (LE or not) and I am not sure how long the fad for vintage lume will last. I also don’t want to stand in line at an OB or AD to beg for mercy to possibly put my name down on some special “you are worthy list”. To me that kind of kills it. Certainly some will show up on watchrecon.

  • ??????

    Copy -> Paste

  • Mark1884

    I like Omega, but these do nothing for me. They seem old & tired.
    Hate the aged lume!

  • gw01

    I think there is some charm when a brand digs back into its own archives, because it has a level of authenticity that “vintage inspired” pieces form new comers just don’t. Brands like Bremont, Monta, etc are using borrowed history; guys like Omega actually wrote it and keep on writing it.

    Sometimes established brands are written off in favor of newcomers, to “get something different” or whatever. But, when established brands reissue a vintage model from their own history, they bring them back to life with the technological advancements they have polished throughout time, including advancements in movement development (design, materials, etc).

    When newcomer/homage brands are birthed, then re-case third party movements. I don’t see anything wrong with that, as they do have costs to cover and profits to turn; and in artistic/design terms, imitation is the highest form of flattery.

    The issue I see is with some of the newcomers, those that price themselves in similar brackets than the real McCoys. Those that don’t have history behind them (and I’m NOT talking about cachet or any form of social snobbish bragging), I’m talking about the time, money, trials, failures and efforts well spent to be/get their watches to evolve to where they’re at… in terms of technology (engineering), design (aesthetics).

    Omega reissues some of their greatest all-time hits, remastered. They allow vintage aesthetic lovers to enjoy these pieces with all their best contemporary technology in place. Wether I like vintage aesthetics or not, I raise a digital glass of champagne and celebrate Omega’s history.

    Bravo, Omega!

  • Robert McKean

    Omega makes some nice watches, but not these. There are a lot of real vintage watches out there at that price. What happens when a fake vintage watch ages? Is it then a fake vintage vintage?

  • The first two sentences really caught my attention. I guess that’s Omegas way of dealing with the glut of their products for sale in the aftermarket. “We’ll just make them all OLD STOCK.” I do feel sorry for all of those retailers who have a lot of that “old stock” sitting in their display cases. Maybe Swatch will by them all back? And keep adding to the asset side of their balance sheet.

    I do like these three watches. If I were younger, I would buy the Trilogy group and put them in my safe. I do think they will be valuable as a boxed set 30 -40 years from now. Trouble is, I won’t be around that long.

    • Bfsp

      The problem is that this retailers, because they don’t understand the value Omega (and others) represents even at retail, will turn around and sell them to the grey market.

      This in turn makes the value of said pieces go down on the used market, making people think that Omega “doesn’t hold its value”. This attitude then gets people to buy on the grey market to “minimize losses” that are perceived.

      It’s a cycle that’s caused by shitty retailers. If you walk into a retailer and you know more than the person selling to you, you’re probably in a shitty retailer.

      • Well, it could be the problem is due to the amount of product the retailers are required to buy; coupled with the fact that the market is compromised by product glut; further complicated by the fact the brick & mortar traffic is down; further complicated by the fact that Omega products are overpriced; and, further complicated by the fact that said retailers have bills to pay and can’t afford to sit on inventory forever.

  • Bill Grist

    Love the bracelet. Would buy if they had omitted the fake patina lume

  • Marius

    These watches are taking lazy watchmaking to a completely new level.

    I understand when brands use style cues from vintage references and integrate them into modern watches; however, I don’t understand why Omega would create a 1:1, perfect carbon copy of its vintage watches. Let’s be honest, Omega produced these timepieces in 1957 because they really look like 1957. I don’t see why anyone would buy such dated and old-looking watches in 2017. And, if you’re interested in vintage watches, you would be better off buying a real & original 1957 Omega, not a modern duplicate.

    Furthermore, these watches are quite expensive. Okay, the chronograph, at CHF 6,700 is not that terrible — although, keep in mind that the 1861 is a cams-actuated chronograph, not column wheel, as the article inccorectly states (the only column wheel caliber was the 321; the later 861 and 1861 are both cams-actuated). However, the other two references are expensive considering that we are talking about basic three-handers. Granted, Omega is a very good brand, but when you’re charging around $7,000 for a three-hander, you are competing with more prestigious higher-end brands. Omega is a mass-manufacturer with an annual production of over 1 million watches, and there is only one mass-manufacturer that can charge such prices — Rolex.

    • You’re absolutely correct, the 1861 is a cam-actuated design – got a little ahead of myself there. Story has been updated to reflect this correction.

    • Luciano

      I would add that with the Moonwatch Chronograph 39.7mm (link) running at $3,700 in the grey market, there is even less justification for these prices.

      https://www.omegawatches.com/watches/speedmaster/moonwatch/chronograph-397-mm/31132403001001/

    • DS

      I dont disagree, but dont see why people find the Speedy the most acceptable…

      A chrono it may well be, but a tired old movement that is not updated for fear of losing the NASA certification, whilst the other 2 are carrying an innovative COS/METAS-certified ultra-antimagnetic, decently finished movement.

      The Railmaster is the best value of the 3 to me. The Speedy, you are essentially paying 3k premium for the patina’ed look and the fancy box over the regular model.

    • DanW94

      You don’t see why anyone would buy such dated and old looking watches in 2017? You severely underestimate the strong nostalgic appeal of these items, not to mention the purchasing power that rich old dudes have. These are like money in the bank for Omega.

      • Chaz

        I honestly don’t think rich old dudes are buying these. I think they’re aimed at the bearded or moustachioed “old skool is cool” hipsters that strive for the worn, old look but everything they wear is new and EXPENSIVE ($300 selvedge jeans…$200 “work” shirts, $100 leather bracelets, etc).

        This has been exacerbated lately with sudden fresh watch “experts” learning everything they know at a website starting with “H”.

        • DanW94

          You’re probably right, but somewhere along the line some financially well established people (read: older) will have to pick up the 20k price tag to move that boxed set. That barista salary can take an occasional hit of a couple hundred now and then but 20k is a different story. But then maybe I’m doing the underestimating, there’s plenty of hipsters making bank in Silicon valley and other tech hotspots.

          • Chaz

            “…plenty of hipsters making bank in Silicon valley and other tech hotspots.”

            EXACTLY. And EVERYTHING they know about watches, they gleaned in passing off of Instagram or “H”.

            This site, though not the slick package of other sites that seem more interested in watches-as-accessories to fashion, I view as a “down and dirty” place for seriously geeky hardcores. Kind of like an early Rocky gym versus a Housewives of Orange County kind of gym.

          • Bfsp

            If you think this site is for hardcore watch geeks, I pity the knowledge you think a watch geek should have. I’ve seen comments on “lack of finish” on a Breguet Tradition model.

          • DanW94

            Or like a cup of 50 cent diner coffee with the consistency of motor oil that’ll put hair on your chest but will give you the jolt of caffeine you need to function versus one of those ultra expensive skinny,low-fat double shot salted caramel shittiato drinks sprinkled with smurf turds and fairy dust that taste like a kids milkshake you get from a certain pretentious chain.

        • IG

          What about rich old hipsters? The other day I saw a ~60 y/o hipster wearing spray-on jeans so all of his varicose veins were perfectly presented through the trousers.

      • Chiming in as a not-rich-old-dude, but one who appreciates the utilitarian spirit of the originals. For me, it’s a shot at wearing and enjoying the watch as it was originally built and meant to be worn, rather than babying its vintage counterpart is extremely appealing to me.

        • DanW94

          Not that we’ll ever be able to determine it, but exactly what demographic do you think will drive sales of these watches? WIS(watch nerds like yourself), hipsters(younger demographic) as Chaz mentions, older established buyers who might be collectors? It’d be interesting to find out.

        • Chaz

          If you will wear a retro watch re-issue the way it was “intended” to, without fear of scuffing it for (dear Lord!) fear of de-valuing it, I highly recommend the new Rado “Captain Cook” throw back diver.

          Amazing true-to-original looks (and size) with a price that won’t make you take a loan out for. AND you get the reassurance (?) that BOTH are part of the same manufacturing group.

    • Omegaboy

      The only thing that I think will getting tiring is the vintage-looking lume. I just got rid of a Chr Ward C65 Vintage because the orangey brown lume lost its appeal. The lume on these Omegas is worse.

  • Shinytoys

    The watch industry is certainly experiencing unprecedented financial woes currently. So many of the companies trying to find their way through the dark to find the path of profitability, and also trying to guess what the public wants and what they will buy. This is so reminiscent of the motorcycle industries troubles of the last ten years. Going into a warehouse today and seeing crated expensive machinery from 2010 is enough to make anyone queasy. The bikes seemed to be glued to the showroom floor. Currently, both industries are trying to re-invent themselves to find out where the buyers are, and what will be interesting to the buying public. Both industries have gone the route of re-issuing models from days gone by with less than enthusiastic responses. Let’s hope both can find their way from the dark back into the light.

  • Yan Fin

    Generally I like re-issues . But these 3 models to me look just plain ugly through and through. Even the casebacks.

    • SuperStrapper

      I can’t believe I’m going to say this, because I’ve said for a long time that exquisite watch boxes are a waste of effort and serve to only artificially inflate prices (Panerai pearwood watch box owner here, it sits in a bigger box in my basement never to be seen again) but the presentation for this ‘ZOMGWTFBBQ LQQK!1!!!11!one1! EPIC TRIOLOGY!!111one!!’ Is kinda pathetic. I guess I should be impressed that they didn’t go over the top with it, but at the same time this is supposed to be ‘special’ and the presentation makes it look ‘speshul’.

      • The Old Watcheroo

        FAKE PATINA FAUXTINA EVERYWHERE!!!

  • awildermode

    This is perfect for those forum members every other week that question, “Finally getting an Omega, should I get a Speedmaster or Seamaster? Also looking at a Railmaster.”

    STFU! Get all three!

  • Rick

    It would be very helpful if reviewers would include details that some of us find important, such as lug length (end to end), in addition to lug width, case size and height of the case. Lug length especially is important to those of us who have smaller wrists and it seems just about only Worn and Wound regularly include this measurement in their reviews. I wonder why ABLOGTOWATCH never does. Otherwise, I do appreciate the review. For one, I like the handwind chrono movement and the smaller case for the Speedy. Despite its price, it will sell out before it hits the stores.

    • gw01

      I agree this blog has plenty room for improvement, however I’ve seen them do more ‘in deep’ reviews post Baselworld. The first posts seem to be quick impressions… from the VLOGS it seems like theres just lots to see in little time.

    • BNABOD

      so what’s the thickness and lug to lug on these puppies? anyone?

  • Yanko

    They look OK. For a $ 1,000.00 a piece.

  • Robby

    I’m a big fan of the way these watches look but it kills me that there’s a fake patina. Let me wear a watch and create my own story and patina naturally as it ages.

  • Ulysses31

    I have weird love/hate feelings for these watches. Love the dials and some of the “classic” Omega styling, but really hate the dull-as-dishwater bracelet and case design. They don’t really feel vintage in their styling, they’ve made them too generic and sucked out what character the originals had.

  • When are they going to introduce the more “modern” Railmaster variant with contemporary lume and without the ersatz faded bezel?

    You know, like they already did in 2010:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/899da1fe31ebc490d565d180614b9926806c210eeef93bc25f6ef4b7ae205578.jpg

    • PleaseSpellRoman4AsIV

      Not until the faux-aged luminova fad fades… I would say at least 3 more years.

      • The Old Watcheroo

        FAKE PATINA FAUXTINA EVERYWHERE!!

  • Dr. Zarli Kyaw

    Speedmaster is definitely overpriced considering less expensive materials are used such as haselite crystal, non ceramic bezel and manual moment which is not chronometer rated. It should be the least expensive of all three. It is about A$2000 more expesive than last year ck 2998 le which got more expensive sapphire crystal and ceramic bezel. Are extra bracelet, nato sterp and 1 mm smaller case justified for that price jump? Having said that all those speedies are already sold out at the boutiques in Melbourne within a couple of days after the announcement at the beselworld.

  • Geoff Williams

    Nice watches, and I like the mix of vintage look/size with modern movements and bracelet. The price point is criminal on all 3 however. Won’t matter, as there are enough Omega fanatics that these will be completely bought out in advance by people who have never seen the watches in person. Omega has milked the Speedmaster heritage to death so they clearly know the fan base and how to make money.