Ceramic Daytona vs 321 Ed White

[BNA/LION]

Daytona

[illiguy]

Both

[stevestil]

i’m a huge speedy fan and own a sapphire sandwich and would love to own a 321 one day.

if i had the opportunity to pick one or the other i’d go with the daytona.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ltmgeller]

OMega?

[Enatai252]

I own both DaytonaC and the EW along with the 5070P which uses the actual Lemania 321 movement. I appreciate each of them. I voted EW as it gets more wrist time from me primarily because it is more legible and more stealth which to me are both positive factors. And I really like how it wears. The 321 movement also speaks to my geek nature but really just for the owner to appreciate. The Daytona is comfortable and looks great….is noticed more…and should be part of any multi chrono collection. I am also fan of the Hesalite 3861 and Snoopy 50th and own both but I think the two examples in the poll are the two I would consider as the primary chrono to acquire

[mdtddd2007]

It's tough...both great! Btw has to be Daytona!

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by subtona

I guess performance is subjective?
For me it is the ability to legibly indicate the time at a glance (in varying lighting conditions) the speedy is far superior (and always has been) in this function.
Additionally performance is being able to accurately time events, again the legibility of the chrono function in the speedy is far superior and always has been. Of course one could argue that the Daytona has a modern movement with better accuracy however in my experience if I cannot determine the location of the hands then the accuracy is of little value to me. Additionally the screw down pushers, while iconic to the Daytona and pleasant to look at, simply hinder the routine use of the chrono function.

The Daytona is a great looking watch, if we are being honest the 321 is more balanced looking than the Daytona.


Excessive text /Oversized bezel/Off center subdials / markers of different sizes, all contribute to its lack of balance.

The Daytona is truly one of my favorite watches and was the very first Rolex I wanted over 30 years ago. It is also the most frustrating because it fails miserably in its primary function. I have had 4 of them and my favorites are the black ceramic and the white zenith. The black ceramic was magnificent but it had to go. The white zenith is still in the collection at the moment but is looking for a new home.

This is a really interesting perspective

[ratty]

I certainly prefer the 321 to a ceramic Daytona, it would be closer for me if the Daytona had the SS or WG bezel. I prefer the non ceramic versions of the Daytona.

I have a 321 as well as other Speedmasters, and my wife has the Snoopy 2 and 3. To me 321 is the best Speedmaster I have seen and worn. Yes it looks similar to other models, but I find it significantly different.

[brandrea]

Another significant but subtle aesthetic difference is the treatment in bracelet and case brushed/polished surfaces ….

Omega chose to “reverse” the bracelet and case polish from the way Rolex typically does. The Omega center links are brushed and the outers are polished and the case has brushed sides and polished top lugs.

Time will tell if this improves on marks, but so far after 5 weeks, I’m noticing that the bracelet still looks brand new, no noticeable swirls or wear marks like I used to get with Rolex PCL’s.

It’s also quite striking to look at when you see it in the metal

[GB-man]

321 for sure unless you want a flex piece. Imho there’s nothing better than a watch that is great and nobody knows. Of course omega does have some brand equity but the 321 is like having a lexus with Toyota badges.

[Chester01]

This isn’t even a competition. The speedy by a long mile. The consideration we have here is with the most significant wrist watch ever made with one of the most significant movements used by some of the trinity, against what, a watch with the only real significance being it’s association with celebrity? This is not a real comparison. Tue Daytona has many positive attributes but this being a Rolex forum people start to confuse hype with real heritage. The Daytona has none. It broke no new ground and only claim to fame being a salad dressing guy wore it. Let’s start calling balls and strikes. The only other watches that have that kind of heritage would be the sub, gmt, navitimer, el primero. Watches that either broke new ground or were proven in their respective fields.

[Driver8]

Assuming you like the aesthetics of both, then you genuinely can't go wrong with either.

Personally speaking though, I'm not a fan of the SS Daytona's asymmetric lugs, plus I find it wears very small on my wrist. But even if neither of those things were there, it'd still be the 321 for me by a mile. It's just a more special watch for the true watch fanatic - the history and heritage of the 321 is unparalleled, the assembly process is as close to old-school watchmaking that we can ever hope for from a huge company like Omega, plus it's very "under the radar" unless you really REALLY know, and yet it's genuinely way more rare than the Daytona (if that's important to you).

Also (and there's no getting away from this) the Daytona attracts a lot of people who just want one because it's "hard to get" and therefore a "flex" (which is phrase I hate, but it gets used a lot). Not everyone of course, but there are a lot who do. The 321 is more of a connoisseurs piece IMO.

[karleone]

Daytona all day for the design (personal), overall finish and water resistance. I don’t understand how Omega have two very similar deisgn speedmaster both in steel with one almost at double of the price of the other one.

[karleone]

Originally Posted by Chester01

This isn’t even a competition. The speedy by a long mile. The consideration we have here is with the most significant wrist watch ever made with one of the most significant movements used by some of the trinity, against what, a watch with the only real significance being it’s association with celebrity? This is not a real comparison. Tue Daytona has many positive attributes but this being a Rolex forum people start to confuse hype with real heritage. The Daytona has none. It broke no new ground and only claim to fame being a salad dressing guy wore it. Let’s start calling balls and strikes. The only other watches that have that kind of heritage would be the sub, gmt, navitimer, el primero. Watches that either broke new ground or were proven in their respective fields.

The Daytona has no heritage? What have you smoked?

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by karleone

Daytona all day for the design (personal), overall finish and water resistance. I don’t understand how Omega have two very similar deisgn speedmaster both in steel with one almost at double of the price of the other one.

Have a look at how the 321 is made. Genuinely assembled by hand, with a single watchmaker completing all the assembly of a single movement and the watch it goes into, in a tiny dedicated workshop that has an annual production target of between 1000 and 2000 321 movements. That sort of thing comes with a price tag.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Driver8

Assuming you like the aesthetics of both, then you genuinely can't go wrong with either.

Personally speaking though, I'm not a fan of the SS Daytona's asymmetric lugs, plus I find it wears very small on my wrist….

With each post, I keep remembering things I forget to point out

This is another significant difference in my opinion. ^^^

The 321 actually wears like a true 40 mm vs the Daytona which does not. With a 48mm curved lug to lug, it will suit most any wrist size without looking out of place. YMMV

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by subtona

I guess performance is subjective?
For me it is the ability to legibly indicate the time at a glance (in varying lighting conditions) the speedy is far superior (and always has been) in this function.
Additionally performance is being able to accurately time events, again the legibility of the chrono function in the speedy is far superior and always has been. Of course one could argue that the Daytona has a modern movement with better accuracy however in my experience if I cannot determine the location of the hands then the accuracy is of little value to me. Additionally the screw down pushers, while iconic to the Daytona and pleasant to look at, simply hinder the routine use of the chrono function.

The Daytona is a great looking watch, if we are being honest the 321 is more balanced looking than the Daytona.


Excessive text /Oversized bezel/Off center subdials / markers of different sizes, all contribute to its lack of balance.

The Daytona is truly one of my favorite watches and was the very first Rolex I wanted over 30 years ago. It is also the most frustrating because it fails miserably in its primary function. I have had 4 of them and my favorites are the black ceramic and the white zenith. The black ceramic was magnificent but it had to go. The white zenith is still in the collection at the moment but is looking for a new home.

Of course! Everyone is free to express their opinion.

:saluti:

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by karleone

Daytona all day for the design (personal), overall finish and water resistance. I don’t understand how Omega have two very similar deisgn speedmaster both in steel with one almost at double of the price of the other one.

If you have them in hand you’ll see they are nothing alike. The 321 is leagues beyond the standard moonwatch

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by karleone

The Daytona has no heritage? What have you smoked?

Let’s get onto it. Was it the first automatic chronograph? No. Was it the first racing watch? No. Was it used in space? Do you actually think race car drivers look down at their wrist in a race? Was it used to time the burn which if not exact would have sent Apollo 13 to its doom? No.

What has it done? Was it the first watch to use ceramics? No. Look i owned 2 Daytona, and can separate the hype. I ask again, what has it done other than getting folks who like attention or the status as being someone who has it or sourced it from the AD. That’s not heritage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Let’s get onto it. Was it the first automatic chronograph? No. Was it the first racing watch? No. Was it used in space? Do you actually think race car drivers look down at their wrist in a race? Was it used to time the burn which if not exact would have sent Apollo 13 to its doom? No.

What has it done? Was it the first watch to use ceramics? No. Look i owned 2 Daytona, and can separate the hype. I ask again, what has it done other than getting folks who like attention or the status as being someone who has it or sourced it from the AD. That’s not heritage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have to say that I can see this point of view.

I speak as someone who likes most of the different types of Daytona and I have a few, but I can’t think of what heritage they have.

I don’t like the ceramic versions or those on rubber straps, but I like the 16520 and 116520 / 116509 versions, but I buy them because I like them, not for some heritage that I can’t even think of!

[logo]

logo: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=846386

Travelller: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=803054

Linking these two threads here. For anyone who cares to learn a bit more about the 321 Ed White, these will hopefully help show what it is exactly the Daytona is up against.


…. And another macro.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by ratty

I have to say that I can see this point of view.

I speak as someone who likes most of the different types of Daytona and I have a few, but I can’t think of what heritage they have.

I don’t like the ceramic versions or those on rubber straps, but I like the 16520 and 116520 / 116509 versions, but I buy them because I like them, not for some heritage that I can’t even think of!

I mean, look. I’m no Daytona hater, I owned two. They have an excellent movement, fantastic proportions, well balanced dial, very versatile, and a real perk of water resistance. It’s a great watch, but I think the Daytona because of its hype and “Rolex” on the dial has almost become unquestioned that it had heritage because well Rolex has heritage. Yes, the sub and gmt have heritage and real legacy, but when one looks past the hype, not so much. The el primero, seiko’s automatic chrono, navitimer, and monaco all have more heritage and legacy than the Daytona.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ratty]

No arguments from me!

[Seddyspaghetti]

Daytona. That ed white does absolutely nothing for me.

[Santiago32]

Ed White is a niche watch. I think most won't know what they are looking at.

[rolexperfect]

Both. And at retail. :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by subtona

I guess performance is subjective?
For me it is the ability to legibly indicate the time at a glance (in varying lighting conditions) the speedy is far superior (and always has been) in this function.
Additionally performance is being able to accurately time events, again the legibility of the chrono function in the speedy is far superior and always has been. Of course one could argue that the Daytona has a modern movement with better accuracy however in my experience if I cannot determine the location of the hands then the accuracy is of little value to me. Additionally the screw down pushers, while iconic to the Daytona and pleasant to look at, simply hinder the routine use of the chrono function.

The Daytona is a great looking watch, if we are being honest the 321 is more balanced looking than the Daytona.


Excessive text /Oversized bezel/Off center subdials / markers of different sizes, all contribute to its lack of balance.

The Daytona is truly one of my favorite watches and was the very first Rolex I wanted over 30 years ago. It is also the most frustrating because it fails miserably in its primary function. I have had 4 of them and my favorites are the black ceramic and the white zenith. The black ceramic was magnificent but it had to go. The white zenith is still in the collection at the moment but is looking for a new home.

The legibility is no joke. I use my chronographs to time things as part of my job and do need accuracy. While timing a test, I look at my daytona and there is not enough hash marks on the sub dial to be read with precision. Look closely and you will see it. Its a real problem on the 8,9, 10 minutes, then 18,19,21, 22. For me 13k+ on a watch that cannot be read accurately is a non starter. The function of a watch is to tell the time, and 13k and it cannot. I could not reconcile that and off it went.


I felt it's simply pretty jewelry, took it off and gave it to my wife that evening. That never, flat out never happened with my Speedy, ever.

[noshake]

I like the 321. Smaller case size, better braclet than the original, and the open display back. But I'd still choose the Daytona first if given the choice.

[NachoNeal]

I voted Daytona. But admittedly I'm not a chrono fan and don't know much nuance about the different omega speedmaster models.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by logo

logo: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=846386

Travelller: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=803054

Linking these two threads here. For anyone who cares to learn a bit more about the 321 Ed White, these will hopefully help show what it is exactly the Daytona is up against.


…. And another macro.

That’s not fair