# OMEGA Speedmaster Co-Axial Caliber 9300 Review



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

Hi all,

I just posted my thoughts and experiences with regards to the new Speedy Co-Axial Chronograph caliber 9300 on my blog. I was able to borrow this timepiece from OMEGA for a few weeks, and I am really in love with it (this coming from a Speedy Pro guy ). I had my doubts at first when I saw it last year in BaselWorld, but I had a hard time giving it back.

Here are some high-res pictures I took of the watch today, below you'll find the link to my review. Let me know your thoughts about this watch.





































Click here for the long winded (+1000 words) review..

Best,

RJ


----------



## Coler (Mar 28, 2009)

I love it - and the review too...but...are they sure they know what they are doing, messing with an icon like that...


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

Coler said:


> I love it - and the review too...but...are they sure they know what they are doing, messing with an icon like that...


It is nothing different to what they did to the Speedy Reduced and other variations on the Speedy Pro. As I wrote in my review, as long as you don't see it as a competitor or successor (it is not!) of the Speedy Pro, it is a great watch. If you want a Speedy Pro, get a Speedy Pro and skip this one ;-)


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

Really great review, was pleased to read it as I have just started looking into buying this watch.

Couple of quick questions though if I may - I've got an omega aqua terrra co-ax (8500) and don't find the luminescence as good as I was hoping so I wondered if you thought this was much better? Do you know what material they've used?

Also, do you know how the 9301 movement compares? From the little I can find online, it has some gold components so probably carries a higher price tag (?), but apart from that I can't see much different... is this the case? Does the accuracy or stability differ? Also, does anyone know how much it is?

Cheers!


----------



## BaCaitlin (Sep 6, 2009)

Thanks for taking the time to take the photos and write the review RJB. Very much appreciated. This one is very high on my list of watches to get (hopefully this year).


----------



## hk51pdx (Oct 9, 2010)

Great review of a great watch. You've really paid attention to this new offering and are one of the few sources of detailed info. I can't get one now, as the pricing has elevated out of my range, but once they show on the used market i might consider trading in my PO and Speedmaster for one, and then pick up a used PO and Speedy as time goes on.

I prefer larger watches because of my wrist size, and the date and display back are nice additions. It really is a beautiful watch (thanks for the photos) that would be more appreciated had there never been a Speedmaster Professional.

Thanks again.


----------



## Ramblin man (Feb 7, 2011)

OMG, that Speedy is too gorgeous!


----------



## GaryF (Dec 18, 2009)

Great stuff. Thanks for posting.


----------



## GaryF (Dec 18, 2009)

The regular Speedy Pro has much more lume than the AT and the new watch has more again so it should be a lot better. My Speedy's are still readable after eight hours of sleep.

I'd be almost certain that the two movements you mention are functionally the same.



Mark Standen said:


> Really great review, was pleased to read it as I have just started looking into buying this watch.
> 
> Couple of quick questions though if I may - I've got an omega aqua terrra co-ax (8500) and don't find the luminescence as good as I was hoping so I wondered if you thought this was much better? Do you know what material they've used?
> 
> ...


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

Mark Standen said:


> Really great review, was pleased to read it as I have just started looking into buying this watch.
> 
> Couple of quick questions though if I may - I've got an omega aqua terrra co-ax (8500) and don't find the luminescence as good as I was hoping so I wondered if you thought this was much better? Do you know what material they've used?
> 
> ...


Hi Mark,

Thanks for your comment. I am not sure about the lume, my guess is that they 'just' use Super Luminova. I don't have a modern Speedmaster Pro or Seamaster Pro, but I assume it is no different from these watches.

The caliber 9301 movement versus the reviewed 9300 is only a matter of optical differences, like the gold rotor. It has the seem construction otherwise.

RJ


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

Thanks for all the nice comments people! Just like a few others here, this could be very well my next watch... although I'm afraid I have to sell something else for it.

I'm also curious what this watch will do on the pre-owned market, once widely available.

RJ


----------



## FOOGauzie (Apr 22, 2010)

Thanks for the great review...What a super watch!


----------



## mjrchabot (Apr 5, 2011)

Coler said:


> I love it - and the review too...but...are they sure they know what they are doing, messing with an icon like that...


I agree! When the gentleman at the Omega Boutique told they were putting the 9300 movement in the Speedy Pro I said, "the reason I love the Speedy is for it's heritage value... the movement was worn on the moon!"

Will they continue to make the 3570.50 with the manual winding movement? I should get my hands on one now to be safe.


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

mjrchabot said:


> I agree! When the gentleman at the Omega Boutique told they were putting the 9300 movement in the Speedy Pro I said, "the reason I love the Speedy is for it's heritage value... the movement was worn on the moon!"
> 
> Will they continue to make the 3570.50 with the manual winding movement? I should get my hands on one now to be safe.


Yes, they will never cease producing this one. The OMEGA CEO assured me this during BaselWorld and later on during a visit to the factory again. It will always be manual wound.


----------



## Gharddog03 (Nov 16, 2008)

This a very nice looking speedy. Thanks for the pics.


----------



## Mr Fjeld (Aug 8, 2010)

Thanks for sharing! What a lovely watch; nice caseback, size looks good, and the dial is almost perfect. I'll keep my Pro but I really like this new offering! Nice review and photos as well!


----------



## Zidane (Feb 11, 2006)

Great review Rob! I've yet to see one of these in person but I love how it looks in pictures.


----------



## ChronoScot (Oct 25, 2010)

Hi Robert-Jan, nice review and nice pictures.

One question to you - do you find the legibility of the new sub-dial difficult, given that it is relatively small and has sixty divisions on it for the minute display? My thinking has been that the new elapsed time concept that Omega has incorporated into the cal 9300 is certainly much more intuitive than typical three register chronographs, but that the small sub-dial and large number of divisions may make it difficult to discern the exact minute at a glance. 

In other words, that it will be easy to tell that the minute hand lies between (say) 30 and 35 minutes, but that some squinting may be necessary to tell whether it is at precisisely 32 or 33 minutes, particularly if it is not a "jumping" minute.

Did you find that this was the case, or was at-a-glance reading of the elapsed time to the exact minute pretty easyo


----------



## Muffnbluff (Nov 15, 2011)

I'll be the first to dissent, I just don't see the appeal. This would be one of the last Omegas I'd buy.


----------



## HR F1 (Dec 14, 2006)

The dual sub-dial layout looks really good.


----------



## sager (Dec 16, 2011)

Muffnbluff said:


> I'll be the first to dissent, I just don't see the appeal. This would be one of the last Omegas I'd buy.


This is exactly what I thought when I saw the new speedmasters. But... little by little I started to take a liking to them. The more I see pictures the more appeal they seem to have. I wonder what will happen when I get to see them for real and try one on in person. :think:


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

Thanks for your advice regarding the lume - I'm pretty much sold on this watch, although I am also interested to know a little more about the legibility of the sub-dials as I would need to use them relatively frequently.... any thoughts, RJ?

On a slight tangent, if anyone is interested in reading more about this watch there's another good write-up on this watch (as well as others) from BaselWorld2011 at the link below (scroll to to the bottom section for the 9300); there's also some detail about the 9301 which I'm guessing will be used in the gold and platinum versions that will be later released:
New_Omega_Watch_Reviews: Omega 2011 Baselworld Releases


----------



## Arcticboy (Jan 9, 2008)

I like it! Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

ChronoScot said:


> Hi Robert-Jan, nice review and nice pictures.
> 
> One question to you - do you find the legibility of the new sub-dial difficult, given that it is relatively small and has sixty divisions on it for the minute display? My thinking has been that the new elapsed time concept that Omega has incorporated into the cal 9300 is certainly much more intuitive than typical three register chronographs, but that the small sub-dial and large number of divisions may make it difficult to discern the exact minute at a glance.
> 
> ...


Hi ChronoScot,

I hear what you say and can imagine this could be something you might want to witness before you buy this watch. However, I've been using the chronograph a lot when wearing this watch. Timing my traveling, cooking and just having it 'started' for no reason some times. It didn't give me any trouble to exactly read the minute recorder in the subdial. Don't forget that it is a 44.25mm watch and the sub dials are relatively large as well.

Just like I needed to get used to my Chronoswiss Regulateur for reading time, I also needed to adjust reading both the minute and hour recorder in one dial. However, just like the Chronoswiss, you are used to it within a glance or two.

RJ


----------



## Dixan (Oct 10, 2009)

Great review. Thanks!

I've tried this one on a couple of times now. It's so, so beautiful in the real life. I love just about everything about it. I even fits me okay, despite my usual aversion to anything over 42 mm. The one thing that kind of bugs me a little is the drop down sapphire case back. It just looks a bit _forced_ to me, which of course, it is. It's a clever solution, but it points out what is a blatant compromise to me. Surely a deeper metal case back would've made the watch appear grotesquely thick, so they did the right thing here, but you can't escape the feeling that that's what they built in the first place, and then they stepped back and thought, "Whoa, we need to do something about that thick case back." I don't know, it's just not very elegant, IMO. Still, the way it is, the sapphire back does make it seem less thick, on the wrist.

If I was seriously in the market for this watch, I don't think what I just described would be a deal breaker for me. Indeed, some might see it as more of a positive - a conversation starter, if you will. Anyway, at this point, it doesn't look like the awesome new 9300 movement will be housed in anything a bit more... _svelte_ anytime soon. This exact same watch, with about 1.5 mm less in thickness, would be fantastic. (Then again, if we're talking "ideal," then I'd shrink the diameter down to 43 mm as well.)


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

Dixan said:


> Great review. Thanks!
> 
> I've tried this one on a couple of times now. It's so, so beautiful in the real life. I love just about everything about it. I even fits me okay, despite my usual aversion to anything over 42 mm. The one thing that kind of bugs me a little is the drop down sapphire case back. It just looks a bit _forced_ to me, which of course, it is. It's a clever solution, but it points out what is a blatant compromise to me. Surely a deeper metal case back would've made the watch appear grotesquely thick, so they did the right thing here, but you can't escape the feeling that that's what they built in the first place, and then they stepped back and thought, "Whoa, we need to do something about that thick case back." I don't know, it's just not very elegant, IMO. Still, the way it is, the sapphire back does make it seem less thick, on the wrist.
> 
> If I was seriously in the market for this watch, I don't think what I just described would be a deal breaker for me. Indeed, some might see it as more of a positive - a conversation starter, if you will. Anyway, at this point, it doesn't look like the awesome new 9300 movement will be housed in anything a bit more... _svelte_ anytime soon. This exact same watch, with about 1.5 mm less in thickness, would be fantastic. (Then again, if we're talking "ideal," then I'd shrink the diameter down to 43 mm as well.)


Thanks for your comments and observations. I partly agree with you on the thickness of the case, however, I think OMEGA solved this quite elegantly - as you've pointed out as well. Take a look at the new Seamster PO Chrono caliber 9300, it is much more out there and 'bigger' on the wrist than this Speedmaster Co-Axial Chronograph. The crystal caseback makes it more elegant and of course, adds the joy of being able to have a look at the caliber 9300 movement.

The only deal breaker for me for not getting this watch is that I don't money for it at the moment.

RJ


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

Hi RJ,

I'm concerned that the watch may be too big for my wrist so I'll have to find a stockist to try it on and see but in the mean time, I wondered if you had any idea whether Omega may release a smaller version of the same movement?


----------



## Kieron (Jan 10, 2007)

Handsome looking watch Robert and a great review... :-!


----------



## GTTIME (Jun 28, 2009)

Tried this on today and can't stop thinking about it. Someone want to ask my wife for me?


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

GTTIME said:


> Tried this on today and can't stop thinking about it. Someone want to ask my wife for me?


Buy it and don't say a word ;-) That's how I work....


----------



## Boxed In (Jun 22, 2008)

To me the watch would always look like its missing a dial but it may grow on me over time.


----------



## Chris Hughes (Dec 5, 2010)

Boxed In said:


> To me the watch would always look like its missing a dial but it may grow on me over time.


Same here. I can't get into that bi-compax look at all.


----------



## StoneRoses (Jan 5, 2012)

I don't know how large the subdial of this new speedy compare to POC 9300
It looks a little bit smaller than the POC.

On POC, I found it a bit harder to read the minute chrono registers compare to ordinary jumping 30min. subdial.


----------



## MSNWatch (May 5, 2008)

Well, thanks to Robert's posts and other threads about this watch I decided I must have one. Managed to locate and purchase a lightly used example and I love it. As some of you might know, I collect vintage omegas exclusively and have my share of speedmasters. This one strikes me as being both modern without losing the speedmaster heritage. It is a beautiful piece and will be my daily wearer for the forseeable future. I too looked at the PO chronograph but way too big for me especially the height of the watch. This one is just right. Can't say enough as it looks better in person than in the pictures. Here is a picture of mine:


----------



## sager (Dec 16, 2011)

Used?! Already?!

You are one lucky person. Wear it in good health.


----------



## georges zaslavsky (Feb 11, 2006)

I will take a rolex 4130 or a breitling b01 over that movement any day, they have 7 hours more in terms of power reserve, are rugged and offer better legibility.


----------



## Chibatastic (Mar 29, 2010)

Great review. I tried this one on and let me tell you, it looks and feels tops!
I love how comfortable the sapphire on the bottom is. If I didn't already have my speed master, this would be on my radar.

Chibatastic


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

Chibatastic said:


> Great review. I tried this one on and let me tell you, it looks and feels tops!
> I love how comfortable the sapphire on the bottom is. If I didn't already have my speed master, this would be on my radar.
> 
> Chibatastic


Thanks for the comments. I hear you and I am saving up for one 

RJ


----------



## Robert-Jan Broer (May 2, 2005)

georges zaslavsky said:


> I will take a rolex 4130 or a breitling b01 over that movement any day, they have 7 hours more in terms of power reserve, are rugged and offer better legibility.


Hi my friend,

To be honest, I couldn't care less about those 7 hours with an automatic watch. Would be different when it was a handwound movement perhaps. I am not sure why you would prefer a Rolex Daytona over a Speedmaster when it comes to legibility btw.

RJ


----------



## 4counters (Mar 18, 2010)

georges zaslavsky said:


> I will take a rolex 4130 or a breitling b01 over that movement any day, they have 7 hours more in terms of power reserve, are rugged and offer better legibility.


Sorry but I couldn't let this one slip past to the keeper without commenting.

First of all the 9300 is a new movement so I do not understand how you "know" that the Rolex or Breitling have more rugged movements. If you are talking about the specific watches, then try a PO Chrono with the 9300 movement - that seems fairly rugged to me!

Secondly, your comment around legibility is odd. I cannot think of a watch with better legibility than the Speedmaster pictured in the OP's post.


----------



## georges zaslavsky (Feb 11, 2006)

4counters said:


> Sorry but I couldn't let this one slip past to the keeper without commenting.
> 
> First of all the 9300 is a new movement so I do not understand how you "know" that the Rolex or Breitling have more rugged movements. If you are talking about the specific watches, then try a PO Chrono with the 9300 movement - that seems fairly rugged to me!
> 
> Secondly, your comment around legibility is odd. I cannot think of a watch with better legibility than the Speedmaster pictured in the OP's post.


4130 has been on the market since 2000 and it has already made its proofs in terms of robustness and reliability , so you can't neglect this argument and I know enough on the 4130.The b01 had already a very good article written in Armband Uhren magazin which said a lot about its technical advanced features. Unlike a classical chrono movement the b01 have self centering hammers which avoids to the watchmaker to retouch these during the service, this means a faster service and an unnecessary operation avoided.If the speedy was a tri compax then my thoughts would be different because the bicompax layout doesn't fit a speedy.


----------



## BobmG8 (Jul 26, 2011)

Being a huge Speedmaster fan this one is making my bucket list. Just something I have to do before I... well you know.


----------



## dovewatcher (Jul 23, 2010)

Regarding the thickness, does anyone have concerns that this one won't fit well under your dress shirt cuff? Personal question I realize but am curious. 

Also I don't see this on Omega's website, I see the three-dial but not the two. What is MSRP?


----------



## MSNWatch (May 5, 2008)

Regularly wear min under a dress shirt cuff - no problems whatsoever. MSRP is $8700 for the version with stainless steel bracelet.


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

dovewatcher said:


> Regarding the thickness, does anyone have concerns that this one won't fit well under your dress shirt cuff? Personal question I realize but am curious.
> 
> Also I don't see this on Omega's website, I see the three-dial but not the two. What is MSRP?


I tried it on wearing a suit the other day and it fits just fine. Saying that, I have a small wrist (about 6.25")... coincidentally, I was worried that it would look too big but it doesn't at all, they've done a great job in toning down a relatively large dial - great watch!


----------



## twitceh (Feb 17, 2012)

Mark Standen said:


> I tried it on wearing a suit the other day and it fits just fine. Saying that, I have a small wrist (about 6.25")... coincidentally, I was worried that it would look too big but it doesn't at all, they've done a great job in toning down a relatively large dial - great watch!


Thanks for the heads up on that. My wrist is probably smaller than yours. It fits surprisingly well, just need to go out and buy one. 

Any wrist shots?


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

twitceh said:


> Thanks for the heads up on that. My wrist is probably smaller than yours. It fits surprisingly well, just need to go out and buy one.
> 
> Any wrist shots?


Sorry, I didn't think about it at the time. I'll be going back to have another look soon - might go to the Omega boutique next time so I'll let you know.


----------



## evosam (Jan 2, 2012)

For what it's worth - here is my 9300 speedy on my 6.5 inch wrist. It wears much smaller than it's actual dimensions - more like a 42mm.






It's also one of those watches that has much more presence in person than pictures can show. I went into the Omega boutique looking for the POC Ti/LM and with the speedy 9300 second on my list and was instantly drawn to it. It's an amazing watch and while many folks complain about the price and hate on the 2 register look - IMOH, it's just perfect and a great modernization of the original classic. To boot you also get an incredible movement with crazy accuracy.-Sam


----------



## 4counters (Mar 18, 2010)

Well thanks to Robert-Jan's superb review, follow up pics from other members, and going back to the Sydney boutique a couple of times to try the watch on, I have now ordered one of these on the bracelet from Dimer (Ace).

When I first saw this watch I really disliked it and posted some pretty negative comments about it. Now I think the watch is fantastic, in fact the best thing to come out of Omega since the AT Annual Calendar. Funny how tastes can change innit?! 

I don't have delivery date as yet but will be sure to post wrist shots when it arrives. Let the waiting begin!


----------



## heavenscloud (Aug 3, 2011)

Great review! I'm not much of a Speedmaster fan (blasphemy, I know), but I can't think of a single thing wrong with this watch. (The orange gold model is absolutely stunning, btw.) Time to start saving....


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

Just got back from the Omega boutique with this watch - really impressed with it and can't wait to start wearing it!

I also managed to get it in a nice wooden presentation box - much better than the red box I was expecting... happy days!


----------



## 4counters (Mar 18, 2010)

Mark Standen said:


> Just got back from the Omega boutique with this watch - really impressed with it and can't wait to start wearing it!
> 
> I also managed to get it in a nice wooden presentation box - much better than the red box I was expecting... happy days!


We need pics. And congratulations!


----------



## StoneRoses (Jan 5, 2012)

I have seen this watch in person. It looks better than in the picture but I've found the subdials are too small and you will have to look real close to be able to distinguish the small minute division in chrono subdial.


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

4counters said:


> We need pics. And congratulations!


Will do - I just need to fix my camera! They'll be with you as soon as possible!


----------



## twitceh (Feb 17, 2012)

I love this watch, but after seeing it in person, I think I prefer the new 8500 PO 42mm.

The 9300 mech is really beautiful.

Pics please.


----------



## mt1tdi (Oct 25, 2010)

Did we mention that we need pics? Haha


----------



## Vakane (Oct 25, 2011)

I think 44 is too big. 

It looks weird... Tried it on at the.boutique and i.didnt feel it... went ahead and ordered the PO. 

Great watch.. Just didnt atract me.


----------



## OTX (May 14, 2008)

Vakane said:


> I think 44 is too big.
> 
> It looks weird... Tried it on at the.boutique and i.didnt feel it... went ahead and ordered the PO.
> 
> Great watch.. Just didnt atract me.


I tried this watch on 2 different occasions and while it looks real nice, my problem with it was not the 44mm size. It lacked any applied markers such as the Omega name and logo. Also the PO hands were a lot shinier and I liked the shape better. I also noticed the detailing on the case of the Speedmaster not as detailed as the PO 8500. The 8500 had more case work in it. For example on the PO 8500 the Omega logo on the crown is polished on a brushed background whereas the crown on the Speedmaster looks like the PO 2500 crown. I understand that they were trying to keep it vintage looking but I like some bling on my watches. It still is a beautiful watch though!.


----------



## twitceh (Feb 17, 2012)

eloburg said:


> I tried this watch on 2 different occasions and while it looks real nice, my problem with it was not the 44mm size. It lacked any applied markers such as the Omega name and logo. Also the PO hands were a lot shinier and I liked the shape better. I also noticed the detailing on the case of the Speedmaster not as detailed as the PO 8500. The 8500 had more case work in it. For example on the PO 8500 the Omega logo on the crown is polished on a brushed background whereas the crown on the Speedmaster looks like the PO 2500 crown. I understand that they were trying to keep it vintage looking but I like some bling on my watches. It still is a beautiful watch though!.


I kinda agree with you, especially when considering the massive RRP 8200 USD! You can get a lot of Speedmaster Pro for that. Even though I love the watch a lot, they're a lot of alternatives at that price range, and with that size it is suddenly making the PO seem more outstanding and attractive....

So in the end I went for the vintage 1957 re-issue, and I'll be saving up my money for a D&B Regulator <3


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

mtltdi said:


> Did we mention that we need pics? Haha


After much consideration, I recently purchased the 9300 Moonwatch - I think it is fantastic, I'm so pleased with it! Thanks to RJ for such a comprehensive review, it really got me interested with this piece in the first place and I've done a lot of research since to make sure this was the right watch for me (thanks to WUS contributors).














I actually use the boxes they come in so I was pleased to negotiate a wooden lacquered box for it to live in which I think will last much better than the red leatherette box. Here's some pictures.













Given RJ's thorough review, I thought I'd explain my rationale for choosing this watch in case anyone is also in the middle of choosing and has similar considerations to me. So here's a brief run down of why I chose the 9300 over the other contenders which were on my list; the SPM BA GMT, the 3313 Moonwatch and the Zenith 36,000 and Striking 10[SUP]th[/SUP].

I was looking for a chrono with high legibility with good lume, and preferably an in-house movement. GMT functionality would be useful too&#8230;. I felt the 9300 won all accounts - it definitely has the clearest hands in my opinion, longer and brighter than the 3313 (the lume is superb), and less cluttering than the broad arrow hands. The hours and minutes sub-dial can also be set to be used for a different time which is handy, and the minutes are very easy to read despite being on a 60 minute dial.

OMEGA Watches: Speedmaster Broad Arrow GMT - Steel on steel - 3581.50.00

OMEGA Watches: Speedmaster Moonwatch Co-Axial Chronograph - Steel on steel - 311.30.44.50.01.002

The BA looks great in general and I love the GMT complication - it's very easy to use and read too, - however, the big hands really block the chrono when they get near to the sub-dials, which I will use quite a lot, so I had to rule it out eventually.

I felt the 3313 Moonwatch offers a good deal compared to the £5400 price tag of the 9300. Despite this,, I was prepared to pay the difference given the problems encountered with the 3313 movement by numerous people, the superior lume and clearer hands. Plus I really liked the 44.25mm size and the 2 sub-dials of the 9300. As such, I was prepared to rule out the 3313.

This left me comparing the Omega with the Zeniths. I was so impressed with the Zenith movements, they look and sound great, and the watches look really nice too. I prefer black faces, but the local shops only had the 36,000 with a white face which has been discontinued. Subsequently, they could have done a great deal - reducing from £5200 to £4000!!

ZENITH - Official Website

However, the hands and lume just aren't as clear as the Omega. The internal tachymeter on the Zenith also gives it a slightly busy look IMO. Lastly, the bracelet has this bulky clasp which is quite difficult to remove and isn't very elegant (the pictures don't show this but I tried it on in a shop).

The Striking 10[SUP]th[/SUP] also 'suffers' from these traits, and also doesn't record hours which was important for me (I don't need accuracy to 10[SUP]th[/SUP] of a second, although the movement is excellent on it). It is still a great piece though and is relatively affordable (about £5,400 in my local shop) for such a cool LE&#8230; here's a link to it:

ZENITH - Official Website

With all this in mind, I chose the Omega and as I've said, I think it's brilliant! If I was to critique it, I would perhaps suggest that they make the sub-dials a fraction bigger; not only will it be easier to read them but it will go someway to filling the gap between them (which coincidentally I don't find to be an issue); and obviously the PO appears to have included this in its design... I would also like to know what the face looked like if 'Professional' was added under 'Speedmaster', just to see the effect.

BTW, I have a small wrist (about 6.5"), and I don't think it's too big in the slightest - I'm glad it's no bigger, mind you!














Hope that's useful! Happy to answer any questions.

Reflecting on this awesome purchase, I have a couple of questions which it'd be great if any of the heads can help me with? Firstly, why is the lume so good - is it a new formula or material? I have a decent grasp of chemistry so I'd be interested to read more detail anyone can add... Secondly, is there a distinction between SPM and SPM professional? I'm wondering if this is the reason that the word doesn't appear on the dial?

Regards, M


----------



## mt1tdi (Oct 25, 2010)

Your first pic was pretty clear, then it was all downhill Mark. haha

I like your comments though, and the thought process behind narrowing down your choice. Wear it in good health, I look forward to seeing this one in person, hopefully my AD will have one of these that I can handle soon.


----------



## Mark Standen (Feb 1, 2012)

mtltdi said:


> Your first pic was pretty clear, then it was all downhill Mark. haha....


LOL, I know - my camera was dying again; something wrong with the battery!

Thanks, and fingers crossed your dealer is swift!


----------



## twitceh (Feb 17, 2012)

It even has a proper box, not that red crappy thing!


----------



## 4counters (Mar 18, 2010)

Congratulations Mark, I wouldn't mind a lume shot if you can manage it.


----------



## clover4studio (Jul 25, 2011)

Here is mine!


----------



## carlhaluss (Oct 27, 2007)

Another excellent review, Thank You |>

A beautiful watch! I can only afford one Speedy, so I am getting the Speedy Pro. I have longed for a watch with manual wind and hesalite for a long time. However, this 9300 is absolutely gorgeous. The dial is so simple and well laid-out. The date at 6 o'clock is done perfectly.
To say nothing of the wonderul movement!
Well done!
Cheers,
Carl


----------



## carlhaluss (Oct 27, 2007)

clover4studio said:


> View attachment 653201
> 
> Here is mine!


Stunning! Congratulations. One of the nicest, cleanest dials on any chronograph. The date at 6 o'clock is beautifully done! The whole thing is so elegant, yet it does not lose any of it's original Speedy appeal.
Excellent wrist shot, too.

Cheers,
Carl


----------



## IGotId (Feb 14, 2012)

carlhaluss said:


> Stunning! Congratulations. One of the nicest, cleanest dials on any chronograph. The date at 6 o'clock is beautifully done! The whole thing is so elegant, yet it does not lose any of it's original Speedy appeal.
> Excellent wrist shot, too.
> 
> Cheers,
> Carl


agreed!


----------



## GTTIME (Jun 28, 2009)

I want one of these!!!

Awesome watch have tried it on and loved it.


----------



## clover4studio (Jul 25, 2011)

Thanks for all the nice comments.

Like so many people here have said, the photos don't do it justice! The watch looks stunning in real life and really doesn't feel big on the wrist for a 44.25mm! The plan was to originally get the Speedy Pro but after trying this on I knew this was the one for me. Here are more pictures to tempt you if you are still on the fence


----------



## clover4studio (Jul 25, 2011)

4counters said:


> Congratulations Mark, I wouldn't mind a lume shot if you can manage it.


Sorry to hijack, here is a lume shot


----------



## HRC-E.B. (Dec 18, 2012)

Mark Standen said:


> LOL, I know - my camera was dying again; something wrong with the battery!
> 
> Thanks, and fingers crossed your dealer is swift!


The issue is not about the camera dying. It's about the camera not being able to take pictures in the dark. You need WAY more light.


----------



## HugoSon (Apr 9, 2013)

Awesome watch! Enjoy it in good health!


----------



## Alex_TA (May 7, 2013)

So what on the left subdial at 9: seconds or minutes?


----------



## Zidane (Feb 11, 2006)

Alex_TA said:


> So what on the left subdial at 9: seconds or minutes?


Seconds. The right subdial tracks minutes and hours.


----------



## hpowders (Apr 20, 2013)

I'll be heading to my nearest Omega AD soon. Having just spent for a new Submariner and Grand Seiko, something's got to give here. Probably the Sub. I'm having trouble doing these $7000 deals! I just absolutely love the symmetry of this chronometer. Really handy if you travel to another timezone!

Thanks for the terrific review and dazzling pictures.

I'm in love again!!!


----------



## FourT6and2 (Jun 16, 2013)

I want to like this watch. And for the most part, I do. But I tried one on and it's just too big on my wrist. I'm contemplating waiting for the new '57 Chrono to be available. Almost the same watch, but smaller.


----------



## IGotId (Feb 14, 2012)

FourT6and2 said:


> I want to like this watch. And for the most part, I do. But I tried one on and it's just too big on my wrist. I'm contemplating waiting for the new '57 Chrono to be available. Almost the same watch, but smaller.


I sold my Speedy 9300 b/c it was too 'bulky' for me on the bracelet. I'm looking forward to the 57 as well but am afraid it will be just as thick.


----------



## FourT6and2 (Jun 16, 2013)

IGotId said:


> I sold my Speedy 9300 b/c it was too 'bulky' for me on the bracelet. I'm looking forward to the 57 as well but am afraid it will be just as thick.


Yeah, I think it will probably be just as thick. But for me, the issue wasn't the thickness, but how large the watch diameter was. The '57 is a... 42mm I think. So hopefully that makes enough of a difference. Will have to try one on. Hopefully they hit stores soon because I have my eye on a Speedmaster Racing. And I'm getting impatient.


----------



## RogerP (Mar 7, 2007)

FourT6and2 said:


> I want to like this watch. And for the most part, I do. But I tried one on and it's just too big on my wrist. I'm contemplating waiting for the new '57 Chrono to be available. Almost the same watch, but smaller.


 Choice is good. Those that prefer a smaller sports chronograph will now have a 9300-equipped watch they can be more comfortable with. I can't say I've ever found my Speedy 9300 to be too large or too bulky, but then I a) have a wrist slightly better than 7 1/2" and b) don't mind a large-ish contemporary sports watch, even though I happily wear vintage dress watches down to 34mm.


----------



## IGotId (Feb 14, 2012)

RogerP said:


> Choice is good. Those that prefer a smaller sports chronograph will now have a 9300-equipped watch they can be more comfortable with. I can't say I've ever found my Speedy 9300 to be too large or too bulky, but then I a) have a wrist slightly better than 7 1/2" and b) don't mind a large-ish contemporary sports watch, even though I happily wear vintage dress watches down to 34mm.


I found the 9300 to be very comfortable on a rubber strap, I just couldn't get it to fit right on the bracelet...it didn't help that there wasn't an available 1/2-link


----------



## FourT6and2 (Jun 16, 2013)

RogerP said:


> Choice is good. Those that prefer a smaller sports chronograph will now have a 9300-equipped watch they can be more comfortable with. I can't say I've ever found my Speedy 9300 to be too large or too bulky, but then I a) have a wrist slightly better than 7 1/2" and b) don't mind a large-ish contemporary sports watch, even though I happily wear vintage dress watches down to 34mm.


I don't think it's the height of the watch. i.e. how thick it is. I think it's more the diameter and the fact that the lugs sit right at or almost over the edge of my wrist. My wrist is 6.75" around. But maybe my wrist isn't wide enough to suit this particular watch. For comparison, the Racing model, which is 40mm, looks perfect on my wrist. So I'm hoping a 42mm would sort of split the difference.


----------



## ACampa (Jun 5, 2013)

evosam said:


> For what it's worth - here is my 9300 speedy on my 6.5 inch wrist. It wears much smaller than it's actual dimensions - more like a 42mm.
> View attachment 633119
> It's also one of those watches that has much more presence in person than pictures can show. I went into the Omega boutique looking for the POC Ti/LM and with the speedy 9300 second on my list and was instantly drawn to it. It's an amazing watch and while many folks complain about the price and hate on the 2 register look - IMOH, it's just perfect and a great modernization of the original classic. To boot you also get an incredible movement with crazy accuracy.-Sam


Can you tell me which strap this is and maybe a link to purchase? Is that rubber? Looks awesome!!


----------

