# Omega 1538 calibre



## RogerE

Dear Forum: I have a new Omega Seamaster Aquaterra quartz which has a 1538 calibre. Is this the same movement as my '95 Seamaster? It seems to have the identical features. Thanks, Roger. P.S. why does the second hand never line up with the indices? I assume 'low qualtiy control' is the answer!


----------



## RogerE

Speaking of 'low quality', please pardon my typo in the original post.


----------



## ppaulusz

RogerE said:


> Dear Forum: I have a new Omega Seamaster Aquaterra quartz which has a 1538 calibre. Is this the same movement as my '95 Seamaster? It seems to have the identical features. Thanks, Roger. P.S. why does the second hand never line up with the indices? I assume 'low quality control' is the answer!


The current Omega Cal.1538 is an ETA 255.461. It is a fairly old movement so it could be the same movement as in your 1995 Seamaster. It looks like that Omega changed the caliber ID of the Cal.1438 to Cal.1538 a couple of years ago for unknown reason as both these movements are in fact ETA 255.461.
About your observation of the seconds-hand and the indices: I think, you're right it must be a quality control issue affecting almost all quartz watches.


----------



## Bruce Reding

ppaulusz said:


> About your observation of the seconds-hand and the indices: I think, you're right it must be a quality control issue affecting almost all quartz watches.


Not meaning to bash, here, but I'm thinking that this is much more prevelant among Swiss watches, as opposed to Japanese ones. That's my experience at least, but am interested in hearing other observations. My GP quartz from 1972, otoh, is dead on all the way around. My impression? When quartz was a special, exotic new technology, they really cared.


----------



## ppaulusz

Bruce Reding said:


> Not meaning to bash, here, but I'm thinking that this is much more prevelant among Swiss watches, as opposed to Japanese ones. That's my experience at least, but am interested in hearing other observations. My GP quartz from 1972, otoh, is dead on all the way around. My impression? When quartz was a special, exotic new technology, they really cared.


I agree, Bruce!
Among my current watches, the Longines is dead on around 50% of the time, the Omega is dead on all the time. My two Japanese watches (Citizen and Seiko) are dead on all the time but they are using jewel-less "fly-by-wire" technology where the seconds-hand are automatically adjusted during a set up procedure (for both watches) furthermore in the case of the Seiko the position of the seconds-hand is periodically checked by the electronics of the movement.
I used to have a Seiko (8F32) that had a normal jewelled movement that performed worse than my Longines regarding seconds-hand positioning.


----------



## ppaulusz

ppaulusz said:


> ... It looks like that Omega changed the caliber ID of the Cal.1438 to Cal.1538 a couple of years ago for unknown reason as both these movements are in fact ETA 255.461...


Gentlemen, I think it is an interesting and unusual act by Omega. Can anyone of you give us more details about what has happened, when and why regarding to movements Cal.1438 and Cal.1538?


----------



## vizi

ppaulusz said:


> The current Omega Cal.1538 is an ETA 255.461. It is a fairly old movement so it could be the same movement as in your 1995 Seamaster. It looks like that Omega changed the caliber ID of the Cal.1438 to Cal.1538 a couple of years ago for unknown reason as both these movements are in fact ETA 255.461.
> About your observation of the seconds-hand and the indices: I think, you're right it must be a quality control issue affecting almost all quartz watches.


George, I agree. The calibre ID differs although he is one cal.Eta 255.461


----------



## RogerE

Thank you very much for your answers. I also own 3 Oysterquartz watches, and their second hands line up perfectly with the indices. Of course they were much more expensive than the Omega when new, and undoubtedly were engineered more thoroughly.


----------



## Fatpants

Ditto. My SS GP 354.012 is dead on, whereas the X-33 can be slightly off. My EcoZilla also suffers from mis-alignment, but of course, I wouldn't consider it HEQ. It'll be interesting to see how my first quartz Seiko fares, when I pick it up Monday...


----------



## anonymousmoose

RogerE said:


> Dear Forum: I have a new Omega Seamaster Aquaterra quartz which has a 1538 calibre. Is this the same movement as my '95 Seamaster? It seems to have the identical features. Thanks, Roger. P.S. why does the second hand never line up with the indices? I assume 'low qualtiy control' is the answer!


My Bond seamaster, sold first in 2000 or 2001 (got it pre-owned in 2007), has the second hand not lining up either. I also had a look at a few at the Omega AD and they were the same. I guess its just the way they are produced. I don't loose any sleep over it.


----------



## hedrick

I have a recent Aquaterra quartz and Bond quartz. They both mostly line up. There are a few places on the dial where they don't, be in general they do.


----------



## M4tt

I'm always astonished at how poor the finish is on the movement of the quartz Seamaster. Compared to the finish on equivalent mechanicals, the 1120 for example, it is dreadful. IMHO about the standard of the older Poljot watches .

surprisingly accurate though!


----------



## ppaulusz

M4tt said:


> I'm always astonished at how poor the finish is on the movement of the quartz Seamaster. Compared to the finish on equivalent mechanicals, the 1120 for example, it is dreadful. IMHO about the standard of the older Poljot watches .
> 
> surprisingly accurate though!


Don't forget the Omega Seamaster quartz has been available with different quartz movements. My Seamaster Professional 200m is fitted with the Cal.1441 (ETA 255.561) dual-oscillator thermocompensated movement that is accurate, beautifully finished and the seconds-hand hits the marks spot on all the time. A truly high quality movement in every respect!:-!


----------



## vizi

ppaulusz said:


> Don't forget the Omega Seamaster quartz has been available with different quartz movements. My Seamaster Professional 200m is fitted with the Cal.1441 (ETA 255.561) dual-oscillator thermocompensated movement that is accurate, beautifully finished and the seconds-hand hits the marks spot on all the time. A truly high quality movement in every respect!:-!


I agree!:-!


----------



## M4tt

Unfortunately I was talking about the 'Bond' Seamaster 300 with the 1538 movement which, sadly, isn't quite as impressive. I took a photo of it a while back and I think you will agree that it is a bit of a let down compared to many:

https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?p=363412&highlight=quartz#post363412


----------



## ppaulusz

M4tt said:


> Unfortunately I was talking about the 'Bond' Seamaster 300 with the 1538 movement which, sadly, isn't quite as impressive. I took a photo of it a while back and I think you will agree that it is a bit of a let down compared to many:
> https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?p=363412&highlight=quartz#post363412


True, that Cal.1538 is not a spectacular quartz movement aesthetically but it is reported to be "surprisingly accurate" (for a non-thermocompensated movement). I'd rather have an "ugly" looking quartz movement that is very accurate than a beautifully looking quartz movement that is less accurate. Let's not forget: we are talking about a quartz watch movement and its main function is timekeeping.
Having said that, the Bond-style Seamaster with the Cal.1538 movement is not my cup of tea either.


----------



## RogerE

No, it isn't a pretty movement for sure, but the 2 watches I have with this movement beat the heck out of my 3 Oysterquartzs in the accuracy department.


----------



## M4tt

> but it is reported to be "surprisingly accurate"


Yes indeed, by me, a couple of posts up! indeed, it is reliably more accurate than my quartz chronometer from Krieger - even off the wrist!

Actually, I really like the outside of the Bond, I've had mine for over ten years now and I still really enjoy it. However, for me, part of the enjoyment of a watch is knowing that it is beautiful all the way in. The 1538 is a bit of a let down here, that is all.


----------



## SolidChamp

I decided to bump this thread because it has managed to shed some light on many of the questions I've had since I just recently purchased a new Omega Seamaster Professional Quartz with the black dial and bezel.

Unfortunately for me, at the time they didn't have the chronometer. Now I'm thinking about trading this quartz Seamaster in for an automatic.

How much cash, in addition to the trade, should I be looking at?

Also, any thoughts on my idea to trade? Where would be the best place to look online for a dealer with whom I could conduct such a transaction?


----------



## ronalddheld

Might you get the responses you would want by posting this on the Omega forum?


----------



## SolidChamp

ronalddheld said:


> Might you get the responses you would want by posting this on the Omega forum?


Forgive me, I'm new here.


----------



## ronalddheld

No problem. I was only trying to suggest other fora for you to get more information.


----------



## SolidChamp

Are the Omega 1538 calibre movements COSC certified? Are any of Omega's quartz movements , for that matter?


----------



## Eeeb

SolidChamp said:


> ... COSC certified? Are any of Omega's quartz movements , for that matter?


Almost all of the early ones were COSC certified. None of the recent ones have been.


----------



## SolidChamp

Eeeb said:


> Almost all of the early ones were COSC certified. None of the recent ones have been.


Any particular reason as to why they stopped certifying them?


----------



## webvan

They wouldn't pass the new COSC rules for quartz that date back to 2001 : https://www.watchuseek.com/f9/question-heq-scholars-cosc-40583.html


----------



## Eeeb

webvan said:


> They wouldn't pass the new COSC rules for quartz that date back to 2001 : https://www.watchuseek.com/f9/question-heq-scholars-cosc-40583.html


The Cal 1680 based Constellation Double Eagle would have passed. Indeed, Omega has used a number of thermolines in the past all of which would have passed. I suspect they just saw no marketing motivation in adding Chronometer to the dial.


----------



## ppaulusz

Eeeb said:


> The Cal 1680 based Constellation Double Eagle would have passed. Indeed, Omega has used a number of thermolines in the past all of which would have passed...


Omega used only one Thermoline (Cal.1680 = ETA 252.511). The earlier thermocompensated movements in the Omega watches (Cal. 1441 = ETA 255.561 and Cal.1445 = 255.572) could not be Thermolines as they were no longer available in 2001 when ETA introduced its Thermoline Family of thermocompensated movements.


----------



## ppaulusz

Eeeb said:


> The Cal 1680 based Constellation Double Eagle would have passed...


So would the Cal.1680 (ETA 252.511) based earlier model, the Constellation Perpetual Calendar.


----------



## webvan

Eeeb said:


> The Cal 1680 based Constellation Double Eagle would have passed. Indeed, Omega has used a number of thermolines in the past all of which would have passed. I suspect they just saw no marketing motivation in adding Chronometer to the dial.


Which is a bit strange since they reinstated a TC movement after dropping the 1441 for the 1438 on the Seamaster 200m, would love to know the "story" on why that happened at the time...


----------



## T. Wong

My 2 pre-Bond quartz models-one a 1441 and the other 1438 - are seconds hand accurate. But my two Omega X-33s show one accurate and the other off the markers. My late 1980s Polaris quartz is accurate....

So it is, for sure, rather hit and miss, not just with Omega but many other quartz brands.


----------



## Catalin

webvan said:


> They wouldn't pass the new COSC rules for quartz that date back to 2001 : https://www.watchuseek.com/f9/question-heq-scholars-cosc-40583.html


The Double Eagle Perpetual Calendar could pass COSC, but then again - that model is no longer in production from 2010 :-(


----------



## webvan

Yes, found that out at a dealer the other day, wonder why they removed that rare bird from their catalogue, I guess it wasn't selling well enough, strange since their can't be too many perpetual calendars around. Maybe a chronometer cert would have helped. 

As for my comment, it was referring specifically to the 1538 movement, the topic of this thread ;-)


----------

