Advice humbly requested regards a 2007 Constellation with a calibre 2500.

M
Posts
2
Likes
1
Hello everybody.

I'm a new boy here, with a soft spot for 'older' Omegas, having owned a 1980's Seamaster, a gold capped 80's Constellation and two 70's f300's.

I am currently inches away from the most expensive watch purchase of my life, a 2007 manufactured 38mm Constellation Double Eagle with the Co-Axial Calibre 2500.

However, having undergone the usual Google searches, there appears to be quite a lot about the 2500 being a bit of a dodgy calibre, certainly in its early days.

Will any of you guys a million times more clued up than me shed some light on the matter? Is there cause for concern on a 2007 Constellation, or am I safe?

Bearing in mind I'm contemplating parting with two thousand of my hard earned British pounds, I don't want to get my fingers burned.

Many thanks for any advice you can give.

Cheers.

MJS.
 
dsio
Posts
33,162
Likes
37,894
Short answer, NO. Don't worry about it for a moment. There are some reports of Cal 2500's stopping due to initial problems with lubrication or whatnot, however Omega are addressing any issues under warranty, this was not a major issue, but rather a fairly simple fix. The number effected is tiny compared to the whole and I would definitely not let it put you off that watch at all.

Now, do you have some pictures of the eagle in question?
 
U
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,689
I would differ with Ashley's optimism. I owned a caliber 2500 and it stopped several times. The problem lies with improper lubrication of the pallet jewels. Funny thing is, the oil isn't used to facilitate smoother operation since the co-axial was designed to not need lubricant, it's used as a sort of cushion to soften the impact of the escape wheel teeth. Omega is trying to run the co-axial escapement much faster than it was designed to operate at and the impact was causing the surface of the escape wheel's teeth to become misshaped. The 2500 also uses a modified structure for the co-axial, done to retrofit the escapement into the caliber 1120 (an ETA 2892-A2) - a movement not designed to utilize it so space was an issue. They have the correct layout in the caliber 8500, which was designed from the ground up to optimize the co-axial escapement. A 2007 watch will be out of warranty so you'd be on your own paying for any service.

I do agree with Ashley that we need pictures of any Omega watch you've owned or are thinking of owning.
 
dsio
Posts
33,162
Likes
37,894
U ulackfocus
I would differ with Ashley's optimism. I owned a caliber 2500 and it stopped several times. The problem lies with improper lubrication of the pallet jewels. Funny thing is, the oil isn't used to facilitate smoother operation since the co-axial was designed to not need lubricant, it's used as a sort of cushion to soften the impact of the escape wheel teeth. Omega is trying to run the co-axial escapement much faster than it was designed to operate at and the impact was causing the surface of the escape wheel's teeth to become misshaped. The 2500 also uses a modified structure for the co-axial, done to retrofit the escapement into the caliber 1120 (an ETA 2892-A2) - a movement not designed to utilize it so space was an issue. They have the correct layout in the caliber 8500, which was designed from the ground up to optimize the co-axial escapement. A 2007 watch will be out of warranty so you'd be on your own paying for any service.

I do agree with Ashley that we need pictures of any Omega watch you've owned or are thinking of owning.

I get what you mean but its still not a major percentage, the Cal 2500 was the backbone of the lineup for many years, with Omega getting around 180,000 chonometer certificates per year issued during that time, (Speedys and Quartz are out of those figures) which would be probably 80,000 Cal 2500s or so. There are complaints online but there really isn't a number big enough to reflect even 2% or so of the ownership, you've got tens of thousands of Planet Oceans and Aqua Terras running A and B fast-beat revisions without a problem, I've got a good mate still using one of the first AT 2500s sold in Australia with incredible accuracy and no stoppages.

Interestingly when I was talking to my watchmaker about it and the 8500 a few weeks ago he mentioned that Omega has mandated the use of a radically different lubricant than previously used for Cal 2500s now to address the issue, supposedly this is even since the D revision was released.

...

That said, if given the choice between the 8500 and 2500... I'd pay significantly more for the 8500 any day of the week.
 
dsio
Posts
33,162
Likes
37,894
Its not the most popular piece in the USA and Europe, but in Asia those Constellation double-eagles are looked upon with more respect than even a Rolex Datejust.
 
Steve
Posts
899
Likes
138
Nice watch. I read that the problem movements were fitted to watches manufactured 2005 and before, so yours dated 2007 should be fine.
I doubt there would be a problem. So buy the watch and enjoy it.
 
Sign up or log in to reply...