Ed White 321 vs Daytona: Which is the more special watch for a lifetime?

[Babalaas]

Both the kings of each of their brands. Which one is the more special watch if you had to choose only one? Assume one is going to keep it for a lifetime so resale isn’t a factor.

[JC316]

The 321 is technically a more special watch.

1. Produced in smaller number.
2. Hand assembled by one person.
3. Historic movement.

But the Daytona has a more modern and robust movement.

Question is which design do you like more.

That's the one you should buy.

[jb335]

Special is subjective.

To me, the history, coolness and mystique of a Daytona trumps any Omega. It feels more special on my wrist. The 321 definitely has an argument for being more special for others. Not knocking it, but it’s not more special to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cbalster]

Originally Posted by jb335

Special is subjective.

To me, the history, coolness and mystique of a Daytona trumps any Omega. It feels more special on my wrist. The 321 definitely has an argument for being more special for others. Not knocking it, but it’s not more special to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Omega has some darn good history in the Speedmaster, in my opinion. I have a Daytona and not yet a Speedmaster, but cmon the Speedmaster was chosen by NASA for moon missions, and the Daytona was worn on racetracks by famous actors. I actually give it to Omega on history!

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by jb335

Special is subjective.

To me, the history, coolness and mystique of a Daytona trumps any Omega. It feels more special on my wrist. The 321 definitely has an argument for being more special for others. Not knocking it, but it’s not more special to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol. You don’t have to like the Speedy, but it certainly doesn’t lose out to the Daytona on “history.”

[APPRF]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

Lol. You don’t have to like the Speedy, but it certainly doesn’t lose out to the Daytona on “history.”

Exactly, Daytona can't compete with a Speedmaster in history or significance.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by APPRF

Exactly, Daytona can't compete with a Speedmaster in history or significance.

Yeah, hardly anyone even wanted Daytonas until the ‘80s-‘90s.

[APPRF]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Yeah, hardly anyone even wanted Daytonas until the ‘80s-‘90s.

Yes and you could get on the list for any Daytona even steel and get it, months or a year you will get it eventually. The craze only started with the new 116500 ceramic Panda in 2016 when ADs started keeping them in the back for preferred clients because how popular it became due to it's stunning looks, and of course the Newman effect after the auction results.

[jfmiii]

Originally Posted by jb335

Special is subjective.

To me, the history, coolness and mystique of a Daytona trumps any Omega. It feels more special on my wrist. The 321 definitely has an argument for being more special for others. Not knocking it, but it’s not more special to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The “history” of the Daytona most certainly does not trump a Speedy. Especially a Speedy with a 321 inside. We are talking about a watch worn on the moon vs a watch NASA rejected. That gives the speedy plenty of “mystique” and “coolness.”

[jb335]

Originally Posted by jfmiii

The “history” of the Daytona most certainly does not trump a Speedy. Especially a Speedy with a 321 inside. We are talking about a watch worn on the moon vs a watch NASA rejected. That gives the speedy plenty of “mystique” and “coolness.”

Yeah, I guess the whole moon thing has been so overdone that many of us not only don’t care but it’s become obnoxious and a turn-off.

And wasn’t that almost 60 years ago? Wait, don’t tell Omega that, we’re about to get another half a dozen Limited Editions to commemorate.

Besides, the moon landing was staged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Watchman001]

Originally Posted by jb335

Besides, the moon landing was staged.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Uh…what?

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Watchman001

Uh…what?

That has to be a joke. Wait … the earth is flat

[Neil McCauley]

It's all subjective - lots of people for or against the daytona v speedy argument, there always will be.

For me personally, there's just too many different Speedmasters that all do exactly the same job. The Ed White will go on to be replaced many, many times over over the coming years, and will be even further removed from the watch it's based on, eventually.

Originally Posted by jb335

Special is subjective.

To me, the history, coolness and mystique of a Daytona trumps any Omega.

History of the Daytona? Might wanna think about that a bit closer

The Daytona was originally the goal for going to the moon, we all know how that went... It was then aimed at the Le Mans 24hrs endurance racing event, by being advertised as the "Le Mans" - but then Rolex realised that the US market at the time wouldn't care very much about a European event, and decided to run with Daytona instead. Nobody wanted the watches, AD's couldn't give them away in the early days.

I love the Daytona for what it is, it's a fantastic watch with one of the best chronograph movements ever made - but objectively, the watch is one of Rolex's greatest ever public failures in terms of marketing jobs, compared to the (somewhat creative) backstories of its other watches.

[FloridaBill]

I suggest for everyone to commit to the Ed White 321 so there are more opportunities for me to purchase a Daytona at retail.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Well of the two models I own a Hesalite Speedmaster (reference # bunchanumbers) and I have no interest at all in a Daytona. I don’t need a special Speedmaster or any Daytona but I guess to me the Ed White 321 has the slight edge.

[mykii]

Special is a feeling coming from within. Go with what tickles you more.

[swish77]

Daytona all day, and I love Speedmasters. These retro-style re-dos by Omega do nothing for me. They seem forced, like fake patina.

If I'm going to get a Speedmaster, it's the classic hesalite version. Oh, wait, I have one.

[nyc2la]

One of each!

[Marcjvr]

Originally Posted by nyc2la

One of each!

Best answer

[nickorette]

Originally Posted by nyc2la

One of each!

Hear! hear!

[joli160]

The 321 for the beautiful finished movement and even though they milk the theme but it is the moon watch.

[rolexjackson]

321 can go to the moon, but not to the shower. Daytona is superior in my mind as a daily wear and enjoyment standpoint in my mind.

[logo]

Originally Posted by Babalaas

Both the kings of each of their brands. Which one is the more special watch if you had to choose only one? Assume one is going to keep it for a lifetime so resale isn’t a factor.

Define “special.” Rare? Hyped? Quality? Also define which Daytona ref.

Originally Posted by swish77

Daytona all day, and I love Speedmasters. These retro-style re-dos by Omega do nothing for me. They seem forced, like fake patina.

If I'm going to get a Speedmaster, it's the classic hesalite version. Oh, wait, I have one.

There is no fake patina on the Ed White.

Originally Posted by rolexjackson

321 can go to the moon, but not to the shower. Daytona is superior in my mind as a daily wear and enjoyment standpoint in my mind.

Hope I didn’t break it!





Omega rates it to 50m, it can go to 50m.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by logo

There is no fake patina on the Ed White.

Yes, I know. My comment was about Omega (and some other brands) in general and their use of faux patina on retro/vintage inspired watches, such as the Seamaster 300.

Not a fan of trying to make modern watches look like old watches. The Ed White would be in that category.

[amh]

Originally Posted by logo

<snip>


Omega rates it to 50m, it can go to 50m.

I see two bubbles next to that one pusher

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by logo

Define “special.” Rare? Hyped? Quality? Also define which Daytona ref.

Omega rates it to 50m, it can go to 50m.

Beautiful watch. It absolutely can go to 50m...when new. The problem is that a manual wind watch is going to wear out the crown seals at a much quicker rate than an auto, which is why you see Speedy Pros fail when swimming from time to time. If you swim and shower with a Speedy Pro, I'd recommend getting it pressure tested quite often.

To answer the original question, I think the 321 is more special, but, if it was my daily watch, I'd pick a Daytona simply because of the relatively hassle-free, long-term water resistance.

[INC]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Beautiful watch. It absolutely can go to 50m...when new. [...] If you swim and shower with a Speedy Pro, I'd recommend getting it pressure tested quite often.

To be honest, no 50m/5ATM watch is suitable for swimming. If you want to swim, choose a 100 m/10 ATM watch.

[JC316]

Originally Posted by INC

To be honest, no 50m/5ATM watch is suitable for swimming. If you want to swim, choose a 100 m/10 ATM watch.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by INC

To be honest, no 50m/5ATM watch is suitable for swimming. If you want to swim, choose a 100 m/10 ATM watch.

For most modern watches, 50M means 50M and is fine for swimming.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Beautiful watch. It absolutely can go to 50m...when new. The problem is that a manual wind watch is going to wear out the crown seals at a much quicker rate than an auto, which is why you see Speedy Pros fail when swimming from time to time. If you swim and shower with a Speedy Pro, I'd recommend getting it pressure tested quite often.

To answer the original question, I think the 321 is more special, but, if it was my daily watch, I'd pick a Daytona simply because of the relatively hassle-free, long-term water resistance.

Finally we get some accurate comments Douglas.

After all 50 metres WR is 50 metres.

I am fortunate to own both and would also choose a Daytona.

I would add that winding a SpeedMaster on a daily basis is a pain.

Ps. I see some posts referring to the latest white dial SS Daytonas as pandas - they are not pandas - they could be reverse or albino pandas.