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

[warrior]

Solely from an aesthetics perspective ( NOT quality or how far the watch can go underwater, for example), the Ed White is an absolute no brainer. I ALREADY think a regular old 3861 Speedmaster is waaaaay more distinctive/unique aesthetically as a chronograph watch than a Daytona. In that regard, even without the history, the Ed White wins, is more special.

You put 10 guys on the street with chronographs from Seiko, Tag, Breitling, whatever mass produced brand you want to put in there, any Daytona AND an Ed White….then ask in a poll of people who know nothing about watches what the most unique looking chronograph is in the lineup, I’d be willing to bet the majority would say the Ed White.

[Lalo007]

Depends on which Daytona you are comparing the speedy to.

[fskywalker]

321


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Driver8]

321. MUCH more special IMO

[diver2012]

It's not even close. 321.

[Seddyspaghetti]

Daytona. No speedy will ever tickle my pickle over a daytona.

Based on aesthetics alone, i prefer the look of the daytona. Not even talking about technical ability, history, ‘status’, or any of that other watch nerd stuff.

[njlam]

The SS Daytona is the ultimate status symbol in the same way the 321 EW is the ultimate chronograph.

[bp1000]

Originally Posted by njlam

The SS Daytona is the ultimate status symbol in the same way the 321 EW is the ultimate chronograph.

And this sums it up for me. The two are the ultimates for very different reasons.

I waited a long time for a steel Daytona and whilst I love it, its a very well executed chrono, it does not feel special like virtually any PM Daytona does.

I also waited quite a long time for the EW 321 - every time I put it on, it feels very special.

[Jezz0]

You can't really go wrong with either of them but Daytona will have my vote.

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by diver2012

It's not even close. 321.

Probably over a million Daytonas produced, the 321 is a special watch. Beautiful handmade movement, history which the Daytona can't get near to ever. Daytona is 100% hype, with it's only claim to fame is being owned by an actor, and a model called Zenith with a movement supplied by another more capable company, because Rolex couldn't manufacture a good reliable movement. Still I need to have both.

[myk7000]

Had a Daytona and a 321 - it was honestly very tough deciding which chrono stayed - but the 321 ended up winning out for me.

[warrior]

Absolutely. Thats good….but then I’d say you prefer the look of Seiko, Tag, Timex, Breitling chronographs, which to me, more or less, look like any Daytona. The prominent subdials/busyness within the dial kill the vast majority of chronographs for me. It blends into the crowd of similar looking chronographs. But if you like that look, then good! I don’t

Originally Posted by Seddyspaghetti

Daytona. No speedy will ever tickle my pickle over a daytona.

Based on aesthetics alone, i prefer the look of the daytona. Not even talking about technical ability, history, ‘status’, or any of that other watch nerd stuff.

[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.”

[SS Oyster]

I’ll stay with my Daytonas


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rolesor2022]

I owned 3 Speedmasters, including a 1963 Ed White straight lug 321, and the modern Daytona just beats the piss out of those Omegas. In the end, Omega competes with Tudor and Seiko. Not sure whey they drag Rolex in the conversation. (Well, we do know why...)

Lacks the prestige of Rolex, not a status symbol, ugly bracelets, too many special editions watering down the brand, allowed a plastic Swatch knockoff, Speedmaster is a watch for the HS graduate. A train-wreck.

[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

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by rolesor2022

I owned 3 Speedmasters, including a 1963 Ed White straight lug 321, and the modern Daytona just beats the piss out of those Omegas. In the end, Omega competes with Tudor and Seiko. Not sure whey they drag Rolex in the conversation. (Well, we do know why...)

Lacks the prestige of Rolex, not a status symbol, ugly bracelets, too many special editions watering down the brand, allowed a plastic Swatch knockoff, Speedmaster is a watch for the HS graduate. A train-wreck.

I can tell you’ve never handled a modern 321

[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

[jb335]

Originally Posted by brandrea

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

Haha, total joke.

But in fairness, there is at least some evidence the moon landing was staged. Not so much for a flat Earth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by jb335

Haha, total joke.

But in fairness, there is at least some evidence the moon landing was staged. Not so much for a flat Earth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

An Indian Orbiter took photos of the LMs of both Apollo 11 and 12 on the surface of the moon. I am going to say it's pretty conclusive that they were NOT staged.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by brandrea

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

But the moon is made of cheese.

[Seddyspaghetti]

Originally Posted by warrior

Absolutely. Thats good….but then I’d say you prefer the look of Seiko, Tag, Timex, Breitling chronographs, which to me, more or less, look like any Daytona. The prominent subdials/busyness within the dial kill the vast majority of chronographs for me. It blends into the crowd of similar looking chronographs. But if you like that look, then good! I don’t

You can say whatever you want

[Chapters]

Originally Posted by rolesor2022

Lacks the prestige of Rolex, not a status symbol, ugly bracelets, too many special editions watering down the brand, allowed a plastic Swatch knockoff, Speedmaster is a watch for the HS graduate. A train-wreck.

Wore a Moonwatch today, and happily wearing one tomorrow. Just wish I was as young as my “HS graduate” self.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by jb335

But in fairness, there is at least some evidence the moon landing was staged.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

“Evidence.”

[jb335]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

“Evidence.”

Don’t conflate evidence and proof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Reinhard in SA]

Originally Posted by jb335

Haha, total joke.

But in fairness, there is at least some evidence the moon landing was staged. Not so much for a flat Earth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you imagine what would happen to Omega's marketing if it ever came out the moon landing was staged?

[SS Oyster]

The Daytona 500 has never been staged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Reinhard in SA]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

The Daytona 500 has never been staged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[watchfreak207]

Having own both the Daytona and 321 for a few months, each watch is special in their own ways. The Daytona is a watch that gets instant recognition on the wrist from miles away. Every mom and pop can tell you are wearing a Rolex Daytona. So if u want to be noticed, the Daytona is the watch to go for. The 321 on the other hand, is a IYKYK kind of watch. Nobody will know how special it is unless u are a watch geek. Not comparing brand to brand, the 321 is a technical marvel. Who makes a watch with only one watchmaker assigned and assembled twice at this price point? I personally just feel more special when wearing the 321.

Should there be a day I need to rid either one of them, I will keep the 321 even though the Daytona will prob worth more in the market.