Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
I have attempted to make a comparison between two of the "iconic" chronographs of the past half-century. I do not perceive this as a contest, but more of an objective (as far as possible) view of the differences and similarities.
In the end there is no loser or winner - only preference, prejudice and perceptions. I would also add that I have owned one watch for five years and the other for five minutes - so my judgement may not be as objective as I'd like to think.
First though - to bust some myths. Contrary to popular opinion, I have not been asked if the Daytona is a fake, I have not been asked if I think I am Paul Newman or Neil Armstrong, and in reality nobody gives a damn what watch someone else wears.
For this comparison I have looked at the two watches I happen to own - the ceramic Daytona 116500LN and the 50th anniversary Speedmaster 311.33.42.50.01.001. My Speedmaster is visually similar to the Moon Watch, although there are several small differences.
Now, on to the comparison:
History and Pedigree
Clearly, both of these watches have roots going back more than fifty years - and I would argue that both can show very clear similarities to their forefathers. I would not offer an opinion about which has the "best" heritage and I will not attempt to document it, as it has been done many times by writers with far more style than me.
Design
I think it is clear that both watches were designed as practical chronographs. The Speedmaster offers a cleaner dial and is instantly legible, which I guess is a very practical consideration. On the other hand, the Daytona has a purposely large font for the tachymeter scale, which is potentially more practical than the Speedmaster. In the end, I have never used the tachymeter on either, so it's not important to me.
The chronographs in both watches offer the same 12 hour recording function, although the Daytona claims to show 1/8 second increments, compared to the Speedmaster which has 1/4 second markers.
It could be argued that the Rolex shows closer attention to detail by using a slightly asymmetric case design, with the right lug being slightly narrower to balance the chronograph pushers.
Practicality
When it comes to practicality, there are plenty of differences between these two watches:
- Automatic v's Manual winding
Personally, I prefer automatics, particularly when worn continuously for several days/weeks - but that's only because I am lazy/forgetful. In the end, manually winding a watch is hardly a hardship, although several people complain that the Speemaster crown-guard/case does not make it the easiest to wind.
- Legibility
I think there is no doubt that the Speedmaster is a more legible watch. In day-to-day use, I have no problem with reading the Daytona, but I think the Speedmaster is about as good as it gets when it comes to reading the time on a chronograph dial.
- Size and shape
Again, it's probably a matter of personal preference, but I would choose the 40mm Rolex over the 42mm Omega. I also prefer the lack of height in the Rolex - although again, the Omega is hardly huge.
- Using the chronograph
Both of these watches are rated to 100m, so I have to wonder if it is strictly necessary to include the screw-down pushers on the Daytona, but I suppose, back-in-the-day, the technicalities of achieving water resistance were more challenging, and these days, those pushers are part of the design heritage. From a functional point of view, both chronographs work in the same way - push at 2 to start and stop, push at 4 to reset. Both watches work with a crisp start/stop action and there is little to choose between them.
Quality
Probably more difficult to judge than almost anything else, but my overall impression is that the Rolex is better made. The case polishing, dial markers and bracelet all (to me) seem to be a step up. As always, it's small details but overall the Rolex wins (as you could expect from the price position).
Movement quality is more difficult for me to judge, as I am far from an expert. In the end, I would expect them both to be reliable and have a long life. Certainly, both of my examples are extremely accurate - the Omega lives up to its chronometer spec and the Rolex seems to be almost bang on since I have owned it.
One area where the Omega is definitely more pleasing is the rear view:
Wearing Comfort
Both watches are a good fit on my wrist and neither could be described as uncomfortable. Overall, I prefer the size of the Daytona, but there's not a lot in it:
Value
Outside of watch-obsessives, neither of these watches would ever be described as good value! However, in the case of these two, both seem to be set up to hold their value quite well. I bought the Speedy as NOS and I would easily get my money back, and we all know the current situation of the Daytona. In the long-run, these are both 'safe' purchases and in that sense, offer good value.
Conclusion
As stated at the beginning, there is no winner or loser. Today, I would always choose the Daytona - trading a bit of clarity for the convenience of the automatic movement and smaller case, but if, for some reason, I had to sacrifice it and keep the Speedy, I could barely claim hardship.
In the end there is no loser or winner - only preference, prejudice and perceptions. I would also add that I have owned one watch for five years and the other for five minutes - so my judgement may not be as objective as I'd like to think.
First though - to bust some myths. Contrary to popular opinion, I have not been asked if the Daytona is a fake, I have not been asked if I think I am Paul Newman or Neil Armstrong, and in reality nobody gives a damn what watch someone else wears.
For this comparison I have looked at the two watches I happen to own - the ceramic Daytona 116500LN and the 50th anniversary Speedmaster 311.33.42.50.01.001. My Speedmaster is visually similar to the Moon Watch, although there are several small differences.
Now, on to the comparison:
History and Pedigree
Clearly, both of these watches have roots going back more than fifty years - and I would argue that both can show very clear similarities to their forefathers. I would not offer an opinion about which has the "best" heritage and I will not attempt to document it, as it has been done many times by writers with far more style than me.
Design
I think it is clear that both watches were designed as practical chronographs. The Speedmaster offers a cleaner dial and is instantly legible, which I guess is a very practical consideration. On the other hand, the Daytona has a purposely large font for the tachymeter scale, which is potentially more practical than the Speedmaster. In the end, I have never used the tachymeter on either, so it's not important to me.
The chronographs in both watches offer the same 12 hour recording function, although the Daytona claims to show 1/8 second increments, compared to the Speedmaster which has 1/4 second markers.
It could be argued that the Rolex shows closer attention to detail by using a slightly asymmetric case design, with the right lug being slightly narrower to balance the chronograph pushers.
Practicality
When it comes to practicality, there are plenty of differences between these two watches:
- Automatic v's Manual winding
Personally, I prefer automatics, particularly when worn continuously for several days/weeks - but that's only because I am lazy/forgetful. In the end, manually winding a watch is hardly a hardship, although several people complain that the Speemaster crown-guard/case does not make it the easiest to wind.
- Legibility
I think there is no doubt that the Speedmaster is a more legible watch. In day-to-day use, I have no problem with reading the Daytona, but I think the Speedmaster is about as good as it gets when it comes to reading the time on a chronograph dial.
- Size and shape
Again, it's probably a matter of personal preference, but I would choose the 40mm Rolex over the 42mm Omega. I also prefer the lack of height in the Rolex - although again, the Omega is hardly huge.
- Using the chronograph
Both of these watches are rated to 100m, so I have to wonder if it is strictly necessary to include the screw-down pushers on the Daytona, but I suppose, back-in-the-day, the technicalities of achieving water resistance were more challenging, and these days, those pushers are part of the design heritage. From a functional point of view, both chronographs work in the same way - push at 2 to start and stop, push at 4 to reset. Both watches work with a crisp start/stop action and there is little to choose between them.
Quality
Probably more difficult to judge than almost anything else, but my overall impression is that the Rolex is better made. The case polishing, dial markers and bracelet all (to me) seem to be a step up. As always, it's small details but overall the Rolex wins (as you could expect from the price position).
Movement quality is more difficult for me to judge, as I am far from an expert. In the end, I would expect them both to be reliable and have a long life. Certainly, both of my examples are extremely accurate - the Omega lives up to its chronometer spec and the Rolex seems to be almost bang on since I have owned it.
One area where the Omega is definitely more pleasing is the rear view:
Wearing Comfort
Both watches are a good fit on my wrist and neither could be described as uncomfortable. Overall, I prefer the size of the Daytona, but there's not a lot in it:
Value
Outside of watch-obsessives, neither of these watches would ever be described as good value! However, in the case of these two, both seem to be set up to hold their value quite well. I bought the Speedy as NOS and I would easily get my money back, and we all know the current situation of the Daytona. In the long-run, these are both 'safe' purchases and in that sense, offer good value.
Conclusion
As stated at the beginning, there is no winner or loser. Today, I would always choose the Daytona - trading a bit of clarity for the convenience of the automatic movement and smaller case, but if, for some reason, I had to sacrifice it and keep the Speedy, I could barely claim hardship.
Richard
- Amor Vincit Omnia
- Moderator
- Posts: 33795
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:34 pm
- CW-watches: 4
- Location: Norfolk, UK
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
That was a thoroughly entertaining and largely very objective review, Richard, with the addition of some outstanding photographs as usual.
I have never so much as handled a Daytona, so it would be asinine on my part to pass any judgement whatsoever. Let’s say that these are two superb chronographs and that I am very happy to own a Speedy.
Well done - brilliant post.
I have never so much as handled a Daytona, so it would be asinine on my part to pass any judgement whatsoever. Let’s say that these are two superb chronographs and that I am very happy to own a Speedy.
Well done - brilliant post.
Steve
Linguist; retired teacher; pilgrim; apprentice travel writer
Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints, kill nothing but time
Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. (Max Ehrmann)
Linguist; retired teacher; pilgrim; apprentice travel writer
Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints, kill nothing but time
Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. (Max Ehrmann)
- gaf1958
- Trusted Seller
- Posts: 12431
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:24 am
- CW-watches: 24
- Location: ɐᴉlɐɹʇsn∀ 'ʇsɐoƆ ǝuᴉɥsunS
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Interesting comparison Richard - thanks for posting it. Without owning the Daytona myself, I think I'd agree with many of your observations and disagree with none of them... You're a fortunate man owning both of those lovely watches.
CW C1+2xC3+6xC6/60K+C7+C11+3xC60T+2xC65+C90+2xC600
Omega Ω 11xSpeedy+14xSeamaster+4xConnie+DeVille
Cartier+2xPanerai+2xFarer+2xOris+Sinn+11xSeiko+ManyVintage
B&R+Halios+5xVisitor+TagH+6xTissot+2xZelos+4xCertina+more
Family12xCW+2xΩ+Cartier
Omega Ω 11xSpeedy+14xSeamaster+4xConnie+DeVille
Cartier+2xPanerai+2xFarer+2xOris+Sinn+11xSeiko+ManyVintage
B&R+Halios+5xVisitor+TagH+6xTissot+2xZelos+4xCertina+more
Family12xCW+2xΩ+Cartier
- Kip
- The Administrator
- Posts: 35173
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:45 pm
- CW-watches: 150
- LE-one: yes
- LE-two: yes
- LE-three: yes
- LE-foura: yes
- LE-fourb: yes
- LE-five: yes
- LE-six: yes
- LESeven: yes
- Location: New Hampshire, USA
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Excellent read Richard. Thank you.
Not owning a Daytona, but having handled a few, and having confidence that you did your very best to be objective, I do wonder about this...
Not owning a Daytona, but having handled a few, and having confidence that you did your very best to be objective, I do wonder about this...
if you didn't know the price difference, would your conclusion be the same?Quality
Probably more difficult to judge than almost anything else, but my overall impression is that the Rolex is better made. The case polishing, dial markers and bracelet all (to me) seem to be a step up. As always, it's small details but overall the Rolex wins (as you could expect from the price position).
Kip
"Asylum Administrator"
Visit the CWArchives for everything CW. Historical, specs, manuals and resale. It is all there.
"Asylum Administrator"
Visit the CWArchives for everything CW. Historical, specs, manuals and resale. It is all there.
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Very interesting comparison. I didn't know about the asymmetric case of the Rolex.
I like both, but I'd take the Omega.
I like both, but I'd take the Omega.
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Excellent review and comparison Richard.
Probably worth pointing out, for those that don't realise, that your Speedy is not the standard 50m WR, solid caseback, hesalite crystal Moonwatch.
I agree with your observations. Yes the Daytona is a recent addition, but I don't think you are viewing it with rose tinted spectacles, as I would venture to say that once you have had it a couple of years, you may well switch your view a bit more in the direction of the Daytona.
The one point that you didn't do a specific comparison of were the bracelets, where I think the Daytona wins hands down.
Oh and if you think a white dial Daytona's legibility is compromised, best not think about adding the black dial version where legibility is worse than the white.
Neil
Probably worth pointing out, for those that don't realise, that your Speedy is not the standard 50m WR, solid caseback, hesalite crystal Moonwatch.
I agree with your observations. Yes the Daytona is a recent addition, but I don't think you are viewing it with rose tinted spectacles, as I would venture to say that once you have had it a couple of years, you may well switch your view a bit more in the direction of the Daytona.
The one point that you didn't do a specific comparison of were the bracelets, where I think the Daytona wins hands down.
Oh and if you think a white dial Daytona's legibility is compromised, best not think about adding the black dial version where legibility is worse than the white.
Neil
Other watch forums of interest:
TZ-UK
TZ-UK
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
I found that very interesting reading Richard, Many thanks
Mark
- welshlad
- Moderator
- Posts: 11301
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:33 am
- CW-watches: 27
- Location: Yorkshire, UK
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
A great read, Richard. And very relevant to me as someone who has a Moonwatch and has been considering a Daytona (and others) as a complementary white dialled chronograph to go alongside it.
I’ve been trying to talk myself out of the Daytona, partly because I’d have to sell a lot of other watches to fund it, but every time I see your pictures or read your comments on it I do have to concede to myself that this is the white chronograph that I find most compelling. As well as the overall design and little details, it’s the slimness that I really like - a feature that is really hard to find in mechanical chronographs generally.
So plenty more food for thought - mostly in terms of which watches I would be happy to sell to get one of these!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I’ve been trying to talk myself out of the Daytona, partly because I’d have to sell a lot of other watches to fund it, but every time I see your pictures or read your comments on it I do have to concede to myself that this is the white chronograph that I find most compelling. As well as the overall design and little details, it’s the slimness that I really like - a feature that is really hard to find in mechanical chronographs generally.
So plenty more food for thought - mostly in terms of which watches I would be happy to sell to get one of these!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future. - Niels Bohr
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Interesting question, Kip - although almost impossible to answer.Kip wrote:
if you didn't know the price difference, would your conclusion be the same?
I like to think I can see and feel the differences but of course my opinion is compromised by my prior knowledge. Superficially, there is probably not much in it, but perhaps (and also mentioned by Neil) the bracelet provides the biggest clue. The Rolex bracelet is both narrower and thinner, but feels more substantial, and the clasp and easy-link are far better.
From a material richness point of view, the shiny markers on the Daytona make it look more expensive and perhaps the crown/pusher action is more refined, but as said, there's not a lot in it.
Richard
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
I have been through the exact same process - trying to talk myself out of it, but unable to ignore the fact it is a nicely slim automatic white dialled chronograph that is a safe buy... and then wondering what to sell to pay for it. So far, and having sold some great watches, I have no regrets.welshlad wrote: I’ve been trying to talk myself out of the Daytona, partly because I’d have to sell a lot of other watches to fund it, but every time I see your pictures or read your comments on it I do have to concede to myself that this is the white chronograph that I find most compelling. As well as the overall design and little details, it’s the slimness that I really like - a feature that is really hard to find in mechanical chronographs generally.
So plenty more food for thought - mostly in terms of which watches I would be happy to sell to get one of these!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Richard
- Thegreyman
- Trusted Seller
- Posts: 12066
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 3:45 pm
- CW-watches: 6
- Location: Edinburgh
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Interesting to read your comparison of these two great watches.
I've always liked the Moonwatch, although I did try one on very briefly a year or so ago and wasn't sure where it was for me. I think I need to try one on again. It's just such an iconic watch and your 50th Anniversary has the lovely display case back.
Being lucky enough to get my first Rolex this year I'd agree about the quality feel of their watches, and the bracelet has a lovely weight about it. The only thing I'd question about the Daytona is the protrusion of the crown guards, crown and pushers from the case which, to me, from the photos looks slightly more than I'd like, albeit I haven't tried one in the metal and the slimness of the case is a big plus.
Anyway two brilliant watches, enjoy them
I've always liked the Moonwatch, although I did try one on very briefly a year or so ago and wasn't sure where it was for me. I think I need to try one on again. It's just such an iconic watch and your 50th Anniversary has the lovely display case back.
Being lucky enough to get my first Rolex this year I'd agree about the quality feel of their watches, and the bracelet has a lovely weight about it. The only thing I'd question about the Daytona is the protrusion of the crown guards, crown and pushers from the case which, to me, from the photos looks slightly more than I'd like, albeit I haven't tried one in the metal and the slimness of the case is a big plus.
Anyway two brilliant watches, enjoy them
Patrick
C60 Pro 300, C60 Sunrise, C63 Sealander Lucerne blue LE, C65 Dartmouth, W11 Amelia (wife), C63 Sealander (son)
Some others + a few on the way
C60 Pro 300, C60 Sunrise, C63 Sealander Lucerne blue LE, C65 Dartmouth, W11 Amelia (wife), C63 Sealander (son)
Some others + a few on the way
- tikkathree
- Trusted Seller
- Posts: 7363
- Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:21 am
- CW-watches: 1
- Location: East Anglia - arr 'aas right buh
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
atnits wrote:Very interesting comparison. I didn't know about the asymmetric case of the Rolex.
I like both, but I'd take the Omega.
And, whilst I agree, something labelled my "contrariness gene" would send me reaching for the Rolex partly because I've never had the slightest interest in the brand and also because I'm sure I read once that the Speedie is something like "the world's most popular watch".
There's something about not wearing the same watch as every other American or Asian tourist in Cambridge which makes me feel good about microbrands in which category I include Christopher Ward.
Lovely watches both of them, nice to read a review which is shamelessly subjective and does not claim technical objectivity which then turns out to be a re-hash of each brand's own marketing hyperbole. Thank you.
C60 MKI, MKII, MKIII: "some",
C6 & C60 Kingfishers,
C600 Tritechs,
C63 "some",
C65 "some",
C4, C40, C8, C9, C3, C5, C20 & 23FLE
Some other brands
C6 & C60 Kingfishers,
C600 Tritechs,
C63 "some",
C65 "some",
C4, C40, C8, C9, C3, C5, C20 & 23FLE
Some other brands
- scooter
- Trusted Seller
- Posts: 15249
- Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:14 pm
- CW-watches: 1
- LE-two: yes
- LE-foura: yes
- Location: UK
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
I found that an enjoyable read and very well written.
Two iconic watches and quite different in my opinion.
If push came to shove and my life depended upon it I would choose.....
...either.
scooter
Two iconic watches and quite different in my opinion.
If push came to shove and my life depended upon it I would choose.....
...either.
scooter
#1 scooter blue 2012 FLE (50 made)
- Thermexman
- Trusted Seller
- Posts: 6225
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:40 am
- CW-watches: 4
- Location: South West UK
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Enjoyable read and great photos, thanks.
Steve.
-
- Senior Forumgod
- Posts: 4110
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:50 pm
- CW-watches: 2
- Location: Hampshire, UK
Re: Chronograph comparison - Daytona and Speedmaster
Interestingly, I count myself as quite the contrarian. I think it's why I enjoy my red/white/blue speedy so much, because it's considerably different to the normal most popular watchtikkathree wrote:atnits wrote:Very interesting comparison. I didn't know about the asymmetric case of the Rolex.
I like both, but I'd take the Omega.
And, whilst I agree, something labelled my "contrariness gene" would send me reaching for the Rolex partly because I've never had the slightest interest in the brand and also because I'm sure I read once that the Speedie is something like "the world's most popular watch".
There's something about not wearing the same watch as every other American or Asian tourist in Cambridge which makes me feel good about microbrands in which category I include Christopher Ward.
Lovely watches both of them, nice to read a review which is shamelessly subjective and does not claim technical objectivity which then turns out to be a re-hash of each brand's own marketing hyperbole. Thank you.
I really enjoyed this comparison. I'd love a Daytona in the box too and aspire to purchase one in the next 5 or 10 years. Simply beautiful watches!
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 8 Replies
- 297 Views
-
Last post by Amor Vincit Omnia
-
- 16 Replies
- 564 Views
-
Last post by MiniMpi
-
- 10 Replies
- 669 Views
-
Last post by JasperCat
-
- 20 Replies
- 1011 Views
-
Last post by mikes