15-12-2012, 10:47 PM
willy Skrev:Hi John i remember reading somewhere that Rolex were very pressed for time in trying to develop a NAS watch . And if my memory is not failing , they were not given enough time or warning compaired to Omega . Not that it matters much because in my book any Chronograph is a weaker watch than your basic time and date . And therefore cannot qualify as best all round watch .Not correct memoryWilly
Of course a chronograph is weaker than a basic watch - much weaker - but all tested watches were chronos.Omega changed nothing to the speedmaster, to live up to Nasa requirements.
I am 100% sure, Rolex to day, given the chance - could deliver a hersalit version of daytona and get it certified, but when the chance was there, only Speedmaster passed.
It was a strike of luck, combined with a good watch, and Omega has benifitted from it - which is fair enough - but of course not making them the only good chronograph producer
If it helps you to sleep <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> , I am have no doubt that a new Rolex oystercased Sub is MUCH much stronger than any speedmaster ever build
I would however not swap my 105.003 or 145.012 for a Rolex - anyway not for any other reason than a 5513 or whatever, being higher priced
br
Mvh. John - Glad for ure og frisk på lidt iværksætterråd.
Besøg min blog med gode råd til iværksættere!
Besøg min blog om ure!
Besøg min blog med gode råd til iværksættere!
Besøg min blog om ure!

![[-]](https://urdebatten.dk/images/collapse.png)