A Hands-On Comparison of the Omega Speedmaster Black and White, White Dial, and Classic Moonwatch
There are certain “easy wins” with watch enthusiasts that brands rely on. Put a line of red text on a black dial diver, and you’ll get some smiles. Add a micro-adjust to your clasp, and you’ll avoid some angry emails. Drill your lugs, and… well, I at least will be excited. And when it comes to chronographs, a sure-fire way to get some attention is to invert your sub-dials. Yep, though it has been done countless times, “panda” dials still get the thumbs-up from us nerds.
So, it was no surprise that the recently released “Black and White” Speedmasters (which, to those of us from NYC, brings to mind a certain iconic cookie before a watch dial) were received with much excitement. Take one of the most celebrated watches in production, give it a dial treatment that is hard to mess up, and, unsurprisingly, you have a hit. Well done, Omega.
Yeah, the Speedmaster Black and White is very nice looking
To make matters more exciting, despite the many, many, many versions of Speedmasters over the years, Pandas are not common among them. I’m no Speedy scholar, so my internal reference archive isn’t complete, but having been the occasional Speedy customer, I know that pandas were few and far between, usually limited, or precious metal, and rarely a “reverse” or “evil” panda (white sub-dial on a black surface) in form. That this new model is available in steel and not limited actually makes them special, by not being special.
The dilemma, if you can call it that, is that should you be in the market today for a new, steel Speedmaster Professional, you’d have your choice of not one, but three rather appealing, in-stock choices (and then there are like the 500 other versions too). There’s the iconic Speedmaster Moonwatch Professional. The evergreen. The “true” Speedy. Updated to an impressive modern spec with a co-axial, master chronometer-certified 3861 caliber in 2021, it mixes provenance with vintage charm and modern build. Then, there’s the White Dial model (this needs a nickname), which debuted in 2024. Crisp, white, and unexpected, it’s the logical counterpart to the Moonwatch and brings a modern edge to the mid-century design. And now, finally, there’s the “Black and White,” to split the difference, sort of. So, which to choose?
Decisions, Decisions
Let’s get the obvious out of the way: the cases are the same…nearly. As they are all Professional models, they share the distinct, asymmetrical, if-you-didn’t-love-it-you-wouldn’t-be-reading-this 42mm case design. The only difference is that the White Dial (WD) and Black and White (B&W) models are only available with sapphire crystals and display case backs, while the Moonwatch is also available with a Hesalite (acrylic) crystal and a solid caseback. Similarly, the bracelets are nearly the same. They all feature the improved 2021 design, now with a micro-adjust clasp that adds only 2.5mm of room to play (not impressed). The difference here is that sapphire models have polished links on either side of the center links, while the Hesalite models are all brushed. Finally, all feature the 3861 caliber. No surprises.
What separates these models is all dial side, and while one could say that makes the differences aesthetic, there are some practical implications as well. First, let’s look at the dial surfaces and construction. The Moonwatch features a one-piece matte-black dial with printed indices and pad-printed lume. It’s high contrast, though lacks appliques and thus some depth. To make up for this, as of 2021, the dials feature a pronounced “step,” creating a clearer pie-pan shape, a beloved detail of earlier Speedmasters. Additionally, the sub-dials are deeply stamped in with wide bevels for a smooth transition between surfaces. All of the hands on the Moonwatch are matte white, maintaining high contrast. Lastly, the bezel insert is aluminum, keeping with classic Speedy aesthetics.
The WD model is also a single-piece design and features the same stamped shape as the Moonwatch, but is finished in high-gloss white lacquer. Indexes are printed in black, but where there was pad-printed lume, there are now thin, applied black markers with small embedded lume plots. They maintain contrast at the expense of lume, while adding dimensionality and a more modern look. All text is printed in black, save “Speedmaster,” which is red. A little sporty, a little cheeky, it adds personality. The hands on the WD are all gloss black for contrast, though the tip of the seconds is red. The bezel insert of the WD is also aluminum.
Things are different on the B&W. The dial is two-layered, with a top surface in gloss black and a bottom surface in gloss white, visible through straight-cut holes. While it adds depth, it loses the beveled form of the other two models. Interestingly, the inside wall of the cutout is rhodium-plated, giving it a mirror finish. This is difficult to see (I only looked for it after reading that they were there in the product description), so it doesn’t add much to the dial, though it likely cleans up the edge of the cut.
Rhodium frames
While the top layer is pie-pan shaped, the step’s sharp lip is less pronounced. It’s hard to tell if that’s because it’s smaller, the lacquer is rounding it out, or if the shadow of the lip is just less perceivable against the gloss black. Logically, all print on the black surface is white, and all print on the white sub-dials is black. The applied markers, which appear to be the same shape as those on the WD, are rendered in polished rhodium, as are all of the hands, effectively giving them a mirror finish. Lastly, the bezel insert is black ceramic with white fill.
So, that’s the visual breakdown, but what does it mean? You can think of these three watches as a spectrum from utilitarian to luxe. Sure, it’s only three watches, but the point is still true. On the utilitarian side is the Moonwatch. It’s highly legible, relatively matte, and features the most lume. The all-black dial is purposeful, with limited distractions, though it is not without visual interest thanks to dimensionality. It still has a bit of tool watch charm to it.
The WD is in the middle. It’s high contrast, so legibility in light is not an issue, but there’s a lot less lume on the dial itself. That said, for time-telling in the dark, the lume in the hands is likely sufficient. Because the white surface, hands, and markers are polished, the dial is very shiny, especially at an angle. Combined with the purity of the white, the darkness of the black markers, and the sharpness of the edges, it comes across as if it were synthetic or crafted from ceramics (it reminds me of the Björk music video for All Is Full of Love). This isn’t a negative; actually, the opposite. It feels incredibly modern, but not in a way that betrays the essence of the Speedy. It also makes it feel a little more high-end, which was likely the goal. Ultimately, the WD remains sporty, but leans more into luxury.
The White Dial holds its own
As you guessed, the B&W is then the most luxe. It sacrifices legibility for a touch of decadence. The polished markers can reflect black, disappearing into the dial. The hour and minute hands disappear to a lesser extent, as their lume still stands out. The sub-dial hands are a bit of an issue, though. They are very small, and though they can appear black at angles, they can also appear white, vanishing entirely in the surface below.
The gloss of the dial is more pronounced on the B&W than on the WD, which is further emphasized by the ceramic bezel. Where this made the WD feel more modern, the B&W actually reads more vintage, like it predates the Moonwatch. It reminds me a bit of Daytona 6263s or Carrera 2447 NSTs, both of which had a dressy charm in addition to a sporty style.
The ceramic bezel, I can take or leave. At a glance, it doesn’t look that different, but up close you can see that the typography and hash marks are thicker than on the aluminum, and it has a different sheen all around. The white fill isn’t lumed, for those wondering. It just doesn’t add anything substantial beyond a spec on a checklist, while the aluminum is true to the Moonwatch, if that matters.
A sight one could easily get used to
What this all boils down to is that B&W leans the furthest into luxury trappings at the expense of some functionality. Black sub-dial hands would have made a significant difference by addressing legibility and bringing back a touch of sportiness. With that said, I am being picky, and it still looks great. If style is the driving factor, which is understandable, the B&W definitely delivers.
Back to the premise that you’re shopping for a new Speedmaster in 2026… If you’re looking for the true Speedmaster experience, there was only ever the Moonwatch as a choice. This is logical for first-time Speedy owners, and returning Speedy owners who want the classic look and the heritage it brings. The WD and B&W are for the oddballs and Speedy-experienced.
If what you want is a sporty, modern chronograph, the WD is the right choice. It’s clean, aggressive, and just different enough. If you’re looking for something a little dressier, more classic-chrono in styling, and a touch blingier, the B&W gets the job done. Or, if you already have both of the others, as I am sure some people do. There really isn’t a wrong choice, per se. But, there is also one more thing to consider: the price.
Why choose just one?
At the time of writing, Speedmasters are priced as follows on bracelets: the Hesalite Moonwatch is $7,800, the sapphire Moonwatch is $9,000, the WD is $9,100, and the Black and White is $10,400. All steel, all with the same movement. If the playing field were level, I’d say the choice was more difficult, but I don’t think the B&W can justify the price difference.
I’d get a couple hundred, maybe, as the dial construction is more complicated and the bezel is ceramic, but considering Speedmasters in general have gone up in price so much over the years, I kind of doubt those add significantly to the manufacturing price, considering Omega’s volume and verticality. Plus, there are other options, like the Speedmaster FOIS released in 2024, which comes in at $8,900 and offers a greater departure from the classic Moonwatch in styling (I just wish the lume wasn’t so dark on it).
In the end, you can’t beat the original
To end on a positive and personal note, spending time with Speedmasters again reminded me of just how great they are. I’ve owned two 42mm Speedmasters, a 3592, which was the first serially produced Speedy with a display case back, and the “broad arrow” 3594. I had to let go of the 3592 for the funds. The 3594, I enjoyed it a lot, especially for the brushed steel bezel, but because of the reflective hands, which would often disappear against the dial; it sort of felt like a large two-hander. Once that idea took root, I couldn’t shake it and had to let it go. It’s been several years, and this exercise has convinced me that I need a Speedmaster back in my collection. The WD is very tempting, but the classic Moonwatch is truly timeless. It’s a design that doesn’t age. It looks good from every angle, with any outfit, and on any strap. And it wears just so damn well. Off to the forums I go. Omega
The post A Hands-On Comparison of the Omega Speedmaster Black and White, White Dial, and Classic Moonwatch appeared first on Worn & Wound.
from Worn & Wound https://ift.tt/G9CT7Vr
Comments
Post a Comment