Review: Omega Constellation (the one nobody wants)

So, here's another review from me. The watch in question is the not so much talked about Constellation Manhattan.

The specimen in my possession is the reference number 123.10.35.20.01.001 (links to Omega website) which is a (relatively recently) discontinued watch but they make similar models still. Some specifications:

• Lug‑to‑lug: 38.4 mm (43 mm if we count rigid end-links)

• Thickness: 10.8 mm (includes a domed crystal)

• Case diameter: 35 mm (give or take, depending where you measure)

• Water resistance: 10 bar (push-in crown, if you must know 😉)

• Weight: 142 g (it weighs as much as my two-tone Datejust, for reference)

• Bracelet:

  • 23 mm at case to 18 mm at clasp

  • Link length 9 mm, one 2/3 link at 6 mm is included

  • Link thickness 3.5 mm

  • Dual trigger butterfly at 43 mm long

  • Pin and collar assembly with polished connector links

• Movement (Omega Co-Axial 2500D): 3.5 Hz, 48 h power reserve and based on the 2892-A2 (but it's modified alright...)

Okay so those are the cold hard facts. But a watch is more than the sum of its parts. So how does it feel as a completed product? I hear it's popular in Asia (but I wouldn't know), in the "West" I have seen exactly one on the wrist of someone... and that was on the wrist of a sales at a large jewellery shop (who also had Omega).

On the other hand this watch, or rather its template, was designed in the early 1980s by a lady called Carol Didisheim. It was not Mr G. it is not inspired by a porthole but rather bathroom mirrors. She says it was an observation by a colleague that inspired her but I have my own theory as to when she came up with the design ... they didn't have iPhones back then 😮. Anyway, the original case construction was quite different to how it's assembled today (see here for a bit of background), Omega has kept the design around for 40y now... so it can't be that bad... or can it? Here is what I think after owning the watch for a while.

The Case and bracelet quality

Since the case and bracelet are kind of the selling point here this is an important aspect. The watch is well put together and finished quite well. The tolerances between are pretty damn good for pin and collar links. I don't mind it here because it makes the bracelet look very clean, I don't think it's cost cutting but a design choice which I approve of in this instance. Articulation is good, you get around 90 degrees

The bracelet uses a dual trigger butterfly (for the record I generally like butterfly clasps) which is neatly covered and is decorated with a gold Omega logo (I believe actual gold).

And while I do like the clean looks, the execution here is EASILY the single biggest problem of this watch and it's so bad that I'd recommend you don't buy this watch of that reason alone. See, the folding piece is quite long at 43 mm and yet it only provides 38 mm of extension for your hand to get through because the part so neatly covered by the gold logo is dead space. Pair that with the long and thick links and you get a span of 50 mm

50 mm huh, that's not so bad. I agree, that's why I am not done yet. See the links are not only quite thick (which to their credit balances the watch head extremely well) but also rather long at 9 mm (almost as long as oyster links). Given how there's only one smaller link so you can't swap 2 big ones for 3 small ones and get more flexibility at the bottom (I guess you could buy them though), the bracelet cannot wrap around the edges of the excessively long folding piece and the actual span at the bottom is more like 55 mm... which is massive when the watch is 35 mm. Nomos gets hate for long lugs but their 35 mm watch has 45 mm lugs, this is half a centimetre worse, if we're generous! And also, because it isn't bad enough, the clasp has some sharp/rough unfinished edges. The only part to have so, no such sharp or nasty edges anywhere else. And because that still isn't bad enough, one swing arm has ceramic balls that help closing the clasp and mean it stays tight by the bi that is held shut by the triggers has somewhat loose tolerances (but at this point who's even keeping score). Edit: it is not quite as bad as with Tudor's abysmal end link, so if you can live with that you'll be alright.

As far as "wearability" (a measure for how small it is?) is concerned, if your wrist is small like mine, it won't fit you because it's too big at the bottom. If your wrist is big it won't fit you because it's too small at the top. It fits nobody the right way. If you have a bigger wrist, you can get a bigger one with the newer movements, which is great. But those have worse water resistance...

The Dial

The dial is nice, I especially like how well the day window is integrated. the movement is the perfect size for the opening as evidence by the placement of the window which is even slightly curved at its sides to follow the curvature of the dial. The finishing on the indexes is good. They are sharply cut but there are marks visible under magnification. Not up to GS standards (more like Rolex).

The movement

The movement is an Omega 2500, which is an ETA 2892-A2 that was turned into an Omega 1120 and then equipped with a Co-Axial escapement and a variable inertia balance wheel. The original Constellation in the 80s came with a 2892, so in that sense it's cool. But this movement, unlike the newer 8800 and 8500/8900 was not designed around the escapement. The 2500 comes in 4 versions. Those are A, B, C and D. The first one was terrible, as you can expect. It is quite rare now. The B was better but had issues still, in the C variant the beat was dropped and the balance got a tad bigger I believe. The D version, as found in this watch, got the 3-level Co-Axial I believe which is similar to the new ones. Still, I don't really trust it and I would prefer the 1120 or the 8800. It's pretty and you get to see it at the expense of a caseback medallion 😠.

The bridges are decorated but below it isn't. I don't like that. the rotor, as with most 2892 based watches is noisy. The accuracy is decent, just about in spec at +6 seconds a day or so. On the plus side, although the 2500 is thicker than the 1120 and this watch is thicker than its 1120 equipped predecessors, it's not very thick at just under 11 mm and has a nice profile overall.

The Design

The looks of this one won't be for everyone. Some might call it "feminine", fair enough it was designed by a lady, which I don't mind. I quite prefer it over Mr G's designs. It is also old and in continuous production, so not one of those that are trying to capitalise on current trends by means of revival (like the Tissot PRX), if that means something to you. I bought it because I like how it looks, although I wanted the one with the 1120 movement but couldn't find it in good enough condition. that one also has a very small clasp so that would sort of solve all my issues

So what am I going to do, I will probably get rid of it eventually because of of the bulk at the bottom and it competes with this:

The style in my opinion works well with "nice" clothing but not so much with baggy jeans or sweatpants... although maybe you can pull it off. I don't judge. Same with the Rolex in the above image, it's very shiny with the lacquer dial and all the polished surfaces... although the clasp could also be shorter to tell you the truth 😉.

Will I get the older one which I actually want, probably not because I also have an older Oyster Perpetual Date and I'm pretty sure it would compete with that one (and probably get the short end of the stick again)

Well, I guess in this comparison the Rolex does beat the Omega then... I should probably do a review of these Rolex watches too. They are very nice in my opinion, I like them over the Datejusts. I might if you found this one interesting or helpful.

The Price

This is arguably the best part about it. The discounts that can be had on the grey market. These are priced closer to a Christopher Ward Twelve than they are to a IWC Ingenieur or Girard Perregaux Laureato. Make of that what you want 😉🍻