Hey! How's That Work? | OMEGA Co-Axial | Crown & Caliber

The OMEGA Co-Axial... what the heck is it? Luca, Actual Watch Technician, takes one of the most significant advancements in mechanical timekeeping and shows you just how it works and what makes it so special.
00:00-00:47 - Intro
00:47-02:53 - Swiss Lever Inefficiencies | ANIMATION
02:54-04:20 - What is a Co-Axial Escapement? | ANIMATION
04:21-05:26 - What are the Improvements? | ANIMATION
05:27-06:06 - What are the Benefits?
06:07-06:23 - Hot Take!
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
How a Watch Works: • How a Watch Works 101 ...
The Case for Quartz: • The Case for the Quart...
To shop all watches: www.crownandcaliber.com/colle...
To sell your watch: www.crownandcaliber.com/pages...
For more on buying a watch from Crown & Caliber visit: www.crownandcaliber.com/pages...
To get more content like this and updates on new arrivals, sign up for our newsletter: info.crownandcaliber.com/news...

[@chrismcglynn642]

Whoever is co-ordinating Crown & Caliber's youtube content is doing a great job. Such a different vibe to other watch-focused youtube channels, with great presenters - and different watches than the same old same old we see elsewhere!

[@heyimluca1275]

Thank you Chris!

[@uncleebenezer4691]

It reminds me of Donut Media for watches. Not as flashy bangy but still gives those same fun, informative vibes.

[@OPMDK]

@@heyimluca1275 Love your videos Luca; since everyone seems to love Tudor these days perhaps a future video could explain the technologies required for them to produce a METAS certified movement that competes with the now “old” coax

[@richardnedbalek1968]

Thanks, Luca! Like your casual, informative style with graphics. 👍😁

[@OPMDK]

Luca, you’re perhaps the only redeem label quality of Crown & Calibre; keep making videos sir

[@lukemiller3221]

Fantastic video and explanation. Thanks Crown & Caliber!

[@hybro8]

It's actually an incredibly simple design concept, I wonder why this didn't come around a lot sooner.

[@warmshinediamond]

I finally understand what is Co-axial! Thank you!

[@warusk2nd]

Thanks Luca! Great explanation! You guys are making great content, keep it up! Maybe a future video idea would be to explain Seikos dual impulse and compare to Swiss lever, and co-axial.

[@heyimluca1275]

Thank you Billy! This is a great idea!

[@rsrs8632]

And now we have seiko's dual impulse escapement. Technology is moving fast.

[@heyimluca1275]

It's an exciting time to be alive!

[@bngs1983]

Brilliant explanation.

[@golfnaked]

Actually Roger W. Smith watches also have the co-axial escapement, not just Omega. He was George Daniels assistant for years.

[@heyimluca1275]

You are absolutely right, thank you for pointing that out!

[@BeckVMH]

Was there an agreement with Omega and Daniels to continue use of the co-axial? I’ve done a quick web search, but don’t see that question addressed.

[@user-ik5mn8qv5z]

roger smith owns half of the patent of the first edition of co-axial movement (2 layers) omega owns whole patent on the later 3 layer co-axial movement. Thats why RWS uses the older version of the co-axial movement and not the newer one.

[@Watchmade]

Great video and information. Thanks Luca!

[@Alex-zr4yl]

Hmmm the final statement about co-axial being the only innovation over the past 250 years is a bit of a long shot. There’s Seiko spring drive, Seiko dual impulse, Audemars piguet escapement, the latest frederique constant silicon escapement, gp constant force. And that’s just off the top of my head.

[@heyimluca1275]

Haha you are absolutely right Alessandro, I might've gotten a tad excited. Though to be fair, I'd say the Co Axial had a much greater impact on the watchmaking world as a whole

[@Alex-zr4yl]

@@heyimluca1275 that’s true! Omega believed in co-axial and is actually lately just adopting it across references

[@MrCROBosanceros]

The Seiko's spring drive is not an entirely mechanical movement, Co-Axial movement is 100% mechanical movement.

[@10thMorales]

TAG Heuer’s Mikrogirder-a linear oscillator with 7,200,000 bph (1,000 hz). A regular slow-beat watch only does 18,000 bph (2.5 hz).👍

[@joshbentz9846]

LoL that's what he meant the only besides all of those

[@matteodifra]

I own an omega Speedmaster Moonphase and never understood the coaxial...finally I got it! Thank you

[@watchmaster968]

Correct Coaxial & Grand Seiko Spring Drive are the major advancements. Amazing how others turned the Coaxial movement down. Well done Omega for taking it on.

[@MrCROBosanceros]

Seiko's spring drive movement is not a mechanical movement.

[@watchmaster968]

@@MrCROBosanceros 🤡😩 Yes it is combined with a quartz movement. 🤦🏼‍♂️

[@watchmaster968]

@@MrCROBosanceros Spring Drive combines the precision of a quartz watch with the torque of a mechanical watch

[@MrCROBosanceros]

@@watchmaster968 It's not entirely mechanical movement!

[@watchmaster968]

@@MrCROBosanceros I’ve already explained this 🤦🏼‍♂️

[@brianwest1501]

Good job!! Thanks! I have the 8800.

[@rickfanning5647]

Thanks. That was brilliant. You made a very technical concept easy to understand.

[@heyimluca1275]

Hey thanks Rick, I'm glad you enjoyed it. Stay tuned, there's more to come!

[@andreaiacolina]

Great series, well done Luca!

[@heyimluca1275]

Hey thanks Andrea!

[@andrewsloan4228]

Cheers Luca

[@watchreviews4k]

Interesting video. Regards.

[@12w3w21]

Luca, nice video. Clear and concise. However what about Seiko’s spring drive? Isn’t it another movement type altogether?

[@heyimluca1275]

Thank you Mohan! Yes you're right it is another type of movement, though it's not entirely mechanical so it's a bit of a gray area. If you'd like to learn more we actually did our last episode on the spring drive kzbin.info/www/bejne/mmHMc5Wch5Woeac

[@MrCROBosanceros]

@@heyimluca1275 Exactly, it's not entirely mechanical movement.

[@738polarbear]

I cannot understand how the genius George Daniels had so much trouble getting his MASTERPIECE CO AXIAL movement to the market. I can only think the watchmakers were jealous and would not admit to its engineering flawlessness. Thank God Omega saw it . I will never be able to afford one but it does not stop me appreciating it. .

[@BeckVMH]

I’ve always wondered the same and tend to agree, the others were to proud to admit someone else had a better idea. Good for Omega and watch enthusiasts.

[@MrCROBosanceros]

If it wasn't for the original Swiss movement, George Daniel would most likely never come up with that idea. It was an improvement.

[@gentelmenschannel5028]

You also have the Grand Seiko‘s Dual Impulse escapement now beside Omega’s Co-Axiel escapement.

[@tupaclives96]

🔥🔥 🔥 video

[@ReadyAimFire_]

Benefits to a little problem (more friction) fixed by service of your watch every few years. At the cost of additional parts, more complicated movement, thicker movement, increased price and watchmakers must learn new mechanism. Im not sure its worth the hassle.

[@SoCalWatchReviews]

Great informative video!

[@heyimluca1275]

Why thank you friend!

[@jjp6975]

Merci ! J'ai tout compris! Quelle différence entre le calibre 2500 et 8500 Merci jac.

[@johnescobar5054]

Luca ATL baby!

[@jasonscott6171]

6:08 What about spring drive?

[@gerasimosmoschonas9537]

What's the service interval officially recommended by omega? My ad told me they still need to be serviced every 5-6 years which is the industry standard.

[@mannycalavera2335]

I have had one since 2014 and never serviced it. So that is 7 years. Still runs as accurate as the day I got it it seems. I plan to service it after 10 years (or if it accuracy should be outside of the tolerances).

[@kyunhoon775]

Im thinking about getting an omega with a 2500 cal. But i heard that 2500 cal is very unreliable compare to 8500 cal. What do u think?? I have owned an ETA 2892 movment, and it had power reserve disfunction issue, and i know that 2500 came from eta 2892,,, So, yes im a little worried lol. Thank you!

[@wiktorutracki6469]

Well Audemars Piguet also has its own escapement thats different and much better from the usual swiss solution. So im not sure about the 'only major advancement' part. I dont know of any other brands that have a unique escapement but there might be more.

[@tab3Gator]

Great video. Go Braves! #ForTheA

[@heyimluca1275]

Hey thanks Thomas, Go Braves!

[@Nalot56]

Only advancement in 200 years? Ever hear of Spring Drive?!

[@heyimluca1275]

Why yes, we did a video on it! kzbin.info/www/bejne/mmHMc5Wch5Woeac But yes I might have gotten a tad excited

[@Nalot56]

@@heyimluca1275 good video!!

[@mendipfox1650]

I’ve heard of that. That’s a mechanically powered quartz movement isn’t it? It’s a bit like the Lance Armstrong of watch calibres. I understand Grand Seiko have began to move away from electronic regulation (recent silver birch being a prime example) because the watch purists like a fully mechanical watch.

[@juanfelipemv]

But I like the Rubbing and the slapping !!

[@heyimluca1275]

;)

[@anthax1]

cool channel!

[@The0125johnny]

What about spring drive ?

[@livingdownunder29]

hi, I am thinking to buy Seamaster, but want to understand the major difference between Co-Axial and Co-Axial Master?

[@otobotrecords]

Co-Axial is Co-Axial. The Master you refer to is part of the term Master Chronometer. Master Chronometer designated watches are certified by METAS additionally to the COSC certification.

[@shawj]

"..if not the only major advance in watchmaking in 250 years" Zenith Oscillator: "Am I a joke to you?"

[@user-ik5mn8qv5z]

if your theory is the correct way to describe the co-axial escapement, then the duplex escapement is also a co-axial escapement. Is that correct?

[@bernardocourrege6283]

Is there any harm done if an automatic stops (power runs down) during a day/date change? For example, a Seiko skx, which takes 5 hours to complete the whole day/date change.

[@otobotrecords]

No harm done.

[@lukasz_zegarkowy]

Hi Luca. Thanks for another great video. Luca. All the best to you Luca. From Luca

[@heyimluca1275]

Hello Luca, thank you for watching. And for being Luca. Keep up the good work. To Luca, from Luca.

[@davemck1887]

Surely you mean The Daniels Coaxial Escapement? He gave it to Omega. Let's not steal the man's legacy from him.

[@ALL-il1sw]

Sold it to Omega. He put it to market for sale. Omega made the purchase

[@davemck1887]

@@ALL-il1sw I agree, I just think deleting George Daniels name is a crappy attempt to delete the man's achievement from the history book, it also seems a bit desperate on Omega's part, It seems a little like stolen glory. Maybe the use of both names would've been better.

[@carscigarsscotchnwatches5158]

Luca, thanks for the video and I want to say that anyone that brings learning about watch mechanics to others s doing a great service. However, I have some issues with the coax movement and some comments you made and just wanted to point them out. I want to add that I am a watch collector/fan of almost 30 years and am also an ME, having worked in machine design. But firstly, the coax escapement was originally designed as a low beat clock movement, not a high beat watch movement. Which is where problem one comes in. Remember why Omega had to reduce the beat of their watch down from 28.8k ? The intent by Daniels was to reduce the friction in the standard escapement that is true, but that was in a low beat movement. When you design an automotive engine to run at 2500 rpm, it will be much different than an engine that runs at 8000 rpm. Same goes for watches. The Omega master Chronometer designation is an internal one and it is a proof of quality for sure, but just because other companies don't have it doesn't mean omega and coax is superior. The standard chronometer-certification has a daily accuracy of +6/-4 seconds, The Omega master chrono improves it to 0/+5 seconds. Literally reducing the range by half. Impressive. The Rolex superlative designation brings with it a -2/+2 range which is also well beyond COSC and slightly better than Omega's range. So the accuracy argument of the coax is null. You claim that achieving the same accuracy with swiss lever escapement would be difficult, and Rolex did indeed do it and actually beat it. Lets talk Friction. The claim that it is frictionless and, thus, needs no oil is false. The oil is not added for sound deadening. I have talked to several watchmakers on this and they all said that the oil is indeed necessary. A Truly frictionless system will run forever, never losing energy. The coax escapement not only had an additional rotational/balance point, but it doubled the pallet gemstones, so it has spread the friction loss over more parts and surface area. If someone where to do a friction study over the whole of that escapement, it might be surprising to find that it likely produces a good bit of friction. It's not just the stones hitting the wheel that have friction. All rotating balance points have friction and you just nearly doubled the moving parts with the coax escapement. Maybe the whole of it has slightly less friction than the standard escapement, but not by a lot, I bet. I would love to see someone remove all oil with solvents from the coax and see what happens in a few years. I bet the outcome will not be a happy one. Simple is always more reliable and durable. The coax has just nearly doubled the parts of an escapement to do it's job. That is not robust, that is more things to go wrong. Any time you add parts to any mechanical device, you expect great gains. You are not getting that here. In fact, I am betting the movement as a whole is less reliable and durable than the standard eta movement. I am no watch repairman, but I know a little about dynamic forces and friction loss. I think that the coaxial system would be better off being run at a much slower rate than it currently is. I would have preferred to see it run at 14 to 20k, not 28.8k or even 25.5k is still to high. One of the few major advancements in watchmaking in the last 250 years? Outside of Omega, who cares? Coax has been around since 1980. Daniels went around offering it to the big houses, like Rolex, Breguet and Patek. He even attached his escapement to their movements to show them. They all turned him down. What did they know. I bet more than we know. How about the self winding rotor in a wrist watch? Patented by Wilsdorf. How about the use of ball bearings in the rotor(eterna)? How about screwdown crown and caseback for guaranteed waterproofness. How about the Cartier Santos, first real wristwatch made, not from clocks with straps added. How about the auto Helium escape valve co-developed by Doxa and Rolex. How about the GMT function, or the stop watch function? How about Grand seikos spring drive? If you had said that the spring drive is one of the greatest development of the last 200 years, I might have agreed. A truly hybrid marriage of mechanical and electrical. The 20th century was the hayday of wristwatch development. Omega needed to have something they called in house to reach a higher level of horology. This was more of a marketing decision than an engineering decision. In my opinion. I would never trade my SMP 300 pro with it's ETA 2892 movement from the 90's for the coax. Regards and with respect.

[@johnpatricklopez]

Omega can now do 0 to +2 using the same coaxial movement with their spirate system. My Seamaster 300 is often times doing 0spd which is quite impressive. I’m no expert though as I know nothing about mechanical watches engineering. I agree that lots of those are just marketing ploy, especially that master chronometer certification. I think it’s crap. Lots of brand new Omegas out there losing or gaining too much time within weeks after purchase so I find that METAS thing useless.

[@DavidRon]

The only major advancement to watch making? What about the Tri-synchro Regulator or the Dual Impulse Escapement? Both create less friction than Co-Axial escapement.

[@456MrPeople]

I don't think the dual impulse escapement creates less friction than the co-axial. Otherwise, we'd see it have better accuracy. The spring drive however is basically frictionless.

[@DavidRon]

@@456MrPeople GS movements exceed ISO chronometer spec. But increased friction doesn't decrease accuracy, increased friction decreases power reserve. 80 hours at 36k is better than any coaxial movement as far as I know.

[@456MrPeople]

Honestly, I see the future of mechanical movements in silicon. Look at Frederique Constant's 40 Hz silicon escapement in their Monolithic watches. It's a game changer.

[@mohnnadmercedes8246]

Very difficult to service

[@yehoshuacirt8645]

I don't think that Omega claims greater accuracy because of the coaxial. The greater accuracy is from other improvements like the silicon spring.

[@softmetals3702]

i have 3 omegas the 300 pro,and 2 po,8500 orange 45.5 and the chrono 600. out of all my watches i think like 65 of them other than the old bumpers the omega chrono po is the loudest watch i have. to the point that its on the chopping block i cant stand it ,other than the rotor being way too loud its a really fine bad ass piece

[@nolanreed7090]

This feels like Drunk History meets Tim and Eric.

[@heyimluca1275]

You sir, are a man of taste and class

[@nolanreed7090]

@@heyimluca1275 For your health!

[@InAMinMaths]

And 0:28 Roger Smith.

[@SevGW]

We like Luca

[@heyimluca1275]

I like you too Severin

[@265petsar]

OMEGA......THE BEST ENGINEERED WATCHES EVER.

[@coreyriggle]

The coaxial patent is expired. Anyone can make one.

[@glenns7501]

Ah but you forgot there is the Seiko Spring Drive which has zero friction and is a lot more accurate. It’s mechanical movement generates a very tiny electro magnetic charge which powers a regulator that keeps it extremely accurate. It’s 10X more accurate than a coaxial and on-par with a quartz. 40 years of development paid off.

[@rolandoruiz9801]

Keep the hat...Its always nice to be different....it suites you 😀 keep up the good work

[@heyimluca1275]

Hey thanks Rolando. You are a credit to the force

[@darkenblade986]

"only major advancement" you are forgetting grand seiko's spring drive. cool video tho got a better understanding of the coaxial movement

[@fouadhejazi]

if the co-axil is supposed to provide better accuracy, then why is my rolex more accurate than my omega?

[@mendipfox1650]

I have a 4130 Rolex Daytona & a 9900 Seamaster 300m. The omega is insanely accurate. I’ve had it three months now and it’s lost about 1.5 seconds in that time. My Daytona consistently loses 1.5 seconds a day. I have to recalibrate my 4130 once a month and have done for the last 7 years. Whilst the Daytona is accurate, the 9900 caliber is a different league. Absolute precision personified in my experience.

[@MJMImages]

Where's Nathan?

[@TheLala9la]

watched it in X2 speed! recommended, when tried to back to normal speed wast sound weird

[@WristWatcher]

Spring drive

[@CaptainFury767]

Good video explaining a great movement. It would be better without the fuzzy, quivering overlying text and the weird flecks randomly appearing in your graphics. Striving for that "worn out film from middle school science class" look, maybe?

[@mictaylor9531]

Great video but the crackle graphics are a huge distraction!

[@AlbertoDiaz-pn2zf]

Good video omega longines tag heuer tissot same quality king patex philippe vacheron constantin Rolex

[@ronisworld2916]

Subs!

[@cestmoi2681]

I own lots of Omegas, and couldn't give a shit what is inside them.

[@stephen9609]

Incoming Grand Seiko fanboys talking about how Springdrive is the greatest watch innovation in the last 250 years.

[@stephen9609]

@Christopher Wood -MDH- That wasn't my point at all... but nice humble brag talking about how you have Rolex, Omega, and GS in your collection

[@philipcarr6698]

@@stephen9609 Never known a Rolex owner that doesn't flex. It's right up there with mentioning residual values. I wonder if they ever buy a watch just because they like it.

[@ajlevin44]

Interesting content, but this guy has a weird energy

[@986C]

Misinformation in this video - the co-axial movement is no longer under patent protection and any manufacturer can use the escapement design in their watches. Omega does not own the rights or the co axial movement. As soon as this was said you lost all credibility.

[@jcells2117]

Not the best intro