Please note the location of the 12-Hour and the Small Seconds Register's are swapped between the two, in addition to having a different beat (1185: 21,600, 33xx: 28,800) the is size different's between the two movements (@ ø 26.2 mm • 5.4 mm thick the 1185 is much smaller), etc....

To say the 33xx is based on the F. Piguet 1185 is sort of like saying the Apple Macintosh Computer is based on the earlier Apple ][. Inspired, maybe, derative of, perhaps, an exploration of ideas from the earlier, even... Based? I wouldn't use that term.

Of course the date window can be placed anywhere on the dial the manufacturer wishes it to be, so it's not relevent to this discussion.

astro13rm Posts: Date Window Question... ...All that needs to be done to move the date window around is change the orientation of the numbers on the date ring right? Just want to make sure I understand this.

Almost, there is also the 31 day alignment issue... Since there are 31 days on a date wheel, the manufacturer needs to make certain that the gearing on the wheel lines the date up properly within the date window. If you rotate the date, it may or may not line up properly, because it's not an easily divisable number like 28 (4 x 7, 2 x 14 etc.) in fact it's a prime number. So care has to be taken when moving things around.

Here is a link to the original thread...

In any instance the differing beat, size differences as well as the layout of the sub-dials of the watch point out to the fact that the Omega c.33xx movement relationship to the c.1185 is not direct. One can say they are related and be accurate, but to say the c.33xx is based on the c.1185 is a stretch at best. It's also a bit of a stretch to claim that the c.33xx is an in-house movement. True both F. Piguet are owned by Swatch, and true Omega legally owns the assembly line which Piguet uses to make the c.33xx movements. But F. Piguet is an independent company within Swatch, and saying the c.33xx is an in-house movement is a equally a stretch. Call it an Omega Exclusive movement which is correct and everyone's happy!

-- Chuck

Chuck Maddox		(Article index @ http://chronomaddox.com/cm3articles.html)
		Chronographs, like most finer things in life, only improve with time…