Primary Navigation

Social Navigation

Owner’s Review: the Omega Speedmaster Automatic Day-Date 3520.50.00

Owner’s Review: the Omega Speedmaster Automatic Day-Date 3520.50.00


As a watch gatherer, it’s simply characteristic to make records, regardless of whether physical or mental, of the watches we wish to secure. Toward one side of the rundown may be new and vital watches you simply need to attempt, while on the other are watches you wish you could have however know are probably not going to acquire. As far as I might be concerned, some place in there is a branch of watches I’ve discovered that interest me, yet don’t have a squeezing should be purchased. Maybe they are odd or dark however not exceptionally significant, diminishing buy pressure. Or then again they have some element I need to encounter, yet not so desperately as to compel me to go through the money. The Speedmaster 3520.50.00 was one such watch. For quite a long time it lived on this limbo-list, sporadically provoking a request on the gatherings, an exchange offer to a great extent. In any case, because of a blend of flipping, being marginally disillusioned in certain buys, and having a lot of time to burn during the lockdown, this Speedie moved off the rundown and into my assortment in mid-2020.

Ever since getting the criminally underestimated Speedmaster Mk 4.5 a few years prior (which since left my assortment, however I feel will make a return) I acquired an appreciation for off in an unexpected direction Speedmasters. Speedmasters that may just look like their family because of the word “Speedmaster” being imprinted on their dials. Models that include diverse case shapes and styles, also completely various developments and dial plans. While these models probably won’t be what ordinarily comes to mind when one says “Speedmaster” they pay attention to their namesake, and are at last extraordinary articulations of my number one kind of watch, the chronograph, made by one of the incomparable Swiss brands.

As such, I’ve consistently watched out for the purported “reduced” models. An incredibly huge inventory of models with 39mm, and later 40mm cases, in the style of the famous bent haul Speedmaster Professional case, they offer an idiosyncratic and ordinarily more affordable Speedmaster experience. Notwithstanding being more modest, they are additionally all programmed, which unto itself is a significant takeoff from the Speedy Pro (truth be told, “reduced” is the epithet, Speedmaster Automatic is the official).

With a multi-decade run, it ought to be of nothing unexpected that there are many, numerous references in this sub-class. The most Speedy-esque, and most popular, are the 3510 and 3539 refs, the previous of which Brad Homes examines in his article Affordable Classics: Omega Speedmaster Automatic “Reduced” Ref. 3510.50 . From that point, one can dive into the hustling and Schumacher refs, the date models, chronometers, and the sub-sub-type the 3520 has a place with, the Day-Dates. A deceptive title utilized on Omega’s own site, one may picture an exemplary day/date window on a Speedy, yet these are truth be told triple schedule chronographs with their own particular character, procuring them the epithet Mk40, profoundly adjusting them to the imprint arrangement of Speedies.

It is with this stage set that I will audit a watch that has been out of creation for almost 20 years. This watch has overwhelmed me and addresses an incredible incentive as of now, and likely into the not so distant future too. With Omega having quite recently delivered the freshest age of Speedmaster , introducing the period of the Master Co-Axial 3861 type, and driving the Speedy Pro further into extravagance region, the 3520 is an invigorating option with a genuine device watch spirit.


Owner’s Review: the Omega Speedmaster Automatic Day-Date 3520.50.00

Case Stainless Steel Movement Omega 1151/Valjoux 7751 Dial Black Lume Yes Lens Sapphire Strap Steel Bracelet Water Resistance 50m Dimensions 39 x 44.75mm Thickness 14mm Lug Width 18mm Crown push-pull Warranty NA Price $2000


Typically I survey from an external perspective in, however given that the dial of the 3520 leaves so incredibly from the conventional Speedy, it’s the best spot to begin. Stage one, reject intellectually what you anticipate that a Speedmaster should resemble. That unthinkably adjusted and amazingly moderate three-register dial isn’t here. It probably won’t have even been permitted in the room when the 3520 was planned. Furnished with the Omega 1151, a Valjoux 7751 triple-date programmed chronograph with in-house marking, the 3520 basically requires more. More hands, more windows, more files, more… everything. The outcome verges on disorganized, and it’s absolutely occupied, yet functions admirably in its own way.

Before in any event, getting into it, it’s worth saying that if this watch were to come out today, I’m not entirely certain it would get the best gathering. There are components that are packed and there are plan choices that are unusual and illogical. Yet, since this watch previously ran its course, it currently addresses something odd, and capricious. A watch from a somewhat past time, when web-based media and – ahem – online watch media, weren’t investigating each line and numeral. The client was what made a difference, and in the event that they got it, it had the chance to exist – for a time.

On to the dial. Beginning with the reason that this is a “reduced” model, dial land isn’t plentiful, yet Omega needed to pack in three sub-registers (actually four on the off chance that you tally the stacked sub-dial as two), eight hands, two windows, a full date file, also your ordinary hour, moment and second stamps. Beginning with the last mentioned, you’ll discover huge, lumed square shapes at the hour places that aren’t covered by sub-dials, checking an off-kilter complete of nine. Between these are long white lines for the minutes/seconds and short white imprints at 1/fifth second, indeed as permitted by the sub-dials.

At 12 is the 30-minute aggregator, with marks each moment, numerals like clockwork, and settled inside its limits, the day and month windows. While average for the 1151/7751, the components of the sub-dial are tiny, scarcely containing the windows, which alongside the imprints and numerals makes a ton of thickness at the highest point of the watch. Strangely differentiating this, at six is the 12-hour aggregator, with marks each hour, and numerals just every three, repeating the exemplary Speedmaster plan. Both squeezed into the dial and with a similar distance across, one is packed while the other scanty. It’s odd and uneven however by one way or another adds enchant. On the off chance that I could transform a certain something, it is add little runs at half-hour stretches, yet I can live without them.

Part of what represents the open hour aggregator is that Omega, by some supernatural occurrence, in reality left out a complication. As 7751 fans are likely mindful, there ought to be a little moon cresting it’s pale face out somewhere in the range of nine and three. While I would welcome a Speedymoon ref. 345.0809 into my assortment should the breezes of fortune and a heap of money blow one my way, I trust Omega was more right than wrong to leave this complication off. Other than the additional visual complexity, it would detract from the generally utilitarian usefulness of a triple date chrono. Nothing against the moon, however realizing whether today is a fading bow or a waxing gibbon won’t make a big deal about a distinction in my life.

Crammed into a marginally more modest sub-dial at nine is a combination of dynamic seconds and 24-hour time. The firmly stuffed record incorporates marks each hour, bolder at the even hours with even numerals also. In spite of the fact that the size of the numerals coordinates that found on the other subdials, there are basically more, and in less space. Indeed, the 20, 22, and 24 numerals are almost contacting, and would consider “crowded” by any realistic norm. Also, there are two hands at play, one a stick for the seconds, the other a thickset kind of bolt pointing at the hours. By and by, this isn’t a detail that understands horrendously all around thought, yet with regards to this resigned configuration, simply adds to its particular charms.

A bizarre outcome of the plan of the sub-dials at 9 and 12 is that the vast majority of the heaviness of the dial is in the upper left quadrant. While this has no useful impact, it gives the dial an odd equilibrium, that is, for absence of a superior word, interesting. Across at three you’ll discover the Omega logo, that superb Speedmaster content, and “automatic” in an ungracefully blocky content. In spite of the fact that a respectable measure of verbiage in a little space, it’s one of the more quiet minutes on the dial

Around the edge of the dial, outside of the spooky white limits of the moment/seconds record, is the date track with each of the 31 numerals. The biggest sort on the dial, they make a monumental line and add strain to the thick inward dial with every one of its highlights. One of a few components not found on an exemplary Speedy, or any Speedy not from this arrangement so far as that is concerned, it dramatically affects the general look, giving it an engaging instrument-like quality. Or, in other words, now and again it looks more like a calendrical-instrument than a watch implied for wearing.

One of the parts of the 3520 that explicitly attracted me to it versus other diminished or triple-date references is the handset. The hour, minute, and chrono-seconds hand are outwardly equivalent to that of Speedy Pros of the period. While the fence-post hour and minutes are genuinely standard on the diminished models, the lumed precious stone seconds is less so. Refs like the 3510 have rather wispy sticks that while normal to chronographs offer slightly less Speedy appeal. Also, as I’ve found on my 3594 (a Speedy for an alternate article on an alternate day) with its cleaned wide bolt handset, the chronograph feels somewhat superfluous, while on the 3520 it allures to be used.

Additionally, there is the pointer date hand, which comprises of a dark shaft and restricted tip with wings in white, giving it the presence of drifting. As referenced before, I was at one time a proprietor of the Omega 1045/Lemania 5100 fueled Mk 4.5, which includes a focal moment chronograph hand with a comparable plan, giving the 3520 a smidgen of nostalgic appeal too. At that point, obviously, is its slight similitude to the super uncommon “holy grail” ref 376.0822, which likewise included the type 1045, however in the exemplary wound haul case. Not simply sacred, it’s an individual chalice, and one I envision I won’t be acquiring.

At a look, one is overpowered by the measure of data in plain view on the 3520. Data, which apparently has no pecking order of significance, is pushed at the eye at the same time. Everything is sharp, intense, and similarly weighted. However, after some underlying stun, you become accustomed to it. What I love about it is that in a particularly little space I have all I require. Time, date, day, month (not that I regularly forget about the last mentioned), and a stopwatch, which I’ve become more familiar with utilizing for little cooking assignments and so forth. Also, for reasons unknown, with the 3520 more than different chronographs I own, I want to really utilize the chronograph. Maybe it’s just to spread the eight-gives out to get the full impact, however I think it returns to this watch feeling like a device or instrument. It simply has a quality of direction to it past that of a wrist-extra, similar to its capacities call to be used.


When I originally hauled the 3520 out of its quickly rotting red vinyl Omega box, what struck me wasn’t the complexities of the dial, it was the manner by which astoundingly compact the entire thing was. Indeed, I realized this was a “reduced” model, yet I didn’t anticipate that it should appear to be little in my grasp. That is to say, this is a Valjoux 7751 fueled chronograph, and in the event that we as a whole know anything about 775X chronographs (and Sellita counterparts) from discharges throughout the most recent couple of years, is that they are seldom under 15mm tall, and will in general be 40mm and up. They are for the most part slabby, frequently feeling much bigger than their measurements show. All things considered, the 3520 isn’t in reality that amount more slender at 14mm, however it is more modest at 39mm (however 37.6mm at the bezel), and uses some cunning plan stunts to look and wear more slender than it ought to, demonstrating that with somewhat more artfulness, “automatic chronograph” doesn’t need to rise to “wrist puck.”

Measuring 39 x 44.75 x 14mm, including a domed sapphire precious stone, the 3520, as is normal, includes a wound haul plan that promptly makes it conspicuous as a Speedmaster. As the epithet “reduced” well-portrays, it has recently been scaled down in different measurements and extents. The inclines aren’t as thick, the unbalanced “hump” on the correct side is less overstated, the carry width dropped from 20mm to 18mm, etc. It’s less forcing than the Speedy Pro, yet still gets across the extraordinary and forceful allure that put forth the Speedmaster defense so effective. Strangely, the pushers stay 5mm in measurement, making them urgently larger than average on the more modest case.

The acclaimed Speedmaster bends A stunning, yet scratched up, incline The indented pusher One of my number one points

While comparative from various perspectives, there is a critical distinction that goes towards the design’s astute administration of its tallness. The bezel of a Speedmaster sits on the bended carry mid-case erupting out from a decreased distance across prior to smoothing out altogether, permitting the addition to sit opposite to the precious stone. From the side, this makes a solid break in the mid-case, as the two sections are unmistakably isolated, which consistently pursues a more slender appearance. What’s diverse with the 3520 is that instead of smoothing out prior to hitting the gem, it slants up, prompting a domed gem that streams out of the point of the supplement, pretty much. This adequately makes the bezel thicker, however the precious stone less tall, nullifying the difference.

Why this is smart is on the grounds that intellectually one expects the development is housed inside the mid-instance of a watch, with maybe some space for the rotor permitted by a domed case-back. The 1151/7751 is a thick development, coming in at 7.9mm. To accommodate this, a portion of the development is really taken cover behind the bezel, which is basically concealing piece of the mid-case. At the end of the day, instead of on top of the mid-case, it lounges around a part. The outcome is that outwardly the mid-case doesn’t show up thick by any means, making for a watch that peruses a lot more slender than appears possible.

A disadvantage for some may be the deficiency of the container precious stone, which you can discover on the more traditionally styled decreased models. This hasn’t been an issue for me. While a takeoff without a doubt, it modernizes the general look a piece, which given the profoundly extraordinary dial doesn’t feel improper. Likewise, it’s a sapphire Speedy with no corona, which is an or more in my book.


At this purpose of the audit, the highlights of the Omega 1151/Valjoux 7751 ought to be really clear. Regarding essential details, it’s a 25-gem programmed with 54 hours of force hold and a recurrence of 28,800 bph. Clearly, the triple-schedule complication separates it from other Speedies, especially when it was delivered, however it additionally stands apart for having a 6, 9, 12 sub-dial course of action, and for being a coordinated programmed chronograph. Speedmaster decreased models with 3, 6, 9 designs include particular chronographs, which you can find out about here .

With schedules come complications – to setting the watch, that is. Fortunately, one doesn’t need a manual or watchmaker available to you to set it, however there are some finicky perspectives and a few entanglements to know about. The pointer date is set by means of the crown pulled out to initially position. It must be set advances. The month is then advanced by propelling the date past the 31st. Legitimately stable, yet this comes with an issue. Should you go past your ideal date you are left with three alternatives. The first is to just overlook having some unacceptable date. Not some tea. The second is to acknowledge rout, and put on an alternate watch until the 3520 has run out of juice, permitting you to find some unacceptable date. Adequate, yet not ideal.

The third is to address the date by progressing it… by an entire year. As you stay there, watching time in a real sense pass quickly before your eyes, you have an uncommon chance to consider how you are spending, or maybe squandering, your life, and how one little error like over-excitedly setting the date on your watch can set you back. Simply joking, however it’s a genuine annoyance and I generally feel it can cause undesirable weight on the development. It’s additionally shockingly simple to do as the actual date requires just the smallest turn of the crown to change. Ultimately, the day is set through an indented pusher on the case by 10. No issues there.

Straps and Wearability

The 3520 went ahead an arm band, which was incorporated with the model I procured also. It’s a late ‘90s/early aughts Speedmaster arm band, so it’s five connections with two more slender ones between three wide. Passing by Omega’s site, it seems the more slender connections ought to be cleaned, however on mine they are brushed, causing me to accept there might have been various arm bands at various occasions. It tightens marginally from the 18mm drag to 16mm and highlights a concealed fasten with a solitary catch discharge. This is presumably the best component as it needs one of Omega’s signature larger than average fastens. Additionally, a fascinating component of the fasten is that it really expands, yet just when open to take into account it to sneak off your wrist all the more effectively, I assume. A not so much fascinating but rather more irritating element of the arm band is that it requires unusually flimsy spring bars, ones I needed to extraordinary request to give the wristband a shot. I’m not an immense enthusiast of this period Speedy-arm band, and I for the most part incline toward Speedies on ties (don’t disdain), so having it is more about completing the set than wear.

Rather, I’ve worn the 3520 on different calfskin and nylon lashes and have been unable to locate an awful combination. Nylon is incredible for the mid year and brilliant tones function admirably against the high contrast dial, while cowhide gives it that rough appeal that Speedies do so well. My favored combo is on one of my old Sage High-Craft Vintage lashes (stopped, sorry), which has a 4mm shape, misrepresenting the bend of the lugs.

You realize that feeling when you initially put a watch on and it quickly clicks? Essentially something contrary to what I depicted here ? That’s what occurred with the 3520. It’s totally measured for my seven-inch wrist. The measurement and carry to-drag are ideal, and the stature isn’t an issue on the wrist. It’s compact, durable, and has more character per square millimeter than most items I can envision. From the curved hauls to the excessively complex dial, there isn’t a dead second on this watch, making it perpetually interesting to look at.

An ideal fit Not awful on the wristband either The new Speedmaster Professional, for comparison

Compared to a Speedmaster Pro the 3520 certainly wears diversely yet doesn’t feel like it was intended for more modest wrists, regardless of whether it may work better on them. The dial is smaller, however scarcely seems as though it as it goes further to the edge and has more going on. The distinction in thickness is irrelevant. All things considered, instead of genuinely more modest it looks and feels more stripped down. The expulsion of material from the drags, more slender inclines, and 18mm haul width cut it down and help it up, making it less overwhelming. Not that one is superior to the next, I’m a major aficionado of how the Speedy Pro wears as well, rather thinking about both as forceful dashing chronographs, one is deft while the other muscular.


If the Speedmaster Professional addresses a non-romantic ideal of the ideal chronograph, at any rate in my eyes, the Speedmaster Automatic Triple-Date 3520.50.00 addresses one that is charmingly imperfect. An eccentric disaster, a great blunder that was let through. It demonstrates that “perfect” and “personality” don’t need to coincide and that the last can exceed the previous. As a watch to audit and claim after death to its lifecycle, it offers to such an extent. It negates that programmed chronographs must be large and massive. That Speedmasters need to simply be Moonwatches. What’s more, that dials must be even, inasmuch as they are eventually legible.

It additionally offers an uncommon opportunity to get a triple-schedule chronograph, a sort of development few brands right now use (Sinn and Longines come to mind), that are commonly in costly and bigger watches. What’s more, keeping that in mind, the 3520 truly is a decent worth. Averaging around $2k (mine was under, however is a piece beat up), it’s a ton of watch for the cash. Indeed, they got a little two or three years prior when Hodinkee put together their restricted release Speedmaster with respect to the 3520.53, an intriguing dialed variation of this watch, yet in the plan of watches by and large, not to mention Omegas and Speedmasters, they are still solid.

To wrap this audit up, at long last (much obliged for staying), the 3520 has demonstrated to me to heed my gut feelings in regards to watches I need, more than previously. New and sparkling is consistently fun and enticing, however I infrequently discover they have the backbone as something special and intriguing (except if they end up being both). On the off chance that there are watches that have been waiting on your limbo-list, peculiar, odd-ball, underestimated, or appreciated watches, give them a possibility. I did, and now I have what is effectively one of my number one watches I have possessed, and a distinct “keeper” for the long-term.