- labour intensive means better?
- It is definitely not more precise lol.
- The 321 uses a column wheel and horizontal clutch. The jerk / jumpy chrono hands upon activation of the chrono is caused by the horizontal clutch engaging the chrono second hand. This is eliminated using the vertical clutch and has absolutely nothing to do with cam actuated vs column wheel. (many ignorant ppl quote this when they do not actually how it works)
- Looks are subjective. In terms of functionality, they both achieve the exact same purpose.
- Cams are way more reliable, robust and efficient. (reliability is important. Apollo 13 failure is not an option remember?)
- The nylon brake was adopted because it had a much lower friction coefficient. Omega used the metal brake in the 863 and 1863 for obvious reasons (see through caseback. Aesthetic reasons.) In any case, the 863 and 1863 were not NASA certified so it doesn't really matter.
I thought this was a 321 vs 861 comparison. So I don't really know why you started off the comparison with a column wheel + vertical clutch examples.
Zenith's el primero 36000 bph has nothing to do with the cam vs column wheel comparison. The speedmaster was originally designed to be a reliable racing chronograph that could withstand the vibrations and rigours of motor racing back in the day. The fact that it survived the NASA's tests is a testament to that quality.
This chrono was build to be a toolwatch, reliable and sturdy. Not an elegant PP 1435 or a Lange 1815 chrono. So why talk about elegance? It's akin to putting down a Honda S2000 because it's F20 engine issn't elegant.
thank you bro binnie for your spirited & knowledgeable post in defense of cam-actuated chronographs like the cal 861/1861 and valjoux 7750!
exactly the healthy discussion i hope to kick off for the reading pleasure of those who care.

i hope more chrono experts can come in to share their knowledge!
it's precisely because the vertical clutch is key to the column wheel chronograph's smooth and precise action that i carefully qualified that in my previous post.
in addition, my post is in the context of luxury watches.
toolwatch or not in its inception, the speedy has attained iconic & luxury status. so functionality takes a decided back seat to perceived technical finesse & quality. cos you're paying a huge premium.
in this regard, a column wheel chronograph with vertical clutch has the edge in terms of the effort that goes into its manufacture and the tighter tolerance that's inherent in its design. these are in addition to the smoother operation of its push button and no jerking of the chrono seconds hand when you start it. all objective facts.
the replacement of the white nylon brake in the speedy sapphire sandwich is already a clear admission that perception matters.
FWIW, there's an even uglier, utilitarian, yet robust mechanical movement that rated at 7Gs by major military airforces that's unfortunately canned by its eventual owner.
the lemania 5100.
butt ugly, cheap as sh!t construction. BUT surprisingly one tough sonofabitch.
with the legendary center minutes hand that's shaped like a plane that makes for even easier reading under air battle stress than a small sub-dial.
butt ugly. cheap. BUT i still want one. whether it's sinn, fortis, or tutima.
because i'm a sucker for oop watches.
ps. there's a cheap column wheel chrono out there. the seagull ST-19. the one that powers the 1963 re-issue of the chinese air force issued chrono for its pilots. manual winding only. not sure if vertical clutch or not.