No announcement yet.

Please visit my new Chronometer web page...

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Please visit my new Chronometer web page...

    ...devoted to the Ref. 11821 Chronometer.

    Comments are welcome!
    Last edited by Watch Carefully; 07-02-2020, 11:09 AM. Reason: updated link after website revisions

  • #2
    Hi Brad, congrats on the page, interesting and to the point, also the link to the early print adds, which have raised some questions I'll PM you about.


    • #3
      Beautiful watch and very informative! On a side note, that's a very unusually large case size for that era.


      • #4
        Thanks, fellas!
        Tim, I read your PM and you raised some excellent points for discussion.Perhaps we should open a thread for that. I'll reply after I formulate my thoughts.

        AS, you've nailed one of the key elements of this watch. It is MUCH more substantial than the previous generation of chronometers, and comparable in mass to some of the biggest pieces Rado made in that era (eg, Hardtron) but pays hommage to traditional watch case shapes, and isn't so obviously big. Also, we are probably very much used to the ~34mm size of many Green Horse, Golden Horse and President models of the earlier 1960s, that this just appears to be a minor alteration of that base design. Not so.

        I'll post some photos of it with an earlier chronometer (56-H) and with an oval and round DIastar of the same period, and we'll see the size of it in context. (edit: see later post below with images) Take note, the Jetliner 333 and LITENITE are housed in variants of this same case.

        PS. I have a feeling that, while Rado obviously targeted the Omega Constellation audience with the initial 56-H, they were going for the Rolex buyer with this issue.

        Last edited by Watch Carefully; 06-04-2020, 01:51 PM.


        • #5
          Greet work Brad. The DayNight case is another close relation too, photos for comparison. The Jetliner 333, whilst of similar proportions, is styled significantly differently.

          50F2AFB4-0835-4433-A217-A88B5B272C5C.jpeg D6C580A6-7BFB-4A26-AD85-C8D2234DFB6B.jpeg F14AFF8A-3A3F-4223-ADB0-9D649D5BE7EB.jpeg
          See my collection slideshow at


          • #6
            Originally posted by JohnPat View Post
            The Jetliner 333, whilst of similar proportions, is styled significantly differently.[/ATTACH]
            Great point, and thanks for the Day/Night images. Here is my Jetliner 333 (bought with the hopes I could install a 56-H with AS/Rado cal. 1858--no luck, the dial is too small) with the Chronometer:

            Same basic case, much more rounded lug tops with less definition of finishing.

            If anyone is seeking a project watch, my Jetliner is surplus to requirements. I'm open to offers, especially to trade for something which would fit a loose 56-H dial and movement.
            Last edited by Watch Carefully; 06-04-2020, 01:53 PM.


            • #7
              A couple size-comparison photos:

              56-H in steel (ca 1965) and DS 2 (with transplanted ETA chronometer movt and dial):


              • #8
                July 1 update:
                Restoring to a back-up is underway. Some content will need to be re-added, unfortunately, including the Ref. 11821 and Murano pages.

                Apologies to anyone seeking to access my Rado pages (or other articles)...
                An unexpected update to the site software has thrown a few things into a jumble and the landing page is down temporarily. However, the link below will take you to the index of Rado articles, and other links will work throughout the site--just avoid trying to go to the home page.

                Last edited by Watch Carefully; 07-01-2020, 01:47 PM.