Editor's Picks: Our Favorite Chronographs Of All Time

Recently we asked the Teddy editorial team to pick their favorite watches with a Zenith El Primero movement which, as we all know, is the first and one of the most seminal automatic chronographs in watchmaking history. This got us to thinking about chronographs as a whole, and naturally we had to take a stab at picking our single favorite chronograph, which is no easy task. Of course, this is just a sampling of our collective tastes and not a comprehensive, or even always historically contextualized, list. Sometimes it’s just about taste or watchmaking preferences. So, without further ado here are our favorite chronographs of all time and, as usual, make sure to share your own.

Mark Bernardo: H. Moser & Cie. Streamliner Flyback Chronograph 

To be honest, I had never given much thought to a “favorite” chronograph watch. Over the years, in many annual “Best of” lists, I’ve named what I considered the standouts from a given year, but I have never really committed to an all-time favorite. At first, I considered choosing one of the acknowledged icons of the genre — a Daytona, a Speedmaster, perhaps a Navitimer, Carrera, or Monaco — but there have been too many iterations of all these to choose just one. Then I considered going the crazy-complicated, ultra-high-end route, homing in on masterpieces like the F.P. Journe Centigraphe Souverain, A. Lange & Söhne Triple Split, and MB&F Legacy Machine Sequential EVO — ultimately deciding that spotlighting one of these wouldn’t be all that useful for the many readers who might never see one, much less own one. Finally, I gave serious consideration to making the case for one of the technical or aesthetic outliers, i.e. something that breaks the genre’s conventions in an intriguing way — like the Porsche Design Monobloc Actuator, with its inset rocker pushers; the Graham Chronofighter, with its trigger-like pusher lever; and Montblanc’s Rieussec models, with their counters taking the style of old-fashioned pen nibs. But calling any of these truly a “favorite” would be somewhat misleading. So the watch that eventually came to mind is one that combines elements of all of the above: the Streamliner Flyback Chronograph Automatic from H. Moser & Cie.

Schaffhausen-based Moser launched its first Streamliner series — named for high-speed trains of the 1920s and ’30s, notable for their rounded, aerodynamic curves — in 2020, kicking off the collection in high style with a flyback chronograph model unlike any ever seen before. The watch’s ergonomically shaped, cushion-shaped case measures 42.3mm in diameter and attaches to a fluidly integrated bracelet. Its crown is off-centered at 4 o’clock and its pushers are placed at the unconventional “bull’s head” positions of 10 and 2 o’clock, evoking the look of vintage hand-held stopwatches from the heyday of those eponymous trains. The dial is what really sets the Streamliner apart from most of its chronograph brethren: there are no subdials, just two tracks around the periphery of the main dial, the outer one for elapsed minutes, the inner for elapsed seconds. Instead of a “12” at the top position, there is a “60” in the manner of those aforementioned stopwatches — a statement that the Streamliner is a wrist-worn chronograph first, a time-telling instrument second, despite its very minimalist, three-handed aesthetic. As a bonus, the exhibition caseback of the watch offers a pleasing contrast, offering a mind-blowing view of the proprietary Caliber HMC 902, which looks like a manual-winding mechanism but is actually an automatic, with its rotor cleverly tucked away near the dial side so as not to obscure the rest of the movement parts and allow them to shine. 

No, I don’t expect or desire all chronographs to follow this lead; I am as big a fan as anyone of subdials, tachymeters, monopushers, and all the other traditional trappings of the popular genre. But it’s fair to say the Moser Streamliner ticks a lot of boxes that elevate it above the crowd. Is it an outlier, design-wise? Sure. Does it belong in the conversation about modern technical excellence? No doubt. Is it iconic? That’s a bit more debatable, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the Streamliner becomes a definitive chronograph of its era when we look back a few decades hence.

Blake Buettner: Sinn EZM1

The Sinn EZM1 is the watch that kicked off the brand’s mission timer — or Einsatzzeitmesser — series of watches back in 1997, and it stands unique to this day as a singular expression of a hyper-focused and uncompromised (almost) chronograph. The titanium case uses a destro-style configuration with the pushers on the left side of the case allowing the timing to be activated with the thumb, but a glance at the dial reveals no subdials in sight. Sinn used a modified Lemania 5100 movement for this watch, and utilizes a centrally mounted configuration, meaning all timing elements happen from the central hand stack. The unusual layout is rarely seen these days, and offers what I’d call the most practical implementation of the complication. Further, any extraneous information is rendered in red against the matte black dial, meaning they fall away from sight when not needed. 

As interesting as the configuration of the EZM1 is, how it was put to use is the best part of this story. Sinn designed this watch with German Customs Forces in mind, and many of the original examples bear the symbols of these specialized units. The stories associated with these watches are legendary, and push the EZM1 into its own territory in the history of chronograph watches. Plus, it represents one of the last great venues for the Lemania 5100. 

Bilal Khan: A. Lange & Söhne Datograph

The A. Lange & Söhne Datograph debuted in 1999 and was, without hyperbole, a huge deal due to being the first new in-house chronograph in decades. The L951.1 movement was a 405-component work of watchmaking architecture that boasted a chronograph with a flyback function, incorporating a column wheel and a lateral clutch. And that’s not to mention the iconic Lange big date display. It’s hard to overstate the impact the Datograph had, but let’s just say it’s no small feat to snap Patek Philippe into action, as that brand would develop and release its first in-house chronograph in 2005 with the Ref. 5959, outfitted with the CHR 27-525 PS movement. There are modern chronographs and then there is the Datograph, a watch that seemingly single-handedly sparked a revival the likes of which hadn’t been seen since the Quartz Revolution.

Danny Milton: Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch

My team tried to tell me I couldn't pick this watch. I even thought maybe it should be off limits. But you know what? I was wearing it yesterday and thought, "This is my favorite chronograph of all time. And so here we are. I mean, it is hard not to fall for the NASA history of a watch originally intended to be a motorsport tool. Ever since the 3861 model arrived, it became clear this was the Speedmaster I was waiting for. There is something just so amazing about a brand that has kept a watch in near constant production for as many decades as the Speedmaster but also keeping it upgraded technologically. Sure this latest edition may not yet have the same flight qualifications as the 1861, but it does have a METAS-certified movement inside and a vastly improved (and vintage-inspired) bracelet. I love the continued use of Hesalite for the crystal and a closed caseback. This is a vintage watch that you can buy new, and its a design that's a bona fide icon. It's an easy choice and it's my choice. 

Erin Wilborn: Universal Genève Compax "Nina Rindt" 

Candidly, chronographs aren’t necessarily my thing when it comes to watches, and Universal Genève’s 1960s Panda Dial Compax is one of the few chronograph pieces I’ve found that really captures my interest. This is likely due to the icon behind the icon, Nina Rindt, who wore this model trackside during her husband, legendary Formula 1 driver Joachim Rindt’s, races. 

As much as its 36mm sizing and the mid-century design cues (and I do love the typography on this piece), it’s Nina Rindt’s styling of the Compax with a thick leather cuff that made me fall in love with the piece. Before I became familiar with the “Nina Rindt” Compax, I couldn’t quite imagine a compelling way of fitting a chronograph into my own personal sense of style. But if I were to ever add any type of chrono to my collection, you’d better believe it would be as an homage to Nina Rindt. 

Jonathan McWhorter: Rolex Daytona 116520

Yeah, I know: “Original choice, Jonathan.” Well I’ve got news for you friend, I was asked and I answered: and I stand behind it. Like it or not, the Rolex Daytona has nestled itself onto the podium as the archetypal chronograph, and I’m here to break the news that the hype is real. We keep using the qualifier of “favorite X of all time,” which is quite lofty, but the 116520 hits a certain sweet spot that makes it particularly interesting to me. Let the record also show that I currently own one of these (with the superior black dial) and have owned it for quite some time, and plan to do so indefinitely. But don’t let my bias sway you; follow along and let me explain.

Chronographs are incredibly difficult to manufacture, ask…anyone. Automatic chronographs are a step further up the difficulty chart. In the long history of horology, a self-winding chronograph wasn’t even an option until 56 years ago. The first El Primero movements aren’t even retirement age yet. Which is why I submit that a relatively modern chronograph could even be considered for an “all time” designation: there just hasn’t been much time! 

So, getting to the point: why this watch? When it comes to any chronograph, the distinction is in the packaging. The 116520 is a slim, well-proportioned watch at 38.5-40mm (depending on who you ask) x 12mm thick. Keep in mind this is housing an in-house, automatic, vertical-clutch, column-wheel chronograph — arguably the more precise version of the chronograph in general. Also, at 201 total pieces, the 4130 caliber has 20% fewer parts than its El Primero-based predecessor (which is even less parts than some time-only movements) and around 60% fewer parts than other column-wheel chronographs. Further, only 12 screws are needed for assembly as opposed to the over 40 in the El Primero-based 4030. Not only has Rolex simplified the chronograph considerably; it has managed to achieve COSC certification and maintain an elegant, compact profile that is objectively easier to service and regulate. All of this is to say nothing of how well the watch wears, the water resistance, and the All-Time Oyster bracelet.

Further, the 116520 occupies what I believe will be a relatively small yet important sliver of Rolex history: being the only all-steel Daytona with a Rolex movement inside. Hear me out. Prior to this reference, Rolex used the famed El Primero as a base for the 4030 caliber in the 16520. This gave way to the 4130 caliber for the 116520 in the year 2000. When the crown transitioned to the use of the Cerachrom bezel in 2016, that made the 116520 the only all-steel Daytona with an in-house movement… ever.

One gets the classic charm of the overall size, proportion, layout, and cohesive materials while coupling that with the perks of modern engineering, manufacturing, and the performance that comes along with such. Who knows where Rolex will take the Daytona in the future, but for now and the foreseeable future, I think all of this puts the 116520 in a unique position in the archive, and possibly the most complete chronograph of all time.

D.C. Hannay: Breitling Chrono-Matic Ref. 2112/2114

This is a tough one, because I already own a couple of chronos that are near-perfect for me. Having already caught and released a mint Speedmaster Pro from the early 2000s (sent on its way due to the less-than-ideal fit of its factory bracelet on my particular wrist), I’m pretty happy with my mid-’90s Speedmaster Reduced, which is as close to an ideal aesthetic and flawless fit for my wrist as anything I’ve found. I’m also the caretaker of my father’s 1970 Navitimer 806, an iconic watch that I actually wear, but which, due to its sentimental value, is not part of my regular rotation. So should I settle for something modern? I hesitate, because I find that most contemporary chronos wear a bit larger than I’m comfortable with. What to do? If Georges Kern and Fred Mandelbaum happen to be reading, I realize there’s a snowball’s chance, but consider the following as not just a nod to Breitling’s history, but a plea for a faithful re-edition. 

Barring some sort of miracle, my thoughts return to vintage. And one of my grails happens to come from deep within Breitling’s catalog, and that watch is the Chrono-Matic, specifically the early ‘70s 2112 and 2114 references with the panda dial. One of my best friends happens to own this very watch, and when I first tried his on, I was instantly smitten. The early Chrono-Matics were among that first wave of automatic chronographs that include Seiko’s 6139 references, Zenith’s El Primero, and the watches utilizing the Caliber 11 movement, a joint effort by Heuer, Hamilton/Buren, Dubois-Depraz, and Breitling. Several of these brands claim to be the first to have launched this new category, but these particular Breitlings are the ones that have captured my heart. The 38mm-ish tonneau case, symmetrical dual-register layout, black indices, bidirectional bezel, and very specific panda dial just do it for me. Y’all can keep your stratospherically-priced Paul Newman Daytonas, because this one scratches the very same itch for me.

The 2112 and 2114 references saw many variants in the wake of their release, including some pretty weird asymmetrical subdial versions, but this one is perfect in my eyes. I love that the date window sits at six, not jammed into that less-than-ideal 4:30 position. I’m also enamored with Breitling’s use of Day-Glo orange on the hands, a very ‘70s touch that Heuer also employed to great effect. As far as the bezel insert variants, while I lean toward the 12-hour, the elapsed time version would do in a pinch, given the right example. There simply aren’t enough great tonneau-cased watches in the modern market, but they’re everywhere in vintage. The watch's size, fit, and case profile all just do something for me, and when I find the right one, you can bet it’ll take its place among my first-string starters.