# Steinhart vs Ginault vs Squale, which one is the best?



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

If you can only have one (1) dive watch from those three brands, which watch will you buy from them ?

Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


----------



## marcell (May 6, 2017)

I have ginault but i dont mind if somebody want to trade their squale 60atmos 

Sent from my MI 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

They all have their pluses and minuses, endlessly discussed on numerous threads. Prices vary also, as well as the market value on re-sale.

I have my own definite answer to your question, but why should you care what I think? Decide for yourself, and buy the one you like.


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

Squale beause at least they have some original designs and history behind them.


----------



## AVS_Racing (Aug 16, 2014)

I think Squale too, case and bracelet is better than steinhart, more curved. Never had a ginault so I can't comment if it is worth the premium


----------



## Champagne InHand (Dec 15, 2015)

I own all but the Ginault. I really like my O1B, and my Ocean GMT. I have wider flat wrists and thus the only reason I don't wear the Squale more, but lately I have been enjoying my NTH Amphion Modern, but the Squale has so much heritage. I just couldn't choose other than I really like the ETA 2893-2 in the GMT. 

I'm a big sword hand fan but the Ginault just is too pricy at MSRP or even 40% off. I think divers shouldn't have display backs. That's just a personal preference though. You can't beat Steinhart for affordability. The NTH isn't far behind in affordability and keeps COSC time, from my observations and Time graph. 

If snorkeling or diving less than 100M I would choose the NTH for the Lume. Not that Steiny or Squale don't stay lit up. 

Again this is your choice. This is a dead horse, but I get the pull in different directions. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

cuthbert said:


> Squale beause at least they have some original designs and history behind them.


So does Steinhart, prolly more than Squale. Check out the website for an eye-opening education.


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

yankeexpress said:


> So does Steinhart, prolly more than Squale. Check out the website for an eye-opening education.


Really? More history than Squale? I am curious to see the Steinharts from the 60s that were used as toolwatches by divers.


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

cuthbert said:


> Really? More history than Squale? I am curious to see the Steinharts from the 60s that were used as toolwatches by divers.


As an owner of both, have no issue with Squale. My point is Steinhart has many more original designs currently than Squale:

https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/marine-watch.html

And I would rate them equal in quality and both are better than Ginault with its china parts movement.


----------



## MC88 (Mar 10, 2017)

I would choose Squale then Steinhart, says the 60 ATMOS owner. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kelt (May 17, 2013)

Steinhart, for its quality/price ratio.
Ginault for its outstanding quality and fidelity to the 5 digit Submariner design.
Squale is disqualified by its childish logo, can't stand it, may be with a sterile dial, altough the poor quality of their crown design is still a concern.


----------



## Red PeeKay (Jan 20, 2011)

The Squale seems to run more expensive for an equivalent Steinhart. The Ginault is the smaller of the lot at 40mm so I've ruled them out. 


"Expecto Inopinatum"


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

People who haven't actually owned/held/assessed a particular model and/or brand probably shouldn't jump in on judging them. I can't fairly comment on Squale, having never owned one. But I can say with certainty that the Ginault OR is a significantly more nicely finished watch than any of the the three Steinharts I have owned. That isn't to say that the Steinharts don't represent excellent value or that their premium lines won't match up better to the build of the Ginault.


----------



## tcc6789 (Sep 21, 2011)

lvt said:


> If you can only have one (1) dive watch from those three brands, which watch will you buy from them ?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


Been there, done that. My choice is always be the one that puts a smile on my face whenever I look at it.

View attachment 12480285


----------



## GregoryD (Jan 31, 2009)

I'd go with Squale's original designs over Steinhart's, just because the vintage vibe appeals to me. If you're going the homage route then the Ginault has had good reviews regarding the fit and finish.


----------



## tcc6789 (Sep 21, 2011)

First attachment failed uploading. 2nd try.


----------



## GermanyMatt (Aug 5, 2013)

Having owned all three brands, the Ginault is the better overall package. Squale would be second.


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

Radar1 said:


> *People who haven't actually owned/held/assessed a particular model and/or brand probably shouldn't jump in on judging them.* I can't fairly comment on Squale, having never owned one. But I can say with certainty that the Ginault OR is a significantly more nicely finished watch than any of the the three Steinharts I have owned. That isn't to say that the Steinharts don't represent excellent value or that their premium lines won't match up better to the build of the Ginault.


True but for what I am concerned a brand who makes its own designs is worthy of my respect more than one who pedantry copies Rolex.

If a brand has an history even better...this is for me it's more important than finish or price. For me of course.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

I don't disagree on all counts but assumed the context was comparing the Ginault with Steinhart and Squale sub homages.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## highbob (Feb 27, 2014)

cuthbert said:


> True but for what I am concerned a brand who makes its own designs is worthy of my respect more than one who pedantry copies Rolex.
> 
> If a brand has an history even better...this is for me it's more important than finish or price. For me of course.


Not sure what this means: "one who pedantry copies Rolex."

Are you using _pedantry_ here as an adverb? Or did you mean "one _whose_ pedantry copies Rolex." Interesting grammatical concern/choice. Still doesn't really scan. Apologies if we're talking ESL here.

I wouldn't call Ginault merely pedantic, simply because the OR is such an interesting combination of various design cues. It doesn't merely focus on the specific design specs of any one watch, such as one might expect from a simple pedant.

Out of the three brands referenced here, the OR finish and quality is the best. If you are leery or dismissive of homage watches, I'm not sure if you'd be happy with any of these choices.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

highbob said:


> Not sure what this means: "one who pedantry copies Rolex."
> 
> *Are you using _pedantry_ here as an adverb? Or did you mean "one _whose_ pedantry copies Rolex."* Interesting grammatical concern/choice. Still doesn't really scan. Apologies if we're talking ESL here.
> 
> ...


Sorry, English is not my first language, is this the best shot you have criticize my post?

Having said that this watch has 0% Rolex content:










I don't have it but I consider it and handsome and original design.


----------



## sticky (Apr 5, 2013)

I'd put Squale just in front of Steinhart in the quality stakes but Squale have had a few (well mine have) tiny little QC issues which I feel puts them on a level footing with Steinhart.


----------



## highbob (Feb 27, 2014)

cuthbert said:


> Sorry, English is not my first language, is this the best shot you have criticize my post?
> 
> Having said that this watch has 0% Rolex content:
> 
> ...


I did note apologies for ESL speakers. I think your English is strong, but as I was saying, I wasn't sure of the meaning of your post. Your use of pedantry is problematic.

I like Squale; in fact, I did own one of their mil-spec watches. It definitely showed some influence of other brands, but which brand doesn't? Even the big brands mimic and borrow.

Hope you manage to get hold of one of those grails.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

cuthbert said:


> True but for what I am concerned a brand who makes its own designs is worthy of my respect more than one who pedantry copies Rolex.
> 
> If a brand has an history even better...this is for me it's more important than finish or price. For me of course.


I will add that brand history is nice to have, but it isn't always continuous or indicative of excellence over that period of time. There are several micro brands who put out absolutely stellar pieces and don't carry the same heritage as some of the more established companies. The Ginault is not a direct copy of any specific Rolex, rather borrows elements from a few and adds their own twists to parts of the build. I may have bought the first one they sold - which was taking a bit of a flyer - but absolutely no regrets at all. If I am in the market for a Sub homage this is the one I want.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

cuthbert said:


> this watch has 0% Rolex content:


The pattern of the dial markers is copied from Rolex.

And as Rolex puts it, "The dial is the distinctive face of a Rolex watch, the feature most responsible for its identity and readability."
https://www.rolex.com/watches/submariner/m116610ln-0001.html

So "0% Rolex content" is not quite correct.


----------



## Hornet99 (Jun 27, 2015)

Squale all the way baby.......b-). Love my pan am GMT. 



......and if Steinhart actual stop teasing about releasing a 39mm version and do a version of the legacy then the pan am might have some competition .


----------



## andyk8 (Jan 6, 2016)

Having owned a Ginault, every Steinhart Ocean One and Squale 20, 30 & 50 Atmos I would say the following,

Best tool watch - 50 Atmos
Best finishing - Ginault
Best Value - Steinhart
Worst value for money, least original, crappiest bezel and stupidly big crown - Squale 20 & 30 Atmos


----------



## Arcadiax (Sep 4, 2017)

Squale every time. If you wear a Ginault or Steinhart that looks like a Rolex, people will think you can't afford a real one! Squale has genuine history and unique design and isn't trying to knock off a great design. I don't have an ethical issue with someone replicating a famous design and putting their own name on it - particularly for discontinued or vintage watches. I just don't think its meritorious. Get the Squale and save up for a real Subbie.


----------



## andyk8 (Jan 6, 2016)

Arcadiax said:


> Squale has genuine history and unique design and isn't trying to knock off a great design.


I assume you're not talking about the 20 or 30 atmos?


----------



## JDCfour (Dec 29, 2011)

Squale hands down. No contest 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Porsche993 (Jan 6, 2017)

Arcadiax said:


> Squale every time. If you wear a Ginault or Steinhart that looks like a Rolex, people will think you can't afford a real one! Squale has genuine history and unique design and isn't trying to knock off a great design. I don't have an ethical issue with someone replicating a famous design and putting their own name on it - particularly for discontinued or vintage watches. I just don't think its meritorious. Get the Squale and save up for a real Subbie.


As others have mentioned the Ginault takes elements of past Rolex designs and adds its own twist. Name a modern Rolex with an enamel dial. I can't see ANYONE mistaking it for a Rolex. The cyclops version is a different story but that never made it to full production.


----------



## jlow28 (Feb 27, 2010)

Porsche993 said:


> As others have mentioned the Ginault takes elements of past Rolex designs and adds its own twist. Name a modern Rolex with an enamel dial. I can't see ANYONE mistaking it for a Rolex. The cyclops version is a different story but that never made it to full production.


Yes ... no one would mistake the Ginault for a Rolex Submariner. They look nothing alike

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Porsche993 said:


> I can't see ANYONE mistaking it for a Rolex.


Seriously?


----------



## Porsche993 (Jan 6, 2017)

RNHC said:


> Seriously?


Indubitably


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

Avo said:


> The pattern of the dial markers is copied from Rolex.
> 
> And as Rolex puts it, "The dial is the distinctive face of a Rolex watch, the feature most responsible for its identity and readability."
> https://www.rolex.com/watches/submariner/m116610ln-0001.html
> ...


That is Rolex's PR bull$hit, those dial markers were invented by Rolex, but by somebody else who imposed as standard feature for diver's watches:










I expect you to tell me Squale has copied the crown at 4 o'clock by Seiko and/or that the Seio SKX is a Submariner's copy at this point.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

[deleted]


----------



## Ramblin man (Feb 7, 2011)

For me, best value for money, best looks is the Steinhart ocean Vintage Military.


----------



## Luminated (Dec 1, 2012)

Only own a Steinhart but my opinion is they are the only one which offers variety and some truly striking watches.


































Like them or not but there's no denying they are exciting to look it.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Porsche993 said:


> Indubitably


"Just Say No!" - Nancy Reagan


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

I love my Ginault! It ain't fancy but it's readable, beautiful (the sand lum and red second hand really set it off), durable, accurate and made in USA. (I know, I know not 100% but mostly, certainly more than the 60% needed to claim Swiss made). Sure it looks similar to a lot of other divers (just like a lot of other divers) but it's different in a lot of ways that matter to me. It has a simple face so I can read it without my glasses even in the dark. It is only 40 mm so it fits on my wrist. It isn't fancy looking so my clients don't think I'm trying to impress them. It has an adjustable bracelet, so I can add or subtract a couple of mm when I'm working hard. ... and I love that its made in the USA. We use to be the engineers of the world. We built the Panama Channel, cars, TV's, bridges, sky scrapers, trains, space ships, ... now we charge interest and make movies (mostly ....). It's small but its the same can do spirit and it makes me happy.


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

Arcadiax said:


> Squale every time. If you wear a Ginault or Steinhart that looks like a Rolex, people will think you can't afford a real one! Squale has genuine history and unique design and isn't trying to knock off a great design. I don't have an ethical issue with someone replicating a famous design and putting their own name on it - particularly for discontinued or vintage watches. I just don't think its meritorious. Get the Squale and save up for a real Subbie.


I choose the Ginault for functional reasons but was worried that people would think I was wearing a Rolex which would not be a positive thing.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

I could not possibly care less if "people" think I'm wearing a Rolex or not. Anyone who thinks a good-condition watch with a sword-shaped hour hand and tan lume might be a Rolex has no serious knowledge of Rolexes in the first place, so why should I care what they think? 

And as for whether or not I can afford one: I don't care what anyone thinks about that either.


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

RNHC said:


> "Just Say No!" - Nancy Reagan


OOOOOH, I thought she said "Just say NO2". "No" makes a lot more sense


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

GrounchOldGuy said:


> OOOOOH, I thought she said "Just say NO2". "No" makes a lot more sense


Huh? Why would Nancy Reagan say nitrogen dioxide? Don't take whatever Porsche993 is offering! "Just Say No!"

EDIT: Naturally, *high*bob liked your post. But, of course. :-d ;-)


----------



## highbob (Feb 27, 2014)

RNHC said:


> Huh? Why would Nancy Reagan say nitrogen dioxide? Don't take whatever Porsche993 is offering! "Just Say No!"
> 
> EDIT: Naturally, *high*bob liked your post. But, of course. :-d ;-)


Well, I don't like to brag, but I do race drift cars on weekends ... in my dreams.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Brekel (Sep 18, 2014)

I own a Steinhart OVM2 and am very pleased with it. Yesterday I (finally, but that's another story) received my Ginault Ocean Rover from @Andyk8 and was surprised by the totally different level of fit and finish. The OVM2 is crude compared to the very refined Ginault. OVM2 is a tool, the Ginault a jewel. Bought the Ginault second hand and didn't pay retail of course, but the level of fit and finish is on par with my Sinn 104 (€1090 at this moment), so the RRP for the Ginault isn't that strange. I however do not know how the movement will hold up. So yes, the Ginault is worth the extra.


----------



## iceman767 (Jan 3, 2013)

Hornet99 said:


> Squale all the way baby.......b-). Love my pan am GMT.
> 
> ......and if Steinhart actual stop teasing about releasing a 39mm version and do a version of the legacy then the pan am might have some competition .


Wow, love the look of the Squale Pan Am ! What a beauty.

Had a quick dabble with the Pan am and i think they got the pepsi bezel right on this one!
Awesome watch and congrats.


----------



## s_hersco (Dec 23, 2011)

Squale 100% for me!


----------



## anrex (Jul 30, 2017)

Squale


----------



## MC88 (Mar 10, 2017)

Pepsi bezel is the winner


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

iceman767 said:


> Wow, love the look of the Squale Pan Am ! What a beauty.
> 
> Had a quick dabble with the Pan am and i think they got the pepsi bezel right on this one!
> Awesome watch and congrats.
> ...


Why did they make Pepsi bezels with reversed colors ?


----------



## Hornet99 (Jun 27, 2015)

lvt said:


> Why did they make Pepsi bezels with reversed colors ?


You'll need to ask Squale that, no one knows. They did the same with the original batman gmt and then corrected it withe the ceramic version.....


----------



## Soo Fuego (Feb 10, 2014)

I don't own a watch from any of the three. Every time I see a 60 atmos it makes me want to dip into the savings account. I also wouldn't mind a Pan Am in my watch box.


----------



## ironcross27 (May 7, 2008)

I think Squale designs seem more original, but that may be because I associate Steinhart and Ginault very heavily wtih submariner homages.


----------



## repeaterbeater (Aug 16, 2017)

Looking strictly at the price point factor, I'd consider Tiger Concepts or Corgeut before any of the brands mentioned.


----------



## Hornet99 (Jun 27, 2015)

ironcross27 said:


> I think Squale designs seem more original, but that may be because I associate Steinhart and Ginault very heavily wtih submariner homages.


20 atmos from squale is a sub design copy......


----------



## mj421 (Jun 5, 2015)

I own two Steinhart pieces and two Ginault watches. They are very different.
The Steinharts are much more bulky and give that feeling of a solid and massive piece of steel on your wrist while the Ginault brand watches are much more subtle and look more sophisticated.
There is room in any watch owners' box for both styles. One does not need to be better, just different.
Truth be told, I think the 43mm Christopher Ward line is much more classy in looks and execution.


----------



## 8man (Feb 14, 2015)

I've owned a couple of Steinharts and 3 Squales. I would give Squale a slight edge in fit and finish especially when it comes to the case. Got rid of both Steinharts due to the straight lugs. Other advantages in my opinion: 

The over sized crowns are easy to wind and easy to engage the threads. I actually like the size. 

The date magnifier, aka cyclops (for those of us who like them) is a true 2.5x magnification. Can't understand why Steinhart insists on using 1.5x. Almost not worth even having.


----------



## jaysarle (Sep 29, 2016)

I've owned Steinhart in the past and still own a Ginault OR. The thrill didn't last for me on the Ocean One Vintage Red. Regardless of all the chatter on the OR movement, it runs oh so smoothly and the finishing is better. FWIW the clasp is worlds better on the Ginault vs the Steinhart too.

Hope to add a Squale matic or 1545 at some point. Definitely love the history of the brand.


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

I read so many comments bashing the Steinhart's cyclop, but is the difference between 1.8x and 2.5x so significant?

Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


----------



## Watch Hawk 71 (Nov 15, 2013)

repeaterbeater said:


> Looking strictly at the price point factor, I'd consider Tiger Concepts or Corgeut before any of the brands mentioned.


Neva mind.


----------



## Robert999 (Apr 29, 2006)




----------



## anrex (Jul 30, 2017)




----------



## Gfxdaddy (Jul 9, 2015)

Arcadiax said:


> Squale every time. If you wear a Ginault or Steinhart that looks like a Rolex, people will think you can't afford a real one! Squale has genuine history and unique design and isn't trying to knock off a great design. I don't have an ethical issue with someone replicating a famous design and putting their own name on it - particularly for discontinued or vintage watches. I just don't think its meritorious. Get the Squale and save up for a real Subbie.


Err, no. I have a review on here somewhere where I had the opportunity to compare all three beside each other in-hand. And I've owned a Rolex, currently own two Omegas, and a Tudor (comparison shots in my review). Ginault's finishing is easily comparable to the Tudor and older Rolexes, with one or two minor issues. It sits well beside all the others in my watchbox. The Steinhart is good for what you pay for it, but it's not even close to being in the same league in terms of finishing nor the way it sits on the wrist. Squale's original designs are good, but their sub homages look and feel like cheap knockoffs when held in hand compared to the Ginault OR..again, not in the same league in my opinion. Nothing wrong with owning one though-lord knows I was seriously considering buying one at a point-but comparing it to the Ginault is a night and day comparison: I feel no shame wearing the Ginault out and about as a beater/travel watch, and I've had other friends-also Rolex wearers-ask after it. I would not, however, pay full retail for it. This is a hobby so wear whatever makes you happy-even as one stepping stone in your journey to acquiring your grail-but being blunt (and in my opinion!!!), having held each one in-hand:

Ginault OR + MKII >> Steinhart > Squale

*EDIT*: @Shaunie_007 has a detailed review (including video) of the Ginault vs Squale here. The differences are very easily apparent when you have both side-by-side in the metal. If you can get Ginault's discount then it's a no-brainer.


----------



## iceman767 (Jan 3, 2013)

Both are great watches with the Ginault 'just' marginally better with regards to the bracelet clasps.

The Squale Pan am is a great all round watch









Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk


----------



## zymphad (Dec 28, 2015)

Squale or Steinhart, both are more honest than Ginault. Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts, which isn't a problem in of itself, but the deceitful marketing is. 

I'd go with Squale just because it's not as much of a clone ripoff as Steinhart. The Ginault's is sickening, no better than one of those well made counterfeits IMO.


----------



## iceman767 (Jan 3, 2013)

zymphad said:


> Squale or Steinhart, both are more honest than Ginault. Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts, which isn't a problem in of itself, but the deceitful marketing is.
> 
> I'd go with Squale just because it's not as much of a clone ripoff as Steinhart. The Ginault's is sickening, no better than one of those well made counterfeits IMO.


I have dealt with low grade counterfeit right through to the very highest grades of counterfeits and trust me Ginault is not in that category.

Having owned and sold many high end brands such as JLC, ROLEX, IWC, FP JOURNE, etc the Ocean Rover is an excellent offering from Ginault!

I took the Ginault into a Rolex Dealership in Selfridges , London and they were equally blown away after handling the watch. It honestly is an excellent offering.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Late to party, but just to answer OP's question ...

Well, I have at least 1 diver watch from these 3 brands. As the common link between these 3 brands are Submariner homages, I will just present my point of view based on my collection. Do note that due to my puny 6.5" wrist, I have mainly 40 mm or below watches.

I have a 40 mm Squale 20 ATMOS Classic Ref. 1545, bought in the actual store of Gnomon Watches (not through internet like most WUS do), sometime early 2014, for around US$500. I understand that this could be version 1.5, as version 1.0 might not have SEL and version 2.0 have thicker bezel insert.

Next, I bought my Ginault Ocean-Rover 181070GSLN end of Q1 this year, despite of huge controversy surrounding this watch, for around US$700 after discount direct from Ginault. This is my most expensive Sub homage (or copy, whatever) to date.

Lastly, 3 weeks ago, I got hold of the new 39 mm Steinhart Ocean One black for around US$450 direct from Steinhart, despite of it's well known 'flat lug' flaw. I do have the 42 mm Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military, and I'm fine wearing it, barely. So I think it will be a better fit for me with this shorter lug to lug size of 46.5 mm.

Which is the best of the 3 brands? It depends on what do you value.

Best quality - Ginault. No contest for the other two and rightfully so. After all, the full asking price for Ginault is US$1,299, which is bloody expensive for a Sub homage.

Most dressy - Steinhart. No contest in this area, if you like more bling and more dressy sport watch, due to it highly polished bezel and highly reflective ceramic bezel insert. In picture, you might find the bezel insert look weird. However, in person, I find it interesting that it felt like a hybrid between aluminium and ceramic bezels.

Most faithful overall to the classic Submariner design - Squale. I understand that Gnomon Watches specially commisioned Squale to make this model of Sub homages. So, for those who like the Rolex Sub-like look more, this is the watch to get, without paying the price.

For me, which one of the 3 brands is the best to me? Ginault, as I value quality the most.

And lastly, a picture of the 3 beauties, plus the gen on the extreme right ...


----------



## Porsche993 (Jan 6, 2017)

zymphad said:


> Squale or Steinhart, both are more honest than Ginault. Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts, which isn't a problem in of itself, but the deceitful marketing is.
> 
> I'd go with Squale just because it's not as much of a clone ripoff as Steinhart. The Ginault's is sickening, no better than one of those well made counterfeits IMO.


Oh here we go again. And I bet you've not even handled a Ginault in real life.

No one is saying the movement has no Chinese sourced parts. The company says upfront the shock absorber is from a Chinese company. Its my belief the movements are assembled in the US from foreign and domestic sourced parts. The same critique can be leveled at 'Swiss made' watches too. Only 50% of the total value (60% from 1/1/17), not including labor, has to be from components manufactured within the Swiss border. The other 50% can be from anywhere else in the world including China.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

zymphad said:


> Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts


And your evidence for this is what, exactly?


----------



## Gfxdaddy (Jul 9, 2015)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Late to party, but just to answer OP's question ...
> 
> Well, I have at least 1 diver watch from these 3 brands. As the common link between these 3 brands are Submariner homages, I will just present my point of view based on my collection. Do note that due to my puny 6.5" wrist, I have mainly 40 mm or below watches.
> 
> ...


@OP, couldn't have said it any better. Great answer, and as you'll see, very similar to others who've actually held all three in hand. Good pickups all around though.
PS: I was hopeful that Steinhart had done something about that disappearing ceramic bezel that was present on the original O1, but sadly they don't seem to have :-/


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Gfxdaddy said:


> @OP, couldn't have said it any better. Great answer, and as you'll see, very similar to others who've actually held all three in hand. Good pickups all around though.
> PS: I was hopeful that Steinhart had done something about that disappearing ceramic bezel that was present on the original O1, but sadly they don't seem to have :-/


Lol, well, for Steinhart's 'disappearing' ceramic bezel, I kind of like it. It's what makes it unique, at least to me. ;-)


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

zymphad said:


> Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts





Avo said:


> And your evidence for this is what, exactly?


:-sWhy did Ginault retract their "Made in USA" claim? Everything zymphad stated is evinced in Ginault's own website. Are you, Avo, actually going against Ginault's own admissions?


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Porsche993 said:


> No one is saying the movement has no Chinese sourced parts. The company says upfront the shock absorber is from a Chinese company. Its my belief the movements are assembled in the US from foreign and domestic sourced parts. The same critique can be leveled at 'Swiss made' watches too. Only 50% of the total value (60% from 1/1/17), not including labor, has to be from components manufactured within the Swiss border. The other 50% can be from anywhere else in the world including China.


Ooh. A Strawman. What is the topic at hand - Ginault's deceitful marketing (as proposed by zymphad) or the definition of Swiss Made? You wrote six sentences in your explanation and you spent three sentences or fully half of what you wrote on defining what Swiss Made is. How about addressing what zymphad is claiming, i.e. Ginault's deceitful marketing, rather than implying that handling Ginault in real life will somehow make Ginault's deceit forgivable.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

RNHC said:


> Ooh. A Strawman. What is the topic at hand - Ginault's deceitful marketing (as proposed by zymphad) or the definition of Swiss Made? You wrote six sentences in your explanation and you spent three sentences or fully half of what you wrote on defining what Swiss Made is. How about addressing what zymphad is claiming, i.e. Ginault's deceitful marketing, rather than implying that handling Ginault in real life will somehow make Ginault's deceit forgivable.


Truth is you don't have a shred of proof about any of your own incredibly negative claims. They acknowledged and addressed the Made in America error. If you have any definitive information to share this many months on then by all means put it up.


----------



## Porsche993 (Jan 6, 2017)

The marketing was revised. No different to several other companies who have made similar 'mistakes' e.g. Shinola and Bremont. Ginault has in no way created a 'counterfeit' Rolex. Haters will always hate and thats fine. Can't please everyone. I could be equally indignant that my 'Swiss Made' watch was in fact manufactured with a large proportion of Chinese components and you know they are. I don't hear much of a furore about that.

All I care about is having a well made watch with a design I appreciate and enjoy wearing, a customer service that responds rapidly to contact and most importantly, keeps great time. I believe Ginault offers all of that and more.


----------



## kelt (May 17, 2013)

zymphad said:


> Squale or Steinhart, both are more honest than Ginault. Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts, which isn't a problem in of itself, but the deceitful marketing is.
> 
> I'd go with Squale just because it's not as much of a clone ripoff as Steinhart. The Ginault's is sickening, no better than one of those well made counterfeits IMO.


Ah, another misguided soul!

Anyone can see that the case of the Squale 20 atmos is a much closer Submariner "clone ripoff" (your words) than the Steinhart Ocean One case with its square lugs clearly not Rolex DNA.

Is Ginault marketing being deceitful? hell no more than others! marketing is about deceiving potential customers in believing a product is a "must have".
Ginault watches are a clear indication that their manufacturing skills are of a quality well above their marketing skill.


----------



## Armstrong31 (Nov 7, 2016)

Just picked up a Squale Pan Am GMT. It really is a good watch. Curved lugs snug the wrist. The case is bulletproof and I like the name.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> Truth is you don't have a shred of proof about any of your own incredibly negative claims. They acknowledged and addressed the Made in America error. If you have any definitive information to share this many months on then by all means put it up.


Radar, Radar, Radar. Yet once again with your projections. We went over this so many, many times. The burden of proof is on the one who's making the ridiculous claims - i.e., Ginault - not the detractors. One more time on how normal, non-Radar, logic works:


Ginault - We created special copper alloy for our original movement.
Me - BS
Ginault - It's true, here is our patent, our whatever to support the assertion of creating copper alloy and our movement not being a 2824 copy.
Me - Alrighty then.

But what you want is me, the detractor, prove that Ginault did not create special copper alloy instead of Ginault proving that it did??? I am not the one that made the BS claim. The burden of proof is not on me. Got it? It seems we discussed this about a hundred times. I don't understand why you don't understand the logic.

Now, you know as well as I do, that Ginault specifically retracted the "Made in USA" claim because they thought they would get into trouble since "Made in USA" has specific standards and criteria that Ginault couldn't meet. Of course, Ginault's excuse was they didn't know. Really? Is Ginault going to address myriad of other bogus claims that people questioned? Ginault have had multiple opportunities but chose not to. That just shows a lot about Ginault's ethics and principles.

Per your standard tactic, it's time for you to put up some nice photos of Ginault Ocean Rover, "But, but, look how beautiful Ginault Ocean Rovers are! No one should care about Ginault's BS!" La la la la la~


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

kelt said:


> Ah, another misguided soul!
> 
> Is Ginault marketing being deceitful? hell no more than others! marketing is about deceiving potential customers in believing a product is a "must have".


You think "marketing" is about deceiving potential customers??? No wonder you think Ginault did no wrong. Misguided soul, indeed. :roll:


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

Lol. And still no ACTUAL proof of negative counter-claims. Still just hopelessly mired in marketing spin and blissfully ignorant of the quality of the watch in question. Handled one to develop an informed opinion? Nope. At least Ginault put out an absolutely kick-a$$ Rolex homage. The nicest this side of MK II, and from qualified forum members, gives that beauty a real run for its money at that.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> Lol. And still no ACTUAL proof of negative counter-claims. Still just hopelessly mired in marketing spin and blissfully ignorant of the quality of the watch in question. Handled one to develop an informed opinion? Nope. At least Ginault put out an absolutely kick-a$$ Rolex homage. The nicest this side of MK II, and from qualified forum members, gives that beauty a real run for its money at that.


*Sigh* Still not understanding logic, I see. I am not making any counter-claims, Radar. It's not for me to prove or disapprove anything. Do you know what projecting means? Marketing spin? What am I marketing or spinning? Isn't it Ginault that's doing that?

Do you know what strawman is? What does quality of Ginault watch has to do with Ginault's deceitful marketing practice. Do you know what conflating means? Ginaul, the company, is not same as Ocean Rover, the product. But then again, these points have been made over and over many times. By this point, you are either intentionally being dense or...


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

:-!


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Come on guys. It is just a watch. Why fight tooth and nail over it?

Just answer to OP's question and move along.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Come on guys. It is just a watch. Why fight tooth and nail over it?
> 
> Just answer to OP's question and move along.


I think I have actually provided some relevant, and valuable "hands-on" feedback along the way. |>


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Radar1 said:


> I think I have actually provided some relevant, and valuable "hands-on" feedback along the way. |>


Yes you did. Thank you.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

:-d There, there, Radar. You feel a little better now? You should post some comparison photos between Squale, Steinhart and Ginault. You do take great photos (and I mean that sincerely, without any snark).


----------



## WastedYears (May 21, 2015)

What does anyone's marketing tactics have to do with the topic of this thread?


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

lvt said:


> If you can only have one (1) dive watch from those three brands, which watch will you buy from them ?





WastedYears said:


> What does anyone's marketing tactics have to do with the topic of this thread?


You don't think marketing tactics of each brand have any bearing on the original question posed by the OP?


----------



## WastedYears (May 21, 2015)

RNHC said:


> You don't think marketing tactics of each brand have any bearing on the original question posed by the OP?


No, I don't. The question is 'which one is best?', not 'which company do you take issue with?'.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

zymphad said:


> Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts





Avo said:


> And your evidence for this is what, exactly?





RNHC said:


> Why did Ginault retract their "Made in USA" claim? Everything zymphad stated is evinced in Ginault's own website. Are you, Avo, actually going against Ginault's own admissions?


This is what it says on Ginault's web site:



> We wanted to do something that has not been attempted by small independent watch companies for a long time. We thought maybe we can produce our own movement parts domestically.
> 
> To make this a reality consists two parts, movement parts production and movement assembly. Although these are two totally different realms, our team has the knowledge and know-how of both. What we do not have is the resource to invest in exotic and capital heavy equipment in making these parts. But we kind of have an idea where to look for them.
> 
> ...


 https://ginault.com/caliber-7275/

However, as Ginault notes, "We simply did not know the FTC rules, that for a product to use US Made or Made in USA ALL parts or VIRTUALLY ALL parts have to be made in the US." 
https://ginault.com/prototype-180260gsln-vs-180165c1ln-media-qa/

The listed foreign parts disqualify them from a "Made in USA" claim, so they've stopped making it.

But if you or zymphad or anyone else wants to claim that Ginault is lying, that they actually use all Chinese parts, you really ought to supply some evidence for this.


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

Wow. I'm new to the forum and this is the first time I've seen a fight. I like how it was very quickly taken down to a reasonable level. Congrats to everyone involved.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

GrounchOldGuy said:


> Wow. I'm new to the forum and this is the first time I've seen a fight. I like how it was very quickly taken down to a reasonable level. Congrats to everyone involved.


Well, the Ginault debate is quite old, rehashed by the same players (myself included) over and over in many other threads. Probably why it looks like it got taken down to a reasonable level - there really is nothing new to add or talk about. It's same old arguments on both sides again and again.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Avo said:


> But if you or zymphad or anyone else wants to claim that Ginault is lying, that they actually use all Chinese parts, you really ought to supply some evidence for this.


Again, here is zymphad's quote:



zymphad said:


> Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts


Which part of zymphad's claim is not true? In fact, it looks like what you dug up only supports zymphad's claim and undermines yours.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

Prove that they didn't have SOME parts of the watch made in America. You cannot. The company clearly states that some parts were made in China. The crystal in England. Assembled in USA.

I think the OP wants to know more about the overall build quality of the watches in question. I think people should have firsthand (read in hand) knowledge of same before making utterances. I stated that I can't comment directly on Squale for this simple reason. How many components (and which) from the Steinhart and Squale pieces are sourced in China? I am curious.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

RNHC said:


> Which part of zymphad's claim is not true? In fact, it looks like what you dug up only supports zymphad's claim and undermines yours.


Ginault claims that all parts of the movement are sourced domestically except the mainspring, the hairspring, the jewels, and the shock absorber.

zymphad claims that all parts of the movement are sourced from China.

If you cannot see that these claims are not the same , I just don't know what to say.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Avo said:


> zymphad claims that all parts of the movement are sourced from China.
> 
> If you cannot see that these claims are not the same , I just don't know what to say.


Where did zymphad claim that *all *parts of the movement are sourced from China? He simply said Ginault uses Chinese parts. The inference is entirely on you and your insecurity about Ginault.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

WastedYears said:


> No, I don't. The question is 'which one is best?', not 'which company do you take issue with?'.


*Shrug* If a company's ethics and principles are of absolutely no concern, why stop at "homage" level of copying?


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

So .... its clear that RHNC takes the FTC's standards very seriously, which is only right, but I don't even seem to be able to complying with the FDA standards, so I'm in no position to judge Ginault. To make amends, in the future when I'm boring the guy next to me at the bar by making him look at my watch I'll mention that there some Chinese parts.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

Made in America error dealt with. Some non-American parts acknowledged when it was first released. Next.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

RNHC said:


> Where did zymphad claim that *all *parts of the movement are sourced from China? He simply said Ginault uses Chinese parts. The inference is entirely on you and your insecurity about Ginault.


His exact words were "_Ginault is not made in America, it's assembled, using Chinese parts"
_
To me that indeed sounds like a claim that all parts are China made. Ginault's claim is that, on the contrary, all movement parts are US made with the exception of the hairspring, mainspring, jewels, and shock absorber.

If you think those claims are compatible ... well, again, I can't help you.


----------



## kelt (May 17, 2013)

RNHC said:


> .This message is hidden because RNHC is on your ignore list.


The ignore list is a great tool, it has the same effect as mosquito repellent on pesky bullies.


----------



## Avo (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't want to ignore people who post highly misleading statements, I want to read them so that I can post corrections.

The indisputable facts are that Ginault claims to source the parts for its movement from US sources (with exceptions listed in previous posts). This may or may not be true, I have no way to check it. If someone has evidence that these claims are false, then I would like to see that evidence. If not, claims that Ginault is lying should be clearly marked as personal opinion, and not posted as if it was verified fact.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)




----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

GrounchOldGuy said:


> So .... its clear that RHNC takes the FTC's standards very seriously, which is only right, but I don't even seem to be able to complying with the FDA standards, so I'm in no position to judge Ginault. To make amends, in the future when I'm boring the guy next to me at the bar by making him look at my watch I'll mention that there some Chinese parts.


Okay, buddy. I can only assume your FDA reference has to do something with medication. Feel better. |>


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

kelt said:


> The ignore list is a great tool, it has the same effect as mosquito repellent on pesky bullies.


Aww, you guys are hurting my feelings. *boo hoo* :-( :-d


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar, post up some Squale and Steinhart photos too. It's only fair.


----------



## mf1tym (Dec 21, 2016)

Arcadiax said:


> Squale every time. If you wear a Ginault or Steinhart that looks like a Rolex, people will think you can't afford a real one! Squale has genuine history and unique design and isn't trying to knock off a great design. I don't have an ethical issue with someone replicating a famous design and putting their own name on it - particularly for discontinued or vintage watches. I just don't think its meritorious. Get the Squale and save up for a real Subbie.


I think the OP should edit the subject of this thread making it more clear that the comparison is solely focused on which brand offers the best Sub homage provided that Ginault so far only has 1 line of watch, the Ocean Rover which is a Submariner homage. (by far the best in the business in my opinion. You really get what you paid for)

Without making the question more focused and clear, debates like the above quoted can easily surface and blur the focus.

With a more clear and focused Subject on Sub Homage comparison between the three brands, comments like the above would probably perish since Squale also has a few watches that look just like the Rolex Sub as well which can also be confusing.

I have mentioned this before. To a non WIS, a Sub homage with 50%, 60%, 70% resemblance to the Rolex Sub vs a Sub homage with 99% resemblance to the Rolex Sub would all just look like a Rolex Sub. They probably wouldn't understand the history and value in a homage watch either. And vice versa, to a WIS he or she will immediately know if the watch on the wrist is a homage or a Rolex and understands why homage market exit for the various reasons.


----------



## mf1tym (Dec 21, 2016)

GrounchOldGuy said:


> I choose the Ginault for functional reasons but was worried that people would think I was wearing a Rolex which would not be a positive thing.


I chose Ginault because I have a 116610LV and want a classic no-date version. I wasn't sold on the idea of buying used Rolex, or micros that only carry the looks not the quality. Ginault's Ocean Rover although costing more than the Squale and the Steinhert, the quality of the OR also demonstrates supremacy in this category. Very very happy with the purchase.

I had no problem with people thinking that it's a Rolex wannabe. I often introduce my OR as the "American Rolex" There is no shame in buying something because you truly adore the design and style, and the "original" creator no longer make them. Also, I truly enjoyed what Ginault did on the OR with their own flavor. How many times have you read or heard that a Rolex Sub owner expressed their desire wishing Rolex to make an iteration of the Sub in a certain way? The vintage lume, military-style sword hands, and maxi indices and the top-notch quality did just that for me. The OR is the next best thing you can get in lieu of the classic Rolex Subs if you care about both the quality and aesthetics.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

mf1tym said:


> I chose Ginault because I have a 116610LV and wants a classic no-date version. I wasn't sold on the idea of buying used Rolex, or micros that only carry the looks not the quality. Ginault's Ocean Rover although costing more than the Squale and the Steinhert, the quality of the OR also demonstrates supremacy in this category. Very very happy with the purchase.
> 
> I had no problem with people thinking that it's a Rolex wannabe. I often introduce my OR as the "American Rolex" There is no shame in buying something because you truly adore the design and style, and the "original" creator no longer make them. Also, I truly enjoyed what Ginault did on the OR with their own flavor. How many times have you read or heard that a Rolex Sub owner expressed their desire wishing Rolex to make an iteration of the Sub in a certain way? The vintage lume, military-style sword hands, and maxi indices and the top-notch quality did just that for me. The OR is the next best thing you can get in lieu of the classic Rolex Subs if you care about both the quality and aesthetics.


I love the way you put it as "American Rolex". :-!

That give me an idea ...

From now on, I would call my 39 mm Steinhart Ocean One as "German Rolex", and refer to my 40 mm Squale 20 ATMOS classic as "Italian Rolex". :-d


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

mf1tym said:


> I think the OP should edit the subject of this thread making it more clear that the comparison is solely focused on which brand offers the best Sub homage provided that Ginault so far only has 1 line of watch, the Ocean Rover which is a Submariner homage. (by far the best in the business in my opinion. You really get what you paid for)
> 
> Without making the question more focused and clear, debates like the above quoted can easily surface and blur the focus.
> 
> ...


I see what you mean, but unfortunately I can't edit the original post anymore (you only can edit a post within XX days after the date of its creation).

Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

lvt said:


> I see what you mean, but unfortunately I can't edit the original post anymore (you only can edit a post within XX days after the date of its creation).
> 
> Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


Well, you can say now, in the next post, what is the actual title or content you wanted in the opening post.

Better be late than never, right? 

Anyway, I still think that your question is limited strictly to 40 mm and below Sub homages. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## mf1tym (Dec 21, 2016)

RNHC said:


> :-sWhy did Ginault retract their "Made in USA" claim? Everything zymphad stated is evinced in Ginault's own website. Are you, Avo, actually going against Ginault's own admissions?


Here we go again.

It is very effective and yet very misleading to use the "made in USA" incident trying to paint a picture and fooling people into thinking Ginault's OR is mainly composed of cheap Chinese parts like the ones used on most other micro brands' watches.

Let me be clear. What Zymphad said is claiming (without bases and evidence) that Ginault Ocean Rover, just like the other Sub homages such as Steinhert and NTH, uses lower-cost, mediocre quality Chinese parts but try to pass them off as US made. I simply do not agree and do not believe that is the case.

I am willing to bet you a dime the Ocean Rover has more parts that were made in the US than Steinhart Ocean One has made in Switzerland.

Ginault did retract the "made in USA" thing due to ignorance of the US FTC guideline; however, this does not detract from the fact that majority of the parts used to make the Ocean Rover are super high quality, precision cut, machined, and finished parts made here in the US. There is a reason why the Ocean Rover quickly became the top dog in this category of watches.

From my observation of holding the watch in steel and my understanding of the watch industry and quality, I'd estimate 70%-80% of the parts were made here.

To me, the OR is 10 times more American than the new US passports.

The next closest rival in this category is probably 5-10 years behind in terms of production skills and capability. If it wasn't for educational purposes, comparing the Ocean Rover to the likes such as NTH, Steinhart, and Squale for quality is somewhat pointless and a bit like the OR is bullying the other kids. It's like using a GP bike paired with a top-level rider (Rossi, Stoner, Lorenzo.....) racing it in the 250cc race against younger less experienced riders.


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Anyway, I still think that your question is limited strictly to 40 mm and below Sub homages. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Yes it's about dive watches in general, I didn't think about the size when I created the subject, and Steinhart just released a 39mm version of its Ocean One serie.

My question mostly focused on the brand perception, wear comfort and build quality.

Thanks.

Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

RNHC said:


> Radar, post up some Squale and Steinhart photos too. It's only fair.


If you had followed along more carefully you would have read that I have never owned a Squale. There are a couple of models that I do like a lot and I would like to try one of those. I have posted many pics of my various Steinharts over the years. They are simply not on the same build level or have the finishing detail of the OR. That's a fact.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

lvt said:


> Yes it's about dive watches in general, I didn't think about the size when I created the subject, and Steinhart just released a 39mm version of its Ocean One serie.
> 
> My question mostly focused on the brand perception, wear comfort and build quality.
> 
> ...


Ah, in that case your question is not size limited then.

For brand perception, Steinhart probably the best at the moment. For wear comfort, Squale probably the best of the lot, but only marginal. For build quality, well ... you already know my answer.


----------



## Gfxdaddy (Jul 9, 2015)

RNHC said:


> Where did zymphad claim that *all *parts of the movement are sourced from China? He simply said Ginault uses Chinese parts. The inference is entirely on you and your insecurity about Ginault.


Well, this thread got derailed rather quickly.

The OP asked for which is the better watch-and has made clear his concern is with build quality and looks-not who has the more accurate marketing, and that's where holding the watch 'in-hand' makes a difference, hence the many references to it. Marketing hyperbole is just that and almost every product manufacturer is guilty of that; my Omega Speedie Moonphase I'm currently wearing states on the caseback "...the only watch worn on the moon", which we all know is BS.

With that in mind, and disregarding the marketing-which is not the issue in question:

Fact: the Ginault is the better finished watch of the three the OP asked after...and no matter your views on the marketing, you'd have the same conclusion if you wore all three.
Fact: the Ginault's movement stacks up pretty well so far compared to the ETA's in those other two and you'd have the same conclusion if you measured the accuracy of all three (I initially had concerns about mine but it just needed to settle in, which it has and I'm getting about +3 secs a day now).

Best build and finish + comparable accuracy = ???


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> If you had followed along more carefully you would have read that I have never owned a Squale. There are a couple of models that I do like a lot and I would like to try one of those. I have posted many pics of my various Steinharts over the years. They are simply not on the same build level or have the finishing detail of the OR. That's a fact.


Well, I can't really say I follow you along carefully (not at all actually) so I didn't realize you never owned a Squale. But you have owned Steinhart, you say? So post some Steinhart photos! You know you want to.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

RNHC said:


> Well, I can't really say I follow you along carefully (not at all actually) so I didn't realize you never owned a Squale. But you have owned Steinhart, you say? So post some Steinhart photos! You know you want to.


Why bother? Excepting _possibly_ Steinhart's Premium line the Ginault blows them away. Which ones of the three brands can you post up and make direct and relevant comments about?

PS You certainly "follow" me. Lol.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

mf1tym said:


> Here we go again...





Gfxdaddy said:


> Well, this thread got derailed rather quickly...


"The ladies doth protest too much, methinks." I smell perhaps post-purchase rationalization that fermented into confirmation bias sprinkled with a dash of ingroup bias. Whatever floats your boat, boys! You don't have to explain love. :-d


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> Why bother? Excepting _possibly_ Steinhart's Premium line the Ginault blows them away. Which ones of the three brands can you post up and make direct and relevant comments about?


None, actually. Not really into homages (copies).



Radar1 said:


> PS You certainly "follow" me. Lol.


Projecting again, I see. If it makes you feel better about yourself, go on and project to your heart's content. In the end, we all live in our own little version of reality. :-d


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

This Ocean One Black is inbound via trade next week. Think it holds a candle to the Ocean Rover? Not a chance. Doesn't mean the Steinhart isn't a great value and decent build. It's just not in the same league.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

RNHC said:


> None, actually. Not really into homages (copies).


 Too bad. And here we all thought you were so eminently qualified to comment on the three homage options under discussion. I sense an underlying tension here possibly related to the undeniable Ginault quality level in juxtaposition to the real McCoy. Perhaps a little to close for comfort. Lol.:-!

PS Homages are not copies. Therein lies another clue to the constant negativity.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> This Ocean One Black is inbound via trade next week. Thinks it holds a candle to the Ocean Rover? Not a chance. Doesn't mean the Steinhart isn't a great value and decent build. It's just not in the same league.


What does it even mean - it doesn't "hold a candle" and "not in the same league?" I do have a Rolex and watches from "lesser" brands. Sure, Rolex seems to be finished a wee bit nicer upon closer look but I couldn't say other watches' fit and finish don't "hold a candle" and "not in the same league" as Rolex. Enlighten me. Explain what you mean with pictures, if you would. :think:


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> PS Homages are not copies. Therein lies another clue to the constant negativity.


Because I have no interest in homages doesn't mean I think negatively of them. To each his own, I say.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

RNHC said:


> What does it even mean - it doesn't "hold a candle" and "not in the same league?" I do have a Rolex and watches from "lesser" brands. Sure, Rolex seems to be finished a wee bit nicer upon closer look but I couldn't say other watches' fit and finish don't "hold a candle" and "not in the same league" as Rolex.  Enlighten me. Explain what you mean with pictures, if you would. :think:


If you can't differentiate differing levels of quality (quite significant in this case, IMO) then I can't help you. The MO is simply to rile people up and stir the pot. It's been that way for as long as I can remember. I am not wasting any more time on it. And I am not getting dragged into a mutual ban either.

Enjoy that Rolex and the rest of us can enjoy our own watches. |>


----------



## Fomenko (Feb 27, 2012)

I've owned two Steinharts (Ocean One Black and Ocean One Vintage). Sold them both. Never owned a Squale but have handled a few. To answer the direct question posted by OP, the best of the three watches mentioned is the Ginault Ocean Rover. It's more refined, better fit and finish, far superior bracelet and buckle, very comfortable... I fully agree that the others are not in the same league. The Ginault should be compared to Oris, Tag Heuers, and similar watches that cost much more than this entry level brands. And I speak from experience after having my Ocean rover for almost a week now, and owning an Oris Maldives, Tag Aquaracer and Tudor Black Bay...


----------



## Morgan24 (Aug 15, 2016)

Placed an order on a Ginault two weeks ago, so should not be very long until I can compare it to my Steinhart OVM1...


----------



## Morgan24 (Aug 15, 2016)

And my MKII Kingston..


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

Morgan24 said:


> And my MKII Kingston..


This is the one that will be interesting.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Radar1 said:


> This is the one that will be interesting.


+1


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> If you can't differentiate differing levels of quality (quite significant in this case, IMO) then I can't help you.


You are sadly mistaken if you believe there is a "quite significant" differing levels of quality between Rolex and "lesser" brands. The law of diminishing return kicks in at much lower price point than you'd think. You seem to hold a misguided notion that Rolex is end-all when it comes to fit and finish. I assure you that is not the case. The difference in quality between Rolex and, let's say, Tudor is literally micrometers apart, if that. If aggrandizing trivial differences makes you feel better, well, bless your heart. But don't state it as if even a myopic blockhead would notice how Ginault is superior to Squale and Steinhart.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

Comprehension clearly isn't your long suit. Lol.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Radar1 said:


> Comprehension clearly isn't your long suit. Lol.


Projecting again, I see. It's a sign of fragile ego, you know. Well, I hope you feel better about yourself, buddy. Remember that a man is not defined by price point of his watch. ;-)


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

Sigh. Relegated to the ignore list. Happy trails, cowboy. 

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## zymphad (Dec 28, 2015)

Avo said:


> I don't want to ignore people who post highly misleading statements, I want to read them so that I can post corrections.
> 
> The indisputable facts are that Ginault claims to source the parts for its movement from US sources (with exceptions listed in previous posts). This may or may not be true, I have no way to check it. If someone has evidence that these claims are false, then I would like to see that evidence. If not, claims that Ginault is lying should be clearly marked as personal opinion, and not posted as if it was verified fact.


Disagree 100%

They are ADVERTISING and MARKETING AS MADE IN AMERICA. It is on THEM to prove it so, not on us to prove them wrong. Your mentality to me is absurd, and laughable.

But enjoy your Rolex American Made counterfeit. Since it's American, it's OK, but if it was a Chinese counterfeit? I really don't give a F what name is on the dial or the slightly different words on it, or that it doesn't use a mercedes hour hand. This is a counterfeit in sheeps clothing, not a homage.


----------



## mf1tym (Dec 21, 2016)

zymphad said:


> Disagree 100%
> 
> They are ADVERTISING and MARKETING AS MADE IN AMERICA. It is on THEM to prove it so, not on us to prove them wrong. Your mentality to me is absurd, and laughable.
> 
> But enjoy your Rolex American Made counterfeit. Since it's American, it's OK, but if it was a Chinese counterfeit? I really don't give a F what name is on the dial or the slightly different words on it, or that it doesn't use a mercedes hour hand. This is a counterfeit in sheeps clothing, not a homage.


I disagree 100%.

Again two separate issues here.

1 is that you are claiming them of being deceitful with their marketing. The made in USA incident was addressed and corrected by Ginault. Do you even know how the whole event unfolded? Do you even know how it went from "made in USA" to them removing it? Please explain it to us if you know the whole incident. And if you don't maybe you should study it before speaking.

2. You claiming Ginault's Ocean Rover is a counterfeit watch is absurd and you might be liable for a slander suit if Ginault decides to bring it on to you. That's as if someone calling your mother a whore on the forums. You shouldn't be slandering another company or your competition like this. Again this is the malicious intend I spoke of from early on.


----------



## Porsche993 (Jan 6, 2017)

zymphad said:


> Disagree 100%
> 
> They are ADVERTISING and MARKETING AS MADE IN AMERICA. It is on THEM to prove it so, not on us to prove them wrong. Your mentality to me is absurd, and laughable.
> 
> But enjoy your Rolex American Made counterfeit. Since it's American, it's OK, but if it was a Chinese counterfeit? I really don't give a F what name is on the dial or the slightly different words on it, or that it doesn't use a mercedes hour hand. This is a counterfeit in sheeps clothing, not a homage.


Where does the current marketing blurb say 'Made in USA'? NOWHERE. Any references were retracted well over 6 months ago.

From their website:
Q: In the member reviews, there is a bold statement on the caseback of your Ocean-Rover stating "MADE IN USA". Are youplaying the patriotism game to gain sales?
A: Absolutely not. The Made In USA phrase was used out of ignorance.
The "Made In USA" casebacks were from the old batch used on our BM1. We simply did not know the FTC rules, that for a product to use US Made or Made in USA *ALL* parts or *VIRTUALLY ALL* parts have to be made in the US.
It was not an intent to deceive nor was it our intention to spin the US Made mark in hopes of driving up sales.
We clearly indicated that certain parts of our watches were imported. BM1 was even equipped with a Swiss ETA back in the days. If we knew such stringent regulation is applied to the Made In USA phrase we would not have put it there.
We have made a new batch with a different engraving. Members who ordered the Ocean-Rover that came with the original BM1 style casebacks will receive a replacement upon request.
With that being said our watches are hand built/assembled here in the United States.
We take great pride in this.


----------



## Lost Cosmonaut (Apr 14, 2009)

mf1tym said:


> 2. You claiming Ginault's Ocean Rover is a counterfeit watch is absurd and you might be liable for a slander suit if Ginault decides to bring it on to you. That's as if someone calling your mother a whore on the forums. You shouldn't be slandering another company or your competition like this. Again this is the malicious intend I spoke of from early on.


Lol, not quite but nice try.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

I don't know, how about mine, which was ordered and received in March?


----------



## Lost Cosmonaut (Apr 14, 2009)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> I don't know, how about mine, which was ordered and received in March?
> View attachment 12542971


That's a loophole, "Hand Built in America" doesn't have the legal protection or standing that "Made in USA/America" has. This is how Shinola gets away with it as well. It's a far more ambiguous wording that would legally allow them to do just about anything (including sourcing 100% of their parts overseas and assembling them here).


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Lost Cosmonaut said:


> That's a loophole, "Hand Built in America" doesn't have the legal protection or standing that "Made in USA/America" has. This is how Shinola gets away with it as well. It's a far more ambiguous wording that would legally allow them to do just about anything (including sourcing 100% of their parts overseas and assembling them here).


Thanks for clearing my doubt. ;-)


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

Wow is this stupid .... still going on? I had no idea people were so passionate about FTC regulations. Is it ok if I still love my crappy Chinese Ginault?


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

GrounchOldGuy said:


> Wow is this stupid .... still going on? I had no idea people were so passionate about FTC regulations. Is it ok if I still love my crappy Chinese Ginault?


It's ok bro, at least to me. ;-)


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

GrounchOldGuy said:


> Wow is this stupid .... still going on? I had no idea people were so passionate about FTC regulations. Is it ok if I still love my crappy Chinese Ginault?


Of course. That's like saying "Is it okay if I still love my crappy Chinese [insert any microbrand name]?" *All *microbrands (and good chunk of parts in "Swiss Made" watches) are made in China. People don't consider microbrands crappy last time I checked. Why do you assume people associate crappy and Chinese together? A WIS would and should know better.

The issue was about deceitful claims, not country of manufacture.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> I don't know, how about mine, which was ordered and received in March?
> View attachment 12542971


According to the regulations, this is not the same as "Made in America". That is the distinction. The watch _is_ hand built in America, including the movement.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Radar1 said:


> According to the regulations, this is not the same as "Made in America". That is the distinction. The watch _is_ hand built in America, including the movement.


Ok.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Double post.


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Ok.


Love that blue bezel variant, BTW. |>


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Radar1 said:


> Love that blue bezel variant, BTW. |>


Thanks. But it is actually black, not blue. Likely due to the lighting, and incorrect white balancing of my iPhone. 

Now that you said, it would be awesome if Ginault, Steinhart, Squale, Nth, or whoever can make the 'blue' variant of my pic. ;-)


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Thanks. But it is actually black, not blue. Likely due to the lighting, and incorrect white balancing of my iPhone.
> 
> Now that you said, it would be awesome if Ginault, Steinhart, Squale, Nth, or whoever can make the 'blue' variant of my pic. ;-)


Oh! Ginault does make a blue bezel variant, but it may have sold out.


----------



## Fomenko (Feb 27, 2012)

Mine is the blue bezel, no date. It's available now... I took this pic to compare 40, 41 and 42 mm.


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Radar1 said:


> Oh! Ginault does make a blue bezel variant, but it may have sold out.
> 
> View attachment 12544195


Not this blue. I mean the slightly 'vintage' blue in my own "accidental" pic.


----------



## Gfxdaddy (Jul 9, 2015)

RNHC said:


> "The ladies doth protest too much, methinks." I smell perhaps post-purchase rationalization that fermented into confirmation bias sprinkled with a dash of ingroup bias. Whatever floats your boat, boys! You don't have to explain love.


Good lord, is this still going on? Post-purchase rationalisation? Lol...look at my signature, I have none. Oh, and to assist you with your query regarding the Planet Ocean 42mm vs the 39.5 (that you posted in another thread) search my posts: I've owned both and have posted comparison pictures. This is what WUS is supposed to be about, helping and encouraging each other, not name-calling like we're in the 5th grade.



RNHC said:


> The issue was about deceitful claims, not country of manufacture.


And this entire thread is about the better watch, not the watch company's claims.



RNHC said:


> You are sadly mistaken if you believe there is a "quite significant" differing levels of quality between Rolex and "lesser" brands. The law of diminishing return kicks in at much lower price point than you'd think. You seem to hold a misguided notion that Rolex is end-all when it comes to fit and finish. I assure you that is not the case. The difference in quality between Rolex and, let's say, Tudor is literally micrometers apart, if that. If aggrandizing trivial differences makes you feel better, well, bless your heart. But don't state it as if even a myopic blockhead would notice how Ginault is superior to Squale and Steinhart.


Nowhere in @Radar1 response did he claim Rolex's fit and finish was the end-all and be-all. He compared between Steinhart, Squale and the OR...again, the topic of this post. You somehow reached into your hat and pulled out a Rolex. T.r.o.l.l.i.n.g.

Seriously, you seem to have a problem with comprehension. And I agree with the others, if you cannot tell the difference in finishing and build quality between a Steinhart and, say, an Oris Divers 65 / Raymond Weil / other watches in the entry-level luxury class-which is where I'd put the OR in terms of finishing-then I don't know what to say because it's clear as day. And no, to pre-empt you, no explanation will be forthcoming-if you don't own them then walk into a boutique to compare for yourself.

I'm pretty sure you're going to respond to this in some childish manner or other so go ahead-you won't get a further response from me. The OP has gotten all the information he needs from this thread, which was the point, so I think it's safe to say we can move on-I look forward to seeing updates with pictures of his decision. Live long and prosper friend.


----------



## Gfxdaddy (Jul 9, 2015)

Morgan24 said:


> And my MKII Kingston..


This is the comparison I'd want to see myself. Could you please add a link to this thread once you do?


----------



## Radar1 (Mar 1, 2013)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Not this blue. I mean the slightly 'vintage' blue in my own "accidental" pic.


Tough audience. Lol. |>


----------



## MadMex (Jun 18, 2010)

Don't worry Radar1, he's obviously pixelated...


----------



## Quicksilver (Jan 12, 2012)

RNHC said:


> Because I have no interest in homages doesn't mean I think negatively of them. To each his own, I say.


Stop posting in this thread.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Quicksilver (Jan 12, 2012)

Radar1 said:


> Oh! Ginault does make a blue bezel variant.


Stop posting in this thread

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Quicksilver (Jan 12, 2012)

I want both of you to take a break from this thread. Actually I want you both to take a break from responding to each other in any Ginault thread. 
Simple. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## GrounchOldGuy (Aug 6, 2017)

Wow again wow. Very cool Quicksilver. I'm new to forums and this is the first time I've seen a squabble like this. I've got to say that everyone acquitted themselves in a gentlemanly manner and I'm impressed. Even RNHC and radar never descended to name calling and fury. Then you politely step in before things get crazy. I'm really glad I found WatchUSeek.


----------



## mf1tym (Dec 21, 2016)

Radar1 said:


> Oh! Ginault does make a blue bezel variant, but it may have sold out.
> 
> View attachment 12544195


WOW this thing is a beaut!


----------



## matador02 (Feb 17, 2010)

lvt said:


> If you can only have one (1) dive watch from those three brands, which watch will you buy from them ?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


I can't never decide on one, so I got all three!!


----------



## Morgan24 (Aug 15, 2016)

So which one do you prefer?


----------



## Hornet99 (Jun 27, 2015)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> I love the way you put it as "American Rolex". :-!
> 
> That give me an idea ...
> 
> From now on, I would call my 39 mm Steinhart Ocean One as "German Rolex", and refer to my 40 mm Squale 20 ATMOS classic as "Italian Rolex". :-d


Steinhart and Squale are Swiss made so still need to be called the Swiss bargain Rolex?!


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

matador02 said:


> I can't never decide on one, so I got all three!!


Typically WUS solution.

So what's your favourite one among those three watches?

Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Hornet99 said:


> Steinhart and Squale are Swiss made so still need to be called the Swiss bargain Rolex?!


Lol, bro, it's hard to differentiate them, if I call both as Swiss bargain Rolex.

'German Rolex' and 'Italian Rolex' are more suitable.

Btw, I might as well call my Tisell vintage red Submersibles as "Korean Rolex", Armida A11 as "Hong Kong Rolex", Aramar Arctic Patrol as "Netherlands Rolex" .... well, you get the idea. ;-)

EDIT : Just to add, if I have Borealis Bull Shark, I would call it "Portugal Rolex", lol.


----------



## matador02 (Feb 17, 2010)

lvt said:


> Typically WUS solution.
> 
> So what's your favourite one among those three watches?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


I will be doing a review soon and after wearing having a close inspection on all three, and without a doubt, the Ginault Ocean Rover 181217GSLN wins and my choice. You really must have the Ginault in front of you and holding it, wearing it to really see first hand why it is a great watch.


----------



## matador02 (Feb 17, 2010)

Morgan24 said:


> So which one do you prefer?


The Ginault Ocean Rover 181270GSLN by far.


----------



## Hornet99 (Jun 27, 2015)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> Lol, bro, it's hard to differentiate them, if I call both as Swiss bargain Rolex.
> 
> 'German Rolex' and 'Italian Rolex' are more suitable.
> 
> ...


Totally agree, but was simply being an arse (I've had a lot of practice) b-) :-d


----------



## SimpleWatchMan (Apr 25, 2014)

Hornet99 said:


> Totally agree, but was simply being an arse (I've had a lot of practice) b-) :-d


No worries bro, a bit of horsing around is fine for me. ;-)


----------



## Hornet99 (Jun 27, 2015)

SimpleWatchMan said:


> No worries bro, a bit of horsing around is fine for me. ;-)


:-!


----------



## Morgan24 (Aug 15, 2016)

Looking forward to getting my Ginault one of these days.


----------



## matador02 (Feb 17, 2010)

Day two with my Ginault Ocean Rover 181270GSLN and still enjoying it.


----------



## Skim_Milk (Aug 9, 2014)

I'd go for the squale, but you can't go wrong with any of those


----------



## Aquifer_Pro (Feb 23, 2008)

I'm not familiar with Ginault or Squale, but I really like the quality/price ratio and customer service of Steinhart.


----------



## Gfxdaddy (Jul 9, 2015)

matador02 said:


> I will be doing a review soon and after wearing having a close inspection on all three, and without a doubt, the Ginault Ocean Rover 181217GSLN wins and my choice. You really must have the Ginault in front of you and holding it, wearing it to really see first hand why it is a great watch.


I'd love to read that review...especially if it was a comparative one (against the others in your collection)-there aren't too many comparative reviews for this on here.


----------



## The_Datta (May 5, 2017)

I would've said ginault but now the Steiny 39mm is a must have


----------



## pochitoski (May 11, 2013)

All of them are very good watches


----------



## anrex (Jul 30, 2017)

The quality is still impressive after over two months of owning...


----------



## pochitoski (May 11, 2013)

I have a Steinhart and I also own a Squale. I think both of them are great value for the price and great quality


----------



## omega1300 (Jun 24, 2010)

Still love it...









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## anrex (Jul 30, 2017)

omega1300 said:


> Still love it...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a great looking NATO!


----------



## wongthian2 (Jun 16, 2016)

I have 2 Squale and think they are keepers. The case is low but heavy and the ETA mvt is solid.


----------



## Seppia (Sep 1, 2013)

Taste is personal, but build quality wise the Ginault is in a different league.


----------



## omega1300 (Jun 24, 2010)

anrex said:


> That's a great looking NATO!


Thanks!! It's got flamingos on it and I couldn't resist - perfect for this watch!









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## David SquaGly (Mar 3, 2013)

Pulled the trigger on an Ocean 44 last week - hoping to be not disappointed!!


----------



## DiverBob (May 13, 2007)

Yeah.


----------



## Watch Hawk 71 (Nov 15, 2013)

HaymondWong said:


> I have 2 Squale and think they are keepers. The case is low but heavy and the ETA mvt is solid.


Ha! I have the same pair, and I love them.


----------



## thekush (Dec 30, 2014)

My pick's Steinhart. Have owned 5 in my life and each one's been great.


----------



## Kulprit (Oct 7, 2017)

I prefer the Steinhart T500 and their vintage divers, followed by the Squale 50 atmos series. I don't care for the straight Submariner homages Steinhart (except the aforementioned vintage models) or Squale (30 atmos line) make. That completely rules out Ginault since that's pretty much all they make. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nanotech9 (May 16, 2011)

My pick is Steinhart as well, but Thats all i own so far... so i'm biased. I went with the Salamander for my first... although i have to admit the Squale pepsi looks pretty nice.


----------



## Timev0id (Jun 19, 2016)

Avo said:


> cuthbert said:
> 
> 
> > this watch has 0% Rolex content:
> ...


The first watch manufacturer with that dial was Blancpain fifty fathoms.

Rolex submariner was first water tight to 100m.

Wonderfully articles about the origin of the dive watch.

https://www.timepiecechronicle.com/...-brief-history-of-the-blancpain-fifty-fathoms

https://www.google.se/amp/s/www.ablogtowatch.com/brief-history-waterproof-watches/amp/


----------



## Riddim Driven (Jun 3, 2007)

They're all the same, with Squale on the bottom


----------



## Timev0id (Jun 19, 2016)

I vote Squale ofc. Got a tropic GMT and it's perfectly executed. Except the clasp.

Fun article about Von Büren and Squale.

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/blood-in-the-water-water-in-its-blood-a-brief-history-of-squale


----------



## TheHans (May 16, 2015)

Ginault seems a tad high priced to me. I don't know if I would pay that much for an homage like that. Specs look decent...but they should have added more original touches.


----------



## mark_engelbrecht (Jul 17, 2016)

Steinhart for me ......


----------



## Terry Lennox (Dec 14, 2017)

I own a Steinhart and love it. 
I would consider a Ginault if the price were lower. I feel like the sweet spot for these homages is 400-700. Once I get over a thousand I tend to want to start looking at DOXA, etc.


----------



## Pazzo (Jun 11, 2017)

Riddim Driven said:


> They're all the same, with Squale on the bottom


I won't put any at the bottom. I simply put Squale on top.


----------



## Homo Sapien X (Sep 15, 2018)

Casing wise : top is Squale
Style wise : same, they are brothers
Price wise : Rolex, bottom



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## P.J.M. (Sep 10, 2018)

**** Sapien X said:


> *Casing wise* :* top is Squale*
> Style wise : same, they are brothers
> Price wise : Rolex, bottom
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I disagree with this. I own a Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military and a Squale 20 ATMOS Heritage 1545 and both are on par in every area except the bezel where the Steinhart is superior due to the edges of the Squale being much smoother to the touch and not as easy to get a grip as on the Steinhart.


----------



## nepatriot (Oct 1, 2010)

lvt said:


> If you can only have one (1) dive watch from those three brands, which watch will you buy from them ?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H630 using Tapatalk


Which Squale? If you mean the 1545, that's a Rolex homage, so that's in the ball park as far as style. Same for the Steinhart.

If I could have only watch one from one these brands, and I wanted a homage, then it would be the original Squale 1545; #2: the newer (Rolex) size Steinhart.

Rational:

1). Movement: Swiss made ETA 2824
2). Value: half the cost of a Ginault
3). Resale value: recognized brands

The Ginault is a nice looking watch, and many owners have positive things to say about them.

But for the cost, you can get a Squale 1521. Squale is the real deal, an historic brand, Swiss made. The 1521 is an authentic resurrected watch, dating back to the early dive days. It's the same case and design used for the Blancpain first 50 Fathoms, and Blancpain's German Navy diver.

The 1545 and Steinhart use ETA 2824 movements, compared to a the Ginault knock off, which is of questionable origin. Yes, I know what they say. May be true. But if so, what an achievement! I'd shout it from the roof tops. Or at least brand the movement, and label it Made in USA.... right on the rotor. Like all other movements makers do. I'd invite in the press and let them document with a video tour of the USA factory, showing the team of highly skilled watch makers at work.

They may be casing their watches in the US, like Shinola. But they would indeed need to be assembling the movement in the USA to claim assembled in USA. This "built in" think is misleading at best.

Not saying they aren't making a nice watch.

But unless verified by the FTC, I'd not pay more than a high end replicate price for one. $400 or so tops. If verified by the FTC, I'd pay more than what their full list price. That would be a bargain!


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

Is Ginault still a thing?


----------



## FordHammie (Nov 24, 2017)

kelt said:


> Steinhart, for its quality/price ratio.
> Ginault for its outstanding quality and fidelity to the 5 digit Submariner design.
> Squale is disqualified by its childish logo, can't stand it, may be with a sterile dial, altough the poor quality of their crown design is still a concern.


Agreed! Their logo stinks in my opinion! 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## threewood (Sep 28, 2011)

I just went through this, looking at all three without knowing this thread existed. I ordered the Squale. All three have the Eta 2824 based movement, I like the Squale logo and looks a bit more and I couldn't justify paying twice as much for the Ginault at this time.


----------



## FordHammie (Nov 24, 2017)

I'm personally digging the Ginault for it's approach and quality, however why didn't they put the flower logo on the clasp like Monta did is beyond me. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ryeguy (Jun 24, 2009)

FordHammie said:


> I'm personally digging the Ginault for it's approach and quality, however why didn't they put the flower logo on the clasp like Monta did is beyond me.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Agreed. This would've been a nice touch.

I think with just some minor enhancements - the mentioned signed clasp, drilled lugs, a fully indexed bezel - and the Ginault could be one of the best mil-sub homages on the market.

If they added some further enhancements such as an anti-magnetic cage, the Ginault could contend with (and likely beat) the MKii Fulcrum.


----------



## nepatriot (Oct 1, 2010)

threewood said:


> I just went through this, looking at all three without knowing this thread existed. I ordered the Squale.


You mean a 1545mm right?



threewood said:


> All three have the Eta 2824 based movement,


Well, not quite right: the 1545 and Steinhart use actual ETA 2824's. Swiss made, meaning at least 50% of the parts made in Switzerland (60% of the total watch).

The Ginault uses an unknown, unmarked, clone of either a 2824 or a Chinese Seagull (a 2824 clone). It may even be a Seagull, modified and regulated by Ginault.

Not knocking the Ginault movement. Just clarifying that it is not an ETA 2824. So apples and oranges: close vs. the real thing.



threewood said:


> I like the Squale logo and looks a bit more and I couldn't justify paying twice as much for the Ginault at this time.


While some people do not like the Squale logo, it is the original logo of an historic Swiss dive watch brand, that was launched in the late 1950's, by a Swiss company that has an even longer history in early dive watches specifically, and watches in general.

Personally, I like that they never modernized the logo.


----------



## cfracing (Feb 21, 2015)

My comparison is strictly of the Milsub homage watches.

I have not handled or seen in person any of the watches, but several that have have mentioned the superior workmanship of the Ginault so i will give it a plus for that. However, the price and the size, supposedly 50mm lug-to-lug, eliminate it from consideration for my smallish wrist.

I personally don't mind the Squale logo especially because it has history which others have mentioned before. I also believe the Squale has a better bracelet than the Steinhart and has a ceramic instead of stainless bezel insert. Also, if you are going to talk about what is on the dial, then what about the book that is on the Ginault with almost nonsensical expressions like "KINETIC CONTINUOUS DATE" and "SUBMERSIBLE MARITIME PRECISION CHRONOMETER".

However, I went with the Steinhart OVM 39 because it became available first, it was a good value, it had what I felt was comparable quality to the Squale, the bezel action was better, and the size was better for me being 1 mm smaller in case size and lug-to-lug. Also, if it matters I think it is truer to the original Rolex Milsub than the Squale 1545.


----------



## barutanseijin (Sep 18, 2017)

A diver should be highly legible. All the dead fish and haiku on the Squale and Ginault dials get in the way of time-telling. I don't care how nice the rest of a Ginault is -- mystery movement and all -- i cannot tolerate that wordy dial.

The redundant branding on Squale dials is annoying and distracting, but the real deal killer is the "Squale" on the cases. No thanks. 

Steinhart divers have less clutter on their dials and less obtrusive branding, so they get my vote.


----------



## Pazzo (Jun 11, 2017)

Squale 

50 or 60 Atmos.


----------



## Earthjade (Jan 5, 2018)

I've owned a Steinhart Ocean 39 Black and now have a new model Squale 1521 50 Atmos. Can't speak for Ginault.

STEINHART
* Rolex Submariner knock off.
* Excellent case, bracelet, dial and hands.
* Minimal branding that imitates the Submariner dial branding.
* Good dial lume.
* My first Steinhart had a faulty movement that broke within a week (Steinhart eventually replaced it for me).
* Replacement Steinhart ran at +5 seconds a day out of the box.
* Lume application on the bezel was slightly crooked.
* Bezel felt cheap, was hard to turn, did not properly align to 12 o'clock at all times and had a lot of play.

SQUALE
* Original design. Unique among dive watches.
* Excellent build and finishing. Absolutely beautiful.
* Minimal branding ("Squale" written once on the dial and fish logo only appears on the case back - no side etching or "double logo" on the dial of my 50 Atmos)
* Crap dial lume.
* Ran at +15 seconds out of the box and it annoyed me: paid to have it regulated to within +8 seconds.
* Bezel easy to turn, amazing build quality and had no play.

Was happy with the Steinhart at first but the knock-off homage aspect began to annoy me over time. With the Squale, the original design is going to have a lot more staying power with me.
So without holding and knowing how Ginault is, I say Squale is the best for me. Because Ginault has another Submariner knock-off homage line like Steinhart, I'd probably have the same concerns with that company as I did with Steinhart (though Steinhart do make a few original designs but they don't seem to be too popular).

Now, if you're talking about the Squale 1545 line and are looking for a battle of the Submariner homages, I'd place Squale last with a toss-up between Steinhart and Ginault based on looks. I'd probably choose the Steinhart because it's legitimately Swiss Made and has an ETA movement in it, so no surprises for servicing. I don't know how reliable Ginault's movement is so why take the chance?


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

barutanseijin said:


> A diver should be highly legible. All the dead fish and haiku on the Squale and Ginault dials get in the way of time-telling. I don't care how nice the rest of a Ginault is -- mystery movement and all -- i cannot tolerate that wordy dial.
> 
> The redundant branding on Squale dials is annoying and distracting, but the real deal killer is the "Squale" on the cases. No thanks.
> 
> Steinhart divers have less clutter on their dials and less obtrusive branding, so they get my vote.


Have several Squale and several More Steinhart.....just wanted to say not all Squale have the fish logo or the case name: (actually none of my 3 Squale have the case engraving)


----------



## Porsche993 (Jan 6, 2017)

cfracing said:


> My comparison is strictly of the Milsub homage watches.
> 
> I have not handled or seen in person any of the watches, but several that have have mentioned the superior workmanship of the Ginault so i will give it a plus for that. However, the price and the size, supposedly 50mm lug-to-lug, eliminate it from consideration for my smallish wrist.
> 
> ...


I query that 50mm lug to lug measurement. Its wears small on my 17cm wrist. For me its perfect dimension wise. And to be honest after a while you stop noticing the text on the dial. Really all things considered the Ginault is best of the three here. The regulation makes my example +1-2 s/d easily beating my high end watches that cost 10x more.


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

Meant to post this here, not the other ginault thread:

As a Big fan of MilSub homages, and owner of several (dozen) I passed on the ginault as I believe the OWC 5517 is a better watch with a better movement, the Soprod A-10, which is a Swiss made version of a high-beat Seiko design.


----------



## Homo Sapien X (Sep 15, 2018)

Earthjade said:


> I've owned a Steinhart Ocean 39 Black and now have a new model Squale 1521 50 Atmos. Can't speak for Ginault.
> 
> STEINHART
> * Rolex Submariner knock off.
> ...


I think all 3 are nice watches. For that prices , it makes me believe that buying a Rolex Submariner is somewhat delusional.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cfracing (Feb 21, 2015)

Porsche993 said:


> I query that 50mm lug to lug measurement. Its wears small on my 17cm wrist. For me its perfect dimension wise. And to be honest after a while you stop noticing the text on the dial. Really all things considered the Ginault is best of the three here. The regulation makes my example +1-2 s/d easily beating my high end watches that cost 10x more.


Yes, I think I remember reading that either in a review or a post by an owner, which is why I said "supposedly". However, the lugs do look straight and long to me.

Cost was a major factor in my decision because I was looking for a decent quality, relatively inexpensive watch with good water resistance as a "beater" watch that was an homage to the Rolex Milsub. However, now I see that Ginault has a model that sells for $699 and with a 20% discount is competitively priced ... and it has a very cleaner dial. ;-) If I had not already purchased the Steinhart I would certainly consider the Ginault although the uncertainty about the lugs and the fact the movement in that model is unregulated with an accuracy of +/- 20 spd is a concern.


----------



## JCartwright77 (Mar 22, 2018)

I love my squale watches, especially the Tropic GMT. I had a Steinhart OVM but sold due to lugs. They just don’t curve around the wrist like they should, now maybe the 39mm case would be better as I had the 42mm. I do plan on ordering Steinhart GMT pepsi in 39 with a jubilee bracelet, so will see if the smaller size remedies this problem. Squale logo is contentious, but I like it.


----------



## JCartwright77 (Mar 22, 2018)

I do agree bezel on my squale models can feel the same as trying to unscrew a fliptop bottlecap, extremely tight. Does seem to loosen overtime, steinhart bezel action was fine


----------



## RSDA (Sep 19, 2010)

barutanseijin said:


> ...but the real deal killer is the "Squale" on the cases. No thanks.


I was originally put off by the idea as well, but came to discover as an owner that it is virtually unnoticeable, particularly with the matte finish.


----------



## Toonces (Jan 14, 2017)

How is this thread still alive after a year? Everyone knows the answer is Squale.


----------



## Earthjade (Jan 5, 2018)

RSDA said:


> I was originally put off by the idea as well, but came to discover as an owner that it is virtually unnoticeable, particularly with the matte finish.


New Squale batches are in the process of eliminating the Squale branding on the cases.
If anyone is interested in buying a Squale 1521 now (any model), ask the seller if it's a newer production model without the side etching.


----------



## nepatriot (Oct 1, 2010)

The logo engraved the side of the case never bothered me personally, but some don't like it. 

I'm curious if the Square branding on the side of the case was added when Square ran out of the NOS cases back 2010, and machined new ones? Or was the case branding also on the original watch design that came out back in the 60's? 

If the logo was part of the original design, or was on the NOS cases Squale used when re-starting the watch, I would hope Squale keeps the logo. If not, I hope they delete it going forward. OMHO, it adds nothing, except authenticity if that was part of the design.

As far as this thread, the OP is comparing Rolex sub homages. He is therefor not referring to the 1521, but rather the 1545.


----------



## Quantumleap (Nov 11, 2011)

All are excellent watches. Buy the one you like most.


----------

