# Quality of Seiko Divers vs Rolex Submariner



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

I've tried researching Japanese vs. Swiss movements and Rolex vs Seiko threads throughout various forums to understand why a majority of people are interested in high end Swiss movements over Japanese moments and to understand what separates Seiko from Rolex besides movement and price. 

I've read that:

Seiko divers are a good bang for their buck
Both Seiko & Rolex have long history, good quality
Rolex may be more accurate right out of the box
Seiko for a beater/Rolex for everything else
Both will last forever
Seikos can go longer in between servicing

If both are so durable and reliable and low end Japanese $100-250USD movements are capable of performing just as efficiently as high end Swiss, why are the majority of people biased towards Swiss? Better decorated movements? Prestige? I'm not trying to say that they are the same, but I am trying to figure out from WIS if Seiko SKX007, 173, monster are on par with a Rolex as far a quality/durability? Also if quality/durability is not an issue, then where is the bias coming from?


----------



## Mark355 (Dec 25, 2012)

Is Rolex better than an SKX? Of course.

Is it 40x better? Heck no.


----------



## jkpa (Feb 8, 2014)

I predict 25+ pages.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

Mark355 said:


> Is Rolex better than an SKX? Of course.
> 
> Is it 40x better? Heck no.


 I understand that you're saying that difference between them isn't vast why is it better? Most threads are filled with posts saying that Rolex is better but not saying why. Its probably implied to you knowledgable WIS but for someone new like me I'm still trying to learn.


----------



## Mark355 (Dec 25, 2012)

Chronometer movement, high quality steel, ceramic bezel, prestige, iconic design often copied, prestige, and prestige.


----------



## WatchNRolla (Feb 4, 2014)




----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

I have a Rolex and had a GRAND Seiko.

They are said to be on par with each other.

The Rolex quality keeps amazing me.

The GS was very disappointing.


----------



## BostonWatcher (Jun 28, 2012)

Cannonball said:


> I have a Rolex and had a GRAND Seiko.
> 
> They are said to be on par with each other.
> 
> ...


And I feel the exact opposite having owned several Rolex watches and a GS.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)




----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

Its a question that will never be answered to everyone's satisfaction.


----------



## IanGrey (Jan 17, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> I have a Rolex and had a GRAND Seiko.
> 
> They are said to be on par with each other.
> 
> ...


You are clearly in the minority.

To the OP: I think a better comparison to the Submariner would be the MM300 or Grand Seiko Spring Drive Diver. Having seen both in the metal, I was extremely impressed at how the MM300 held up next to the Sub, and the Spring Drive Diver, IMO, blew away the Rollie on all levels. Different strokes for different folks though. I love the sculpted cases, general design aesthetics, and history behind the Seiko divers. I like vintage Subs and the tool watch history associated with them too, but the modern ones don't really grab my interest. I'd rather have a collection of affordable Seiko divers than a single Sub. Both are great brands, but IMO the quality to price ratio of the Seiko divers is very hard to beat. The SKX007 is one of the best watches for the price out there.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

wschofield3 said:


> And I feel the exact opposite having owned several Rolex watches and a GS.


I think we should take this outside. ;-)


----------



## BostonWatcher (Jun 28, 2012)

Cannonball said:


> I think we should take this outside. ;-)


I'm a lover, not a fighter...besides, I'm too old


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I'm not trying to say that they are the same, but I am trying to figure out from WIS if Seiko SKX007, 173, monster are on par with a Rolex as far a quality/durability? Also if quality/durability is not an issue, then where is the bias coming from?


Why would you even try to compare a $200 watch with an $8,000 one? Of course the Rolex has higher quality components.


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

Yes a fair comparison is GS vs rolex.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

wschofield3 said:


> I'm a lover, not a fighter...besides, I'm too old


Good, me too. Besides, I've got this summer cold that won't let go of me.

But back OT, what I do like about Rolex is all of their watches meet their standard. There are no lesser models.

Seiko's blurred lines of high end to cheap POS is not as reassuring and my experience with their high end line has only reenforced my feelings.

Now is a SKX007 really over 50 times less a Sub-C, probably not.


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

Like anything else, you pay megadollars for slightly better quality but heaps more prestige. A rolex is not worth $9000 more than a Seiko in terms of quality of materials, anyone who tries to justify that is mistaken. Its all about Velben Goods- look it up.


----------



## sutherland (Aug 12, 2008)

Cannonball said:


> I have a Rolex and had a GRAND Seiko.
> 
> They are said to be on par with each other.
> 
> ...


Sorry...but no. Having owned two Submariners and three Grand Seikos (SBGH001, SBGA029, SBGE001), the attention to detail and the fit and finish of the Grand Seikos are on another level. Not taking anything away from the Rolex, I love my Submariner and always will...but it takes more than fancy chamfers to beat the GS in the finish department.


----------



## Likestheshiny (Nov 28, 2011)

The two watches I'm most obsessing about right now are a Rolex GMT Master (which is basically a sub with a different bezel) and a Grand Seiko "Snowflake." Awesome, _awesome _stuff going on in both watches. Despite Rolex's general reputation for bling, I find the GMT Master to be wonderfully understated -- it's just a masterpiece of solid, refined workmanship. The Snowflake, on the other hand, is just absurdly shiny and pretty. My "To hell with it, just buy both right now" muscle is twitching even as I write this.

What was this topic about? Seiko diver vs. Rolex sub? Put a Seiko diver of the same price point against the sub, and both are awesome. That's pretty much the lesson of any thread like this. There's enough awesome in the world for both companies to have some.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

ok, as an owner of many versions of the two watches you ask about I feel very qualified. I have owned tons of SKX's 007's and 009's. I have also owned and own SRP's. Seiko makes a diver that for the money cannot be beat in the SKX and SRP's. The Rolex Sub is on a whole different level of quality when compared to the SKX/SRP. But it should be. Everything works better. The crown, the bezel, the bracelet feel of the links, everything. But you compare an $8k watch to a $200 watch. Not very fair. The Sub is not 40 times better. The watch price thing is a diminishing return as price goes up. You never get as much at higher prices. The SKX/SRP is a better watch for the money. The Sub is a better watch when money is taken out of the equation. Just like a Grand Seiko Diver is going to be a better watch than an SKX, and so well a BP 50 Fathoms ,etc.


----------



## Rob Roberts (Feb 16, 2014)

ah, if you are not into luxury items.. ( BTW I grew up on Seiko and own those plus Omega and Rolex ) Then $29 quartz should do. They keep time well! All are. I work for myself and last year had a very good year so, I got a Planet Ocean. I love it and still have a connection to it and a Seiko from my college years that I learned SCUBA with it on my arm. I am almost 50 YO had another great year so I got the mother of all dive watches to reward myself DSSD. Thats not for everyone and I didn't get it to brag, just for me. ( and show you guys)
If I see a person with any dive watch I usually strike up conversation and complement the watch and talk diving if they dive. In other words I believe Seiko is great but Rolex is a different deal bought and worn for different reasons. BTW you guys have me wanting to learn how to mod those Seikos awesome work


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

I see a ceramic bezel as a negative.


Mark355 said:


> Chronometer movement, high quality steel, ceramic bezel, prestige, iconic design often copied, prestige, and prestige.


----------



## camb66 (Jan 25, 2010)

Stellite said:


> ok, as an owner of many versions of the two watches you ask about I feel very qualified. I have owned tons of SKX's 007's and 009's. I have also owned and own SRP's. Seiko makes a diver that for the money cannot be beat in the SKX and SRP's. The Rolex Sub is on a whole different level of quality when compared to the SKX/SRP. But it should be. Everything works better. The crown, the bezel, the bracelet feel of the links, everything. But you compare an $8k watch to a $200 watch. Not very fair. The Sub is not 40 times better. The watch price thing is a diminishing return as price goes up. You never get as much at higher prices. The SKX/SRP is a better watch for the money. The Sub is a better watch when money is taken out of the equation. Just like a Grand Seiko Diver is going to be a better watch than an SKX, and so well a BP 50 Fathoms ,etc.


Spot on!


----------



## SeikoRulz (Jan 2, 2014)

Stellite said:


> ok, as an owner of many versions of the two watches you ask about I feel very qualified. I have owned tons of SKX's 007's and 009's. I have also owned and own SRP's. Seiko makes a diver that for the money cannot be beat in the SKX and SRP's. The Rolex Sub is on a whole different level of quality when compared to the SKX/SRP. But it should be. Everything works better. The crown, the bezel, the bracelet feel of the links, everything. But you compare an $8k watch to a $200 watch. Not very fair. The Sub is not 40 times better. The watch price thing is a diminishing return as price goes up. You never get as much at higher prices. The SKX/SRP is a better watch for the money. The Sub is a better watch when money is taken out of the equation. Just like a Grand Seiko Diver is going to be a better watch than an SKX, and so well a BP 50 Fathoms ,etc.


Bullseye !!!

I own Seiko watches and nothing else, 5's, SKX series, SRP series, SARB series and quarts and solars. I like divers watches mostly. My Grail watch is the Rolex Submariner. I am more than happy with my Seiko divers and some day I might own a Submariner before they reach $100k in value, haha


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

I think the best way to really answer that for yourself is to hold both in your hands and then you'll see if it's worth it to you. Even the difference between the SKX and for example the Sumo is pretty noticeable, at least to me. It's hard to really answer this without breaking out a bunch of popcorn and watching the mayhem run loose. Kind of reminds me of this blog post and the ensuing thread here 

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/$20-casio-beats-grand-seiko-quartz-what-outrageous-1057738.html


-adi4


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

sutherland said:


> Sorry...but no. Having owned two Submariners and three Grand Seikos (SBGH001, SBGA029, SBGE001), the attention to detail and the fit and finish of the Grand Seikos are on another level. Not taking anything away from the Rolex, I love my Submariner and always will...but it takes more than fancy chamfers to beat the GS in the finish department.


Why are you sorry? No need. I was just sharing an experience.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)




----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

Good, better, best??? I don't know....but the more stare at watches all day the more I think the sub just may be the perfect watch ever made...for me at least. Size, history, quality, looks...I dig it. Had a few lower end Seikos, still have a vintage cushion case 6309 but I have never listed after a higher end Seiko diver for whatever reason. They just don't give me that feeling. If the MM300 was half the thickness I might be more interested, the thing just sits waaaay to high on my wrist. I'm getting tired of the big watch thing. I'm wearing my aqua racer WAB 2010 because of the size and comfort a lot lately and it makes me want a sub even more.


----------



## DanielW (Sep 3, 2013)

A lot is said allready. But 1 thing is sure, if I had the knowledge 7 years ago that I have now I sure as hell wouldnt have bought my SMP with service costs as high as the price for a new blumo, not mentioning the purchase price of a SMP. I adore my SMP and it will be worn till the coffin, but the quality of Seiko is unbeatable. No a Seiko skx hasnt got the appeal of the SMP I got, but it has the same thoughness.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met behulp van Tapatalk


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

There is no rational reason for you to buy the Rolex. You can argue it all you want, but odds are you're not going to dive enough to push its limits (and even then there are comparable cheaper watches). That's like saying, "Hey, I can get to work quicker in a Bugatti than my Toyota." The Seiko is a well built fully functional watch for what it says it does. As is the Rolex. Whether or not you feel you get the cost difference out of the Rolex is another matter. My Seiko chrono keeps time better than my Speedmaster and is more durable and I can replace it forever before it costs more than the Speedmaster, but I value the Speedmaster more because of the intangibles. Whether those intangibles are enough to justify the expense is all up to you.

Think of it this way. Why do so many of us see a brand like Mercedes, which makes hatchbacks, delivery trucks, people carriers as high end but view Lexus as "Toyotas with velour?" It's perception and the value you assign to the intangibles of the brand. Value wise, Lexus will always win. This coming from someone who owns an AMG Mercedes.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

There is a LOT to that question but I will add a few thoughts.

Grand Seiko is a better comparison to Rolex, a little on that later.

Compared to the Seiko divers Rolex has much better fit and finish, uses a higher grade of steel for watch purposes, has arguably a more robust movement and can go just as long without service BUT Seiko movements are cheap just to replace in many cases, people see the cost benefit in keeping a Rolex movement serviced. Also don't rule out aesthetics for some may much prefer one over the other. In the end compared to Seiko divers Rolex just has higher quality, it depends on the person if that extra quality is worth the extra cost.

Grand Seiko is much closer in quality to Rolex. GS offers better bang for the buck to a degree (though the Rolex will hold value MUCH better and over the life of the watch may actually cost less to own). Once you get past aesthetics GS has better finish and the Rolex has better fit and better bracelets. Accuracy is a moot point in GS Diver to Sub since we are talking different types of movements, and the cost difference (save the new quartz) is not that far different BUT again different types of movements. 

I own 4 Rolex divers and have owned numerous Seiko divers and while they make EXCELLENT betters within MY collection the quality is quite a bit off of the Rolex. With GS I have never bought one since the non-diver aesthetic doesn't move ME, if/when they build a steel/mechanical GS diver I may well be moved to add one to the collection. While I almost think the spring drive is THE GS to own I can't get over my love of pure mechanical watches. In the end a GS diver stacks up very well against a Rolex winning a few and loosing a few with the only significant lose being value retention.


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I've tried researching Japanese vs. Swiss movements and Rolex vs Seiko threads throughout various forums to understand why a majority of people are interested in high end Swiss movements over Japanese moments and to understand what separates Seiko from Rolex besides movement and price.
> 
> I've read that:
> 
> ...


Super easy - a two-part answer. Firstly, the subjectivity of betterness. Second, diminishing returns. After a certain point (where that point is is yet another inscrutable mallard) you pay so, so many monies for wee improvements.

The question is circular and there is no answer. It's the Rolex Popcorn Circularity.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

sutherland said:


> the attention to detail and the fit and finish of the Grand Seikos are on another level.


Finish yes, fit not even close. The most glaring example is SEL fitment to the case. Take the bracelet off a current SUB and see how tight the fitment is, no company in watchdom bothers with this high of a tolerance. Rolex did spend a lot of money on temperature controlled CNC machines for just this purpose. GS fit is VERY good, Rolex is just the best. Again, GS does beat Rolex in finish.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> Finish yes, fit not even close. The most glaring example is SEL fitment to the case. Take the bracelet off a current SUB and see how tight the fitment is, no company in watchdom bothers with this high of a tolerance. Rolex did spend a lot of money on temperature controlled CNC machines for just this purpose. GS fit is VERY good, Rolex is just the best. Again, GS does beat Rolex in finish.


The SEL fit is the easiest and most visually compelling example, but others include: the glibness of the bracelet, the bezel action's insanely buttery smooth clicks, the crown screwing/unscrewing with just the perfect amount of resistance, the glide lock clasp, the flip lock on the bracelet. etc. etc. It's all so precise and perfect. Some of the best fit in the market. Though GS always comes close. GS beats Rolex in finish, of course.

As for the SKX divers, they lose to Rolex Subs in every way, excluding the quality to price ratio: Functional but low quality bezel. Inferior but standard materials (standard steel, aluminum, mineral crystal, etc.) Movement with compromises (no hack, no manual wind). Cheap jubilee style bracelet (not that Rolex has much done better historically, but today they blow away most competitors). Fit far below Rolex standards; Finish too. Great for the price but far below Submariner quality. Look to GS for that.


----------



## TobusRex (Apr 18, 2014)

Rad Red Brick said:


> Super easy - a two-part answer. Firstly, the subjectivity of betterness. Second, diminishing returns. After a certain point (where that point is is yet another inscrutable mallard) you pay so, so many monies for wee improvements.
> 
> The question is circular and there is no answer. It's the Rolex Popcorn Circularity.


Sage point. I've noticed that is how everything is...at some point no matter how much more you pour into something the improvement will be minimal. The atomic bomb for example. A 50 megaton nuke barely has a larger blast radius than a 5 megaton nuke. Yet, presumably, 10 times as much cost/resources went into producing the 50 megaton nuke. Is it worth it? Nope....give me 10 of the 5 megaton nukes! Cars....my 2002 Honda Civic cost me $15,000 new....about 1/3 the cost of a new 2002 Corvette. Is the Corvette 3 times better than my Civic? Hell no...my Civic is more reliable, gets superior mileage (by a wide margin). On the other hand for the premium the Corvette is much more powerful and faster. Is the Corvette superior to my Civic? Well if I could get the Corvette for $15,000 I certainly would, haha, but for 3 times the price.... nope.


----------



## denmanproject (Apr 17, 2012)

Thread needs pictures........ carry on b-)


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Getting metal components to fit together precisely, and articulate with ease but without excess play, exceeds the tolerances of typical CNC machines that are used to produce metal components in watches. Rolex uses special temperature-controlled CNC machines, so as to minimize temperature fluctuations that limit the kind of precision that can be achieved.

Another example of a watch case that requires tight tolerances is the JLC Reverso, where the inner case needs to slide and pivot smoothly, but also snap securely into the outer case, and JLC also employs a special process specifically for their Reverso cases.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

The Seiko SKX has a very compelling value proposition, and as others have said, a Rolex does not offer the same value as a Seiko, but then again, neither does the Grand Seiko.

We had a thread a while back showing Seikos with very similar aesthetics but at different price points, ranging from a Seiko 5 all the way to a Grand Seiko, and while one gets a better product with each higher price point, the value proposition diminishes as well.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

TobusRex said:


> Sage point. I've noticed that is how everything is...at some point no matter how much more you pour into something the improvement will be minimal. The atomic bomb for example. A 50 megaton nuke barely has a larger blast radius than a 5 megaton nuke. Yet, presumably, 10 times as much cost/resources went into producing the 50 megaton nuke. Is it worth it? Nope....give me 10 of the 5 megaton nukes! Cars....my 2002 Honda Civic cost me $15,000 new....about 1/3 the cost of a new 2002 Corvette. Is the Corvette 3 times better than my Civic? Hell no...my Civic is more reliable, gets superior mileage (by a wide margin). On the other hand for the premium the Corvette is much more powerful and faster. Is the Corvette superior to my Civic? Well if I could get the Corvette for $15,000 I certainly would, haha, but for 3 times the price.... nope.


:think:...Wonders what Mr Rex wants 10 nukes for...:-s...unless NM stands for northern Mosul...;-)


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

mleok said:


> Getting metal components to fit together precisely, and articulate with ease but without excess play, exceeds the tolerances of typical CNC machines that are used to produce metal components in watches. Rolex uses special temperature-controlled CNC machines, so as to minimize temperature fluctuations that limit the kind of precision that can be achieved.
> 
> Another example of a watch case that requires tight tolerances is the JLC Reverso, where the inner case needs to slide and pivot smoothly, but also *snap securely into the outer case, and JLC also employs a special process specifically for their Reverso cases.*




Indeed, and it definitely works well . . .


----------



## OrangeSport (Jan 2, 2012)

Don't know if this helps, but it's a review of the Monster written by a Submariner owner.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/holiday-my-monster-mini-review-703365.html

and here's what I wrote about the Sub.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/why-i-love-my-sub-713605.html

And

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/alike-but-different-sub-v-speedy-910784.html


----------



## H2KA (Apr 17, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> Finish yes, fit not even close. The most glaring example is SEL fitment to the case. Take the bracelet off a current SUB and see how tight the fitment is, no company in watchdom bothers with this high of a tolerance. Rolex did spend a lot of money on temperature controlled CNC machines for just this purpose. GS fit is VERY good, Rolex is just the best. Again, GS does beat Rolex in finish.


+1

I almost bought a preowned GS (SBGM001) a while back until I noticed the bracelet fitting on the lugs


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

I should say that it isn't actually necessary to have extremely tight manufacturing tolerances in order to achieve an exceptional level of fit. One could imagine doing something similar to what Apple did with the iPhone, where components were measured after manufacturing and then paired with other components that most precisely fit together.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

Thank you for all of the replies! Including the popcorn pictures for which I expected for a topic like this lol. I also read your links so thanks for that, OrangeSport. It seems it's maybe about the quality of parts and finishing that are put into the Rolex that the Seiko can't compare to. The car analogies were helpful as well. I always kind of wonder what separated Honda from Lexus or Mercedes besides the detail & aesthetics but it really is just the detail & aesthetics, higher quality parts and how the item is view through that person's perspective of worthiness.


----------



## Swordman (Jan 10, 2009)

Nobody has mentioned the tunas yet! The darth, emporer and the new sbdb009 are the stuff of legend.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

Swordman said:


> Nobody has mentioned the tunas yet! The darth, emporer and the new sbdb009 are the stuff of legend.


The question is do they change the equation? In my opinion no. Only the GS is in the quality realm of the Submariner, the farther down the Seiko tree you go the less capable of standing up to the Submariner. In terms of "legend" when it comes to legendary status there is the Sub and then everything else.


----------



## Dan83bz (Jul 6, 2008)

Rolex is Rolex.

But Seiko....there's Seikos ( the few 100s $ ones) and there's Seikos (the kind that are similar in price to Rolex).

I wish Rolex also made "beaters" to compete with the likes of SKX etc. But that would be against their philosphy


----------



## cuchulain (Jun 5, 2014)

People wear Rolex for the prestige of the watch, like driving a fancy sports car. Some do it to appease their ego, some do it to compensate, and some just do it because it's a panty dropper. It's no mystery a lot of women are drawn to money, no better way to show that then with a Rolex on your wrist.

At the end of the day watches like Rolex are the apex in conspicuous consumption, it's all about showing you're better than the next guy and keeping up with the joneses.

I can't see any other reason to pay 10k for a watch that clearly isn't worth that.


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

If you take the economic element out of the equation, say both were the same price, and handle both side by side which would you buy? I owned a Rolex Submariner for a short time in the late eighties, and have owned a Seiko SKX 007 recently the difference is considerable. I have no experience with G.S. so I can't comment on that, but to me if you compare these two watches side by side you will understand the difference in materials and workmanship. Unfortunately I have Rolex taste on a Seiko budget so i go with what I can afford now, unlike when I was younger.


----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

SKX series shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as the sub. Prospex is closer, GS is comparable. C'mon people to even TRY to compare the skx series to anything but 300$ watches is just insanity. I have owned a 007 and monster and although they were good watches for 170-200, that's all they were. Great bang per buck but let's not kid ourselves, they can't be compaired at all to an SMP, Sub, it's just crazy how people even try to compare them.


----------



## OrangeSport (Jan 2, 2012)

cuchulain said:


> People wear Rolex for the prestige of the watch, like driving a fancy sports car. Some do it to appease their ego, some do it to compensate, and some just do it because it's a panty dropper. It's no mystery a lot of women are drawn to money, no better way to show that then with a Rolex on your wrist.
> 
> At the end of the day watches like Rolex are the apex in conspicuous consumption, it's all about showing you're better than the next guy and keeping up with the joneses.
> 
> I can't see any other reason to pay 10k for a watch that clearly isn't worth that.


And yet others, the people I meet at least, do it because either i) they appreciate quality goods in general, enjoy interacting with them and are in a position to reward themselves or ii) they enjoy watches specifically, their history, and understand and celebrate the important part Rolex has played.

I would actually consider my Sub one of the best value watches I have, and it's certainly worth every penny I paid for it.

I can only guess that you must have met some rather odd people to have formed your opinion.


----------



## black watch (Aug 3, 2013)

I was going to add to this....nah forget it, it just isn't worth it.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

short version:
Difference in production values.

What's the difference between a Seiko 5 and a Grand Seiko?
Same thing.

Everyone goes on about how Grand Seiko are better value because there's more hand craft involved and small numbers and yada yada.
Well, my question is what would a Grand Seiko cost if they were to maintain that level of production value but instead of the few thousand that they make, it was a few hundred thousand?


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

*Beauty is only skin deep,*

but ugly goes to the core.

Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper.


----------



## Dan83bz (Jul 6, 2008)

*Re: Beauty is only skin deep,*



pithy said:


> but ugly goes to the core.
> 
> Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper.


Painting all Seikos with 1 brush is...puerile. Betcha' never seen a Seiko GS in the flesh? The dials on most trump Rolex twice or thrice the price EASILY!


----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

*Re: Beauty is only skin deep,*



pithy said:


> but ugly goes to the core.
> 
> Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper.


What model are those pics from?


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

*Re: Beauty is only skin deep,*



oak1971 said:


> What model are those pics from?


Here's the pallet from the 9s85. Slightly less crude. Wish I had a closeup. This kind of thing is one of the reasons that watchmakers openly scoff at Seiko.


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

*Attention to small details*

A proper pallet fork. Calibre 3135.

So to address the original question, how do the qualities compare? Poorly.


----------



## Swordman (Jan 10, 2009)

*Re: Attention to small details*

Personally, I think the fit and finish of the sbdb009 spring drive tuna is easily on par with the submariner. Its brushed dlc titanium shroud really is quite exquisite. Seriously, pick one up and see for yourself. The spring drive movement also makes the COSC designation of the Rolex a bit redundant.

It does look a lot more tool-like, though, so it would be unsuitable to wear with a suit.


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

*Re: Attention to small details*



MissSummerStorm said:


> If both are so durable and reliable and low end Japanese $100-250USD movements are capable of performing just as efficiently as high end Swiss, why are the majority of people biased towards Swiss?





pithy said:


> but ugly goes to the core.
> 
> Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper.





pithy said:


> A proper pallet fork. Calibre 3135.
> 
> So to address the original question, how do the qualities compare? Poorly.


 Well, Pithy has given us part of the answer regarding the movement and timekeeping.

From my perspective, having handled many Seikos and Rolexes, the external fit and finish of Rolex is far superior too.

Furthermore the functionality on (the less expensive) Seikos is not so good. For example some Seiko autos can not even be hand wound, and also have limitations on what time you can change the date. You will not find such constraints on any Rolex, or most decent watches for that matter.

I do understand that higher end Seikos such as Grand Seiko are a different story, but the OP is specifcially asking about the lower priced Seikos. In fact the OP could ask the same question comparing lowe end Seikos to Grand Seiko insetad of Rolex.


----------



## sticky (Apr 5, 2013)

That a Rolex is better than a Seiko is almost a given but the big question is how much better.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Write this down...."Rolex is,what other watches hope to be"............;-)


----------



## OmegaCard (Mar 20, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*

I don't own either GS or Rolex but have researched them both and tried them on at various places. I wouldn't give half the asking price for a GS. To me it felt/looked like a cheap Rolex. I can't explain it because I really like the looks of them on here and always heard about the finish.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

sticky said:


> That a Rolex is better than a Seiko is almost a given but the big question is how much better.


Which is where it gets subjective and as such there is no correct answer.

Not sure why we get these threads since there is no objective way to quantify it to everyone as we are talking value which is obviously different from person to person.


----------



## OrangeSport (Jan 2, 2012)

sticky said:


> That a Rolex is better than a Seiko is almost a given but the big question is how much better.


Indeed, and a of course the law of diminishing returns kicks in....


----------



## OrangeSport (Jan 2, 2012)

*Re: Attention to small details*



OmegaCard said:


> I don't own either GS or Rolex but have researched them both and tried them on at various places. I wouldn't give half the asking price for a GS. To me it felt/looked like a cheap Rolex. I can't explain it because I really like the looks of them on here and always heard about the finish.


Interesting. I am torn between a Rolex and a GS for my next major purchase. I think Rolex does have a presence on the wrist (for the wearer). Is that what you missed with the GS?


----------



## chupete (Jan 2, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> People wear Rolex for the prestige of the watch, like driving a fancy sports car. Some do it to appease their ego, some do it to compensate, and some just do it because it's a panty dropper. It's no mystery a lot of women are drawn to money, no better way to show that then with a Rolex on your wrist.
> 
> At the end of the day watches like Rolex are the apex in conspicuous consumption, it's all about showing you're better than the next guy and keeping up with the joneses.
> 
> I can't see any other reason to pay 10k for a watch that clearly isn't worth that.


Your view is very shallow and petty. You judge others by what they own and not the content of their character. This says everything about you. You may posses the personality of those that your presumptuousness accuses them of being.


----------



## sirgilbert357 (Mar 21, 2012)

jkpa said:


> I predict 25+ pages.


Within 72 hours.


----------



## OmegaCard (Mar 20, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*



OrangeSport said:


> Interesting. I am torn between a Rolex and a GS for my next major purchase. I think Rolex does have a presence on the wrist (for the wearer). Is that what you missed with the GS?


Not at all. I prefer a more discrete wrist presence. It's one of the reasons I don't own a Rolex and was one of the reasons I was looking at the GS . It just didn't do it for me in person. Impersonating a Rolex came to mind immediately. So after that I just sat it back down and moved on.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Seeing as this is turning into a GS vs Rolex thread (which means it has a finite life expectancy) allow me to say that comparing GS to Rolex is really like asking blondes or brunettes (you can't really go wrong with either). It all boils down to personal choice. Owning one of each I can say that I enjoy them both for different reasons and between the two of them they probably account for close to (if not a little over) 50% of my wrist time.





OmegaCard said:


> Not at all. I prefer a more discrete wrist presence. It's one of the reasons I don't own a Rolex and was one of the reasons I was looking at the GS . It just didn't do it for me in person. Impersonating a Rolex came to mind immediately. So after that I just sat it back down and moved on.


Might I ask what exactly was it about the GS that made you think, "Rolex impersonator"? I'm just curious if it was case, dial, hands, wrist presence, or what is just a general feeling that you really can't quantify?


----------



## Yankees2351 (Nov 10, 2012)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cedargrove said:


> Well, Pithy has given us part of the answer regarding the movement and timekeeping.
> 
> From my perspective, having handled many Seikos and Rolexes, the external fit and finish of Rolex is far superior too.
> 
> ...


Shouldnt we always be somewhat careful about what time you set the date on a watch?? Are we saying on a higher end watch i can change the date at 1130pm because the build quality is better?


----------



## mghead (Nov 26, 2013)

Watchbreath said:


> I see a ceramic bezel as a negative.


Then a 16610 with an aluminum bezel is also an option. The rest is all the same quality wise.


----------



## Yankees2351 (Nov 10, 2012)

bu11itt said:


> Seeing as this is turning into a GS vs Rolex thread (which means it has a finite life expectancy) allow me to say that comparing GS to Rolex is really like asking blondes or brunettes (you can't really go wrong with either). It all boils down to personal choice. Owning one of each I can say that I enjoy them both for different reasons and between the two of them they probably account for close to (if not a little over) 50% of my wrist time.
> 
> 
> 
> Might I ask what exactly was it about the GS that made you think, "Rolex impersonator"? I'm just curious if it was case, dial, hands, wrist presence, or what is just a general feeling that you really can't quantify?


the way the markers on the GS pop out at you is a sight to see and the pic does that fact lots of justice.


----------



## Will3020 (Aug 28, 2012)

wristclock said:


> SKX series shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as the sub. Prospex is closer, GS is comparable. C'mon people to even TRY to compare the skx series to anything but 300$ watches is just insanity. I have owned a 007 and monster and although they were good watches for 170-200, that's all they were. Great bang per buck but let's not kid ourselves, they can't be compaired at all to an SMP, Sub, it's just crazy how people even try to compare them.


yup, +1


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Yankees2351 said:


> Shouldnt we always be somewhat careful about what time you set the date on a watch?? Are we saying on a higher end watch i can change the date at 1130pm because the build quality is better?


I have no restrictions on changing the time or date on my Rolex GMTc.


----------



## OmegaCard (Mar 20, 2014)

> Might I ask what exactly was it about the GS that made you think, "Rolex impersonator"? I'm just curious if it was case, dial, hands, wrist presence, or what is just a general feeling that you really can't quantify?


I think I was expecting more. Something to really differentiate itself from the nice Seikos. Something in exchange for giving up the wrist presence, maybe!? And their diver just seemed off compared to the sub.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Yankees2351 said:


> Shouldnt we always be somewhat careful about what time you set the date on a watch?? Are we saying on a higher end watch i can change the date at 1130pm because the build quality is better?


I believe one of the claims to fame of the Rolex 3135 calibre is that it has a wonderfully precise instantaneous date change mechanism that has no restrictions on when you engage the quickset on the date. But, this is not something that many other brands have mastered.


----------



## grampstime (Dec 8, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*

Thing is...todays mechanical watches are obsolete so threads why buy expensive rolex when you can buy cheaper seiko make no sense. My quartz mickey mouse 10$ watch is more accurate then all of yours chronometre rolexes and seikos, if we were to make competition my mickey mouse watch would win, in your face rolex owners!


----------



## OrangeSport (Jan 2, 2012)

*Re: Attention to small details*



OmegaCard said:


> Not at all. I prefer a more discrete wrist presence. It's one of the reasons I don't own a Rolex and was one of the reasons I was looking at the GS . It just didn't do it for me in person. Impersonating a Rolex came to mind immediately. So after that I just sat it back down and moved on.


Thank you...


----------



## Split Second (Apr 18, 2007)

Damn. I quickly misread the title and was looking forward to another Omega v. Rolex thread.


----------



## cuchulain (Jun 5, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*



chupete said:


> Your view is very shallow and petty. You judge others by what they own and not the content of their character. This says everything about you. You may posses the personality of those that your presumptuousness accuses them of being.


Touched a nerve huh?


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



grampstime said:


> Thing is...todays mechanical watches are obsolete so threads why buy expensive rolex when you can buy cheaper seiko make no sense. My quartz mickey mouse 10$ watch is more accurate then all of yours chronometre rolexes and seikos, if we were to make competition my mickey mouse watch would win, in your face rolex owners!


You tell them!!

And you didn't even mention Goofy and Dumbo watches. Keep those as backup I suppose.


----------



## chupete (Jan 2, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> Touched a nerve huh?


Is that what you try to do, instead of having a reasonable discussion, you attempt to bring it down to a very base level? Your behavior is of someone I have no wish to ever know.
No, you did not touch a nerve. I am a UN owner. I do not own Rolex, but I respect the brand. However, I think in your case, you could have substituted any upper price brand name for your comment.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> Touched a nerve huh?


What's up with all the reverse snobbery? Seikos make excellent watches, just enjoy your watch and stop insulting people who enjoy other watch brands. It is superficial to make sweeping generalizations about people solely on the basis of the watch brands they prefer.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> Touched a nerve huh?


Your post should have touched a nerve in every reasonable WIS. Judgement of people based on what is in their watch box is unfair and uncool period, doing it to WIS is pretty mush the most disrespectful thing you can do on a watch forum. Whether snobbery or reverse snobbery it has no place on this forum. This is a thread about the relative merits of watches not the people who buy them.


----------



## cuchulain (Jun 5, 2014)

chupete said:


> Is that what you try to do, instead of having a reasonable discussion, you attempt to bring it down to a very base level? Your behavior is of someone I have no wish to ever know.


Pot meet kettle buddy.


----------



## cuchulain (Jun 5, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*



ilitig8 said:


> Your post should have touched a nerve in every reasonable WIS. Judgement of people based on what is in their watch box is unfair and uncool period, doing it to WIS is pretty mush the most disrespectful thing you can do on a watch forum. Whether snobbery or reverse snobbery it has no place on this forum. This is a thread about the relative merits of watches not the people who buy them.


Yeah because I'm the first guy to ever attribute Rolex ownership with conspicuous consumption and buying purely because of what the name Rolex says to other people. It's not everyone who buys Rolex for this reason but it's probably 95% or more, and it's a very common theme here and was long before I got here regardless of what you feel the level of discourse needs to be.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> Yeah because I'm the first guy to ever attribute Rolex ownership with conspicuous consumption and buying purely because of what the name Rolex says to other people. It's not everyone who buys Rolex for this reason but it's probably 95% or more, and it's a very common theme here and was long before I got here regardless of what you feel the level of discourse needs to be.


You seem to have missed the fact you tripped and fell into a watch forum, where for most people who post here the reasons you attach to Rolex purchasing decisions are not the primary reasons they purchase them. Just like any "ism" painting all people of a broadly defined class is a fools errand.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

cuchulain said:


> People wear Rolex for the prestige of the watch, like driving a fancy sports car. Some do it to appease their ego, some do it to compensate, and some just do it because it's a panty dropper. It's no mystery a lot of women are drawn to money, no better way to show that then with a Rolex on your wrist.
> 
> At the end of the day watches like Rolex are the apex in conspicuous consumption, it's all about showing you're better than the next guy and keeping up with the joneses.
> 
> I can't see any other reason to pay 10k for a watch that clearly isn't worth that.


Man. Are you reading my mail? That is PRECISELY why I bought my Rolex.

Although to be honest it hasn't really performed like I hoped it would. It didn't make me an adult entertainment star. It actually has a reverse effect (affect? I never know which to use) on my wife (well my collection in general does). It didn't get me a promotion. Because no one notices it or comments on it it didn't inflate my ego. In fact the only thing it did do was make me happy and raise my appreciation for a brand that often gets maligned by people who have either never fondled (thought about using "caressed" but that just seemed too dirty) or owned one for reasons about which I shudder to speculate (jealousy?). Oh well. Guess I'll have to buy a Patek now to fulfill all the above criteria.

Edit: Oops, forgot to add a pic&#8230;


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

OmegaCard said:


> I think I was expecting more. Something to really differentiate itself from the nice Seikos. Something in exchange for giving up the wrist presence, maybe!? And their diver just seemed off compared to the sub.


Forgot to respond to this one.

Fair enough. Those are all valid reasons and I enjoy reading others thoughts on watches I enjoy (and don't enjoy for that matter). I frankly haven't tried on the divers, but don't really care for them too much from the photos. I do however love the more simple Grand Seiko's and really want to add a few more to my collection, the new blue "self-dater" (SBGA105) and one of the hi-beat GMT's (probably the white dialed SBGJ001) are both on my list.


----------



## lethaltoes (Mar 5, 2013)

pithy said:


> Here's the pallet from the 9s85. Slightly less crude. Wish I had a closeup. This kind of thing is one of the reasons that watchmakers openly scoff at Seiko.


Hilarious!


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> Yeah because I'm the first guy to ever attribute Rolex ownership with conspicuous consumption and buying purely because of what the name Rolex says to other people. It's not everyone who buys Rolex for this reason but it's probably 95% or more, and it's a very common theme here and was long before I got here regardless of what you feel the level of discourse needs to be.


Are you a Red Hot Chili Peppers fan? I bet your favorite song is "Under the Bridge."


----------



## IanGrey (Jan 17, 2014)

It's too bad that Rolex changed the submariner design for the worst. The newer case design is blocky and doesn't flow well into the bracelet, the vintage versions are much more beautiful from a design perspective. Also, Rolex used to be a watch that anyone could afford after saving up for a bit, and could be used as a true tool watch. Now it's a status symbol with a huge markup and way out of reach for most people. It's amusing how they make "tool" watches, such as the GMT Master II, made of soft metals like white gold that are vulnerable to damage. The brand used to be cool when Steve McQueen wore it, now it's just a banker's watch.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

bu11itt said:


> Seeing as this is turning into a GS vs Rolex thread (which means it has a finite life expectancy) allow me to say that comparing GS to Rolex is really like asking blondes or brunettes (you can't really go wrong with either). It all boils down to personal choice. * Owning one of each I can say that I enjoy them both for different reasons* and between the two of them they probably account for close to (if not a little over) 50% of my wrist time.
> 
> 
> Am I the only one who read that as him owning a blonde and a brunette? My eyes widen in amazement reading that
> ...


Am I the only one who read that as him saying he owns a blonde and a brunette? My eyes widened in amazement at reading that


----------



## Patekista (Jan 2, 2014)

cuchulain said:


> Pot meet kettle buddy.


From what I read, you are the pot and the kettle here. Others is having discussion. You insult owners of other brands. Chupeti is right you are wrong.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

WrnrG said:


> Am I the only one who read that as him saying he owns a blonde and a brunette?


I read it as a brunette and a redhead, but to each their own.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> Am I the only one who read that as him saying he owns a blonde and a brunette? My eyes widened in amazement at reading that


You can't "own" people. My wife is brunette, my mistress is blonde.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

IanGrey said:


> It's too bad that Rolex changed the submariner design for the worst. The newer case design is blocky and doesn't flow well into the bracelet, the vintage versions are much more beautiful from a design perspective. Also, Rolex used to be a watch that anyone could afford after saving up for a bit, and could be used as a true tool watch. Now it's a status symbol with a huge markup and way out of reach for most people. It's amusing how they make "tool" watches, such as the GMT Master II, made of soft metals like white gold that are vulnerable to damage. The brand used to be cool when Steve McQueen wore it, now it's just a banker's watch.


Just grab yourself a 5512 Four Liner (before the prices get stupid) and a pair of Persol sunglasses and channel the King of Cool! His Ferrari is coming up for auction to complete the package...

I personally like the old and maxi designs about equally but understand someone that doesn't like the Maxi. Rolex had to adapt to survive the quartz crisis and if they hadn't moved their demographic they would be gone or owned by Swatch etc. While I do see their precious metal Sub, GMT etc as a money grab their steel watches can still be used as tool watches if one is comfortable with the costs, they can handle it as good or better than ever. I am currently looking at getting a new true beater and have honed in on a Sub, looking at everything from a 5513 to a 114060. Chances are it will be a 5513 or 5512 and I will just keep adding to the patina and sell it for well over what I buy it for 10 years from now. If I get a vintage one I am going to do an experiment comparing the costs to own it over 10 years and the sales price at the end compared to what that money would have made in my portfolio, I have a feeling I can wear a 5512 for ten years "for free".

That reminds me, compare the outside quality of a 5513/5512 to a current $200-$500 Seiko diver and the Seiko would probably win, even in the bracelet department, which is often Seiko's weak link.

edit: added the red text for clarification


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

lethaltoes said:


> Hilarious!


Glad you enjoyed that. lol. Here's the rest of it: From a detail aspect -particularly with regard to the movement - it's not that Rolex is such an exceptional brand. The are several that I find much more appealing. It's just that the Grand Seiko is so mediocre/ho-hum, like they didn't even bother to finish their work before they shipped it.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

pithy said:


> Glad you enjoyed that. lol. Here's the rest of it: From a detail aspect -particularly with regard to the movement - it's not that Rolex is such an exceptional brand. The are several that I find much more appealing. It's just that the Grand Seiko is so mediocre/ho-hum, like they didn't even bother to finish their work before they shipped it.


Interesting. Had it come from the fingers of most people on the forum I would have brushed it off as nonsense, but...


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

bu11itt said:


> You can't "own" people. My wife is brunette, my mistress is blonde.


Depends on the role play 

I like blonde, brunette and redhead. As long as the eyes are blue and the skin is fair... But I digress.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> Interesting. Had it come from the fingers of most people on the forum I would have brushed it off as nonsense, but...


I'm sure his account with SII for getting parts to work on Grand Seikos runs into the thousands :roll:

He posts a random pic of an unknown pallet fork (possibly a low end Seiko) and then draws a comparison to a GS escapement based on a media pic that's 400 x 300 pixels. Does he even know how a GS escapement is made?

Pithy, next time you open up a Grand Seiko, take some nice pics. The whole forum would love to see them to back up your views.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

WrnrG said:


> Depends on the role play
> 
> I like blonde, brunette and redhead. As long as the eyes are blue and the skin is fair... But I digress.


I always like these threads. It gives me an opportunity to read the first post (sigh), and then read the last post, and try to figure out how we got from point A to point Q in just 10 pages.

Having not read any other posts in this thread, I have to say, this one must have been interesting...


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> Interesting. Had it come from the fingers of most people on the forum I would have brushed it off as nonsense, but...


You are very kind to defer, but this is simply my perspective from working on both. Under 100X magnification it's kind of hard to hide any comparative shortcomings in your product. The GS has been amply demonstrated to be a decent runner. I just don't understand why the company won't go the last ten miles to produce a truly superior product. As it stands they can have the best in Japan and not be in the top twenty in Europe.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

*Re: Attention to small details*



cuchulain said:


> Yeah because I'm the first guy to ever attribute Rolex ownership with conspicuous consumption and buying purely because of what the name Rolex says to other people. It's not everyone who buys Rolex for this reason but it's probably 95% or more, and it's a very common theme here and was long before I got here regardless of what you feel the level of discourse needs to be.


So&#8230;. as long as a lot of other people are doing something, that makes it right?


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> I'm sure his account with SII for getting parts to work on Grand Seikos runs into the thousands :roll: He posts a random pic of an unknown pallet fork (possibly a low end Seiko) and then draws a comparison to a GS escapement based on a media pic that's 400 x 300 pixels. Does he even know how a GS escapement is made? Pithy, next time you open up a Grand Seiko, take some nice pics. The whole forum would love to see them to back up your views.


Agreed on the pictures. The first one is 7s26, the second 9s85. Don't know the balance for that category. Anything else you care to have explained to you?


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> Agreed on the pictures. The first one is 7s26, the second 9s85. Don't know the balance for that category. Anything else you care to have explained to you?


You basically just confirmed what I said. The first pics are of a lowly Seiko movement (I'd like to see anyone else do a better escapement for $100 cased in a watch? Anyone? No? OK then) and then you draw a comparison with a GS escapement. If you get the opportunity to take some pics on a microscope of a GS escapement, I'd love to see them. Nothing in post #54 is from a GS.


----------



## freshprincechiro (Oct 12, 2013)

I just bought Grand Seiko SBGA029 about 2 weeks ago. I have compared GS diver with Rolex Submariner many many times... how can i say... It is different. It feels like two different animals serving two different purposes. Finishing is much better on GS diver, but comfort is definitely better on Rolex. It is difficult to tell which is better. But for me, GS was better.

i know some people here think that Grand Seiko is still just an overpriced Seiko. But to me, the word "Grand Seiko" strikes as a high end luxury watch that is to be highly desired. "Grand Seiko" really doesn't resonate the same to me as a regular "Seiko" would. I really see them two separate entities and two separate brands. Then again, it's just me.

I really do not care if a person next to me does not notice that my GS is $ 6000-7000. I do not care if a guy wearing Rolex would not notice my GS being just as expensive as his. I do not need my watch to show my status quo. My watch is something very personal. It is just for me. Maybe this is why I do not seek others' approval on what i wear on my wrist. I just need my watch to satisfy ME every time I look at it. After all, it is ME who has to wear my watch and cherish it for many years to come.


----------



## H2KA (Apr 17, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



pithy said:


> A proper pallet fork. Calibre 3135.


The finishing is actually better than what I'd have expected.. Thx for sharing


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

freshprincechiro said:


> View attachment 1602736
> View attachment 1602737
> 
> 
> ...


What I see from this angle is your minute marker is at 12 and the hour marker has not centered in on the 11 mark.

Also, your "GS" are not even. The "S" rides higher than the "G".

And the date rides high in the window.

Same thing as my GS.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

*Re: Beauty is only skin deep,*



pithy said:


> but ugly goes to the core.
> 
> Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper.


Pithy, which GS is this from? model, movement?



pithy said:


> A proper pallet fork. Calibre 3135.
> 
> So to address the original question, how do the qualities compare? Poorly.


For a movement with no clear caseback, that sure is nice.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



H2KA said:


> The finishing is actually better than what I'd have expected.. Thx for sharing


Interesting; A lot of people don't assosiate Rolex movements with good finishing. I wonder why.


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> You basically just confirmed what I said. The first pics are of a lowly Seiko movement (I'd like to see anyone else do a better escapement for $100 cased in a watch? Anyone? No? OK then) and then you draw a comparison with a GS escapement. If you get the opportunity to take some pics on a microscope of a GS escapement, I'd love to see them. Nothing in post #54 is from a GS.


Virtually everyone that has ever produced a pallet fork in the history of mankind has done a better job from an aesthetic perspective than is reflected in the work on 7s26. Even Timex demonstrated higher quality. Every Swiss lever was better - even the worst ebauche produced on ran out tooling. To any one with any appreciable level of direct experience with watch repair this would be obvious.

----------------

Even the Seagull and Hangzhous have more attractive pallet forks! lol.

------------------------------------

Seiko took down the hyperlink to the high resolution shot of 9s85 pallet fork. About 9 hours ago I sent messages to two different individuals requesting a copy of the picture. I really look forward to posting some comparison shots in the same frame of Rolex and GS!


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



H2KA said:


> The finishing is actually better than what I'd have expected.. Thx for sharing


It's OK, it's just not as elaborate as some of the premium houses.



Arthur M said:


> Interesting; A lot of people don't assosiate Rolex movements with good finishing. I wonder why.


I don't think Rolex's finish is that exceptional and some of it is kind of dated or kitschy but it's just that it's significantly better that Seiko's.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Arthur M said:


> Interesting; A lot of people don't assosiate Rolex movements with good finishing. I wonder why.


Because there is a difference between high quality functional finishing (which Rolex does well) and pretty decoration (like Cotes de Geneve in arabesque), and people are easily taken in by decoration as opposed to functional finishing that only a watchmaker will ever see.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*

That they finish even what you don't see is exceptional in and of itself. Compare the 3135 with ETA's 2892:















Maybe it isn't "Beautiful", but there is value to be had in simplicity done well..


----------



## TobusRex (Apr 18, 2014)

GlennO said:


> :think:...Wonders what Mr Rex wants 10 nukes for...:-s...unless NM stands for northern Mosul...;-)


I'm planning on blackmailing the U.N. for....ONE MILLION DOLLARS!


----------



## Tseg (Mar 29, 2014)

In 30 years I will love my Rolex much more than my Seiko and today's cost difference will be a rounding error vs. what each will be worth at that time.


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

Functionally they are about the same, they both tell time and are water resistant enough to qualify as a dive watch. But, the Sub is just a lot more refined in every aspect. 

A simple turn of the triplock crown vs the SKX crown will tell you that.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

I will always own seiko's, but I will also always own Rolex, lol.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



grampstime said:


> Thing is...todays mechanical watches are obsolete so threads why buy expensive rolex when you can buy cheaper seiko make no sense. My quartz mickey mouse 10$ watch is more accurate then all of yours chronometre rolexes and seikos, if we were to make competition my mickey mouse watch would win, in your face rolex owners!


But first we must take it for a little swim....at least 100ft.on the Great Barrier reef, then climb Mt. Everest.
How about a 9 month tour thru Vietnam, walking everyday....Then a short 3 months in the Sahara.
When will you and Mickey be ready to go?


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

*Re: Attention to small details*



little big feather said:


> But first we must take it for a little swim....at least 100ft.on the Great Barrier reef, then climb Mt. Everest.
> How about a 9 month tour thru Vietnam, walking everyday....Then a short 3 months in the Sahara.
> When will you and Mickey be ready to go?


Gotcha covered with my Exp 1 :-d


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*

This thread needs pictures.


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



little big feather said:


> . . . . How about a 9 month tour thru Vietnam, walking everyday....Then a short 3 months in the Sahara. . . .


Pithy has friends that have worn a sub or a gmt every day of their adult life with an eye towards possibly having to use it as a GOOJFC. Try that with a Grand Seiko or any other Mickey Mouse brand. onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnkk! Non-starter.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

*Re: Attention to small details*



mew88 said:


> This thread needs pictures.


Good combo. Just remember they are obsolete:-!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> Virtually everyone that has ever produced a pallet fork in the history of mankind has done a better job from an aesthetic perspective than is reflected in the work on 7s26. Even Timex demonstrated higher quality. Every Swiss lever was better - even the worst ebauche produced on ran out tooling. To any one with any appreciable level of direct experience with watch repair this would be obvious.
> 
> ----------------
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, I'm just not buying it. Watchmaker or not, you seem to just be trawling the internet for an image of a Seiko pallet fork and making some whacky correlation such as 'the grand seiko is slightly less crude'

The crappy look of the *7s26 *pallet fork is clearly an attempt to hollow it out and reduce it's mass, and the website that you took that photo from even states that the other side is polished.

I really, really look forward to seeing this high-res photo of the Grand Seiko pallet fork.


----------



## Horologic (Apr 26, 2012)

*Re: Attention to small details*



mew88 said:


> This thread needs pictures.


Is that an SKX007 or an SKX013 ?


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Horologic said:


> Is that an SKX007 or an SKX013 ?


SKX013 :-!


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> I'm sorry, I'm just not buying it. Watchmaker or not, you seem to just be trawling the internet for an image of a Seiko pallet fork and making some whacky correlation such as 'the grand seiko is slightly less crude' . . . .


What you can afford to buy (or not buy ) is your business. lol, If I could've laid my hands on one today - it would have been documented.



Domo said:


> . . . The crappy look of the *7s26 *pallet fork is clearly an attempt to hollow it out and reduce it's mass, . . . .


That is abosolute rubbish. Seiko cheapened the manufacture on several calibers by utilizing sintered powder metal casting and they have never bothered to master the technique. Period. Remember these seven series are succeptable to running backwards. Junk. You may wish to educate yourself before being subjected to further embarassment.


----------



## kormaking (Jun 10, 2010)

Thanks for this informative posts, would appreciate if you can post a better picture of 9s85 pallet fork.

Cheers



pithy said:


> but ugly goes to the core.
> 
> Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper.





pithy said:


> Here's the pallet from the 9s85. Slightly less crude. Wish I had a closeup. This kind of thing is one of the reasons that watchmakers openly scoff at Seiko.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> What you can afford to buy (or not buy ) is your business. lol, If I could've laid my hands on one today - it would have been documented.
> 
> That is abosolute rubbish. Seiko cheapened the manufacture on several calibers by utilizing sintered powder metal casting and they have never bothered to master the technique. Period. Remember these seven series are succeptable to running backwards. Junk. You may wish to educate yourself before being subjected to further embarassment.


Wow, really? My 7S36 doesn't run backwards. Or are we talking about back hacking?

The only one who is losing their credibility here is you, which is a shame because most members here respect your input. I swear that I will add a signature to say 'Pithy is the finest watchmaker in the world and I was wrong' if you can produce either the hi-res photo, or a photo of a Grand Seiko movement in your possession, past or present.

Again, _ really _ looking forward to the pics.


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> Wow, really? My 7S36 doesn't run backwards. Or are we talking about back hacking? The only one who is losing their credibility here is you, which is a shame because most members here respect your input. I swear that I will add a signature to say 'Pithy is the finest watchmaker in the world and I was wrong' if you can produce either the hi-res photo, or a photo of a Grand Seiko movement in your possession, past or present. Again, _ really _ looking forward to the pics.


Would there be the possiblity of a wager? huh?


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> Would there be the possiblity of a wager? huh?


I think my humiliation at the bottom of every post should suffice. The only addendum I'll make is IF you get that hi-res pic, the pallet fork needs to be 'slightly less crude' (open to the forum's interpretation). All the pics I've seen of them look shiny and smooth.


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> I think my humiliation at the bottom of every post should suffice. The only addendum I'll make is IF you get that hi-res pic, the pallet fork needs to be 'slightly less crude' (open to the forum's interpretation). All the pics I've seen of them look shiny and smooth.


I think we'll just go with your original terms - particularly since you proposed them. Email me to discuss amounts. I have an agent in Sidney to act on my behalf. Look forward to hearing from you. (email is on my user link)


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> I think we'll just go with your original terms - particularly since you proposed them. Email me to discuss amounts. I have an agent in Sidney to act on my behalf. Look forward to hearing from you. (email is on my user link)


I'm not sure what you mean by that sorry.

It'll be difficult to prove that a photo of a GS movement is one in your possession or that you have worked on, as I'm sure you know people who know people, etc etc. But considering the current crop of 9S with MEMS was released in 2009/2010 I find it hard to believe that someone would get one serviced by an independent so soon. Regardless, I find humble pie delicious and have my fork and knife ready if need be. Look forward to the pics.

Cheers!


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> . . . I swear that I will add a signature to say 'Pithy is the finest watchmaker in the world and I was wrong' if you can produce either the hi-res photo, or a photo of a Grand Seiko movement in your possession, past or present. Again, _ really _ looking forward to the pics.





pithy said:


> I think we'll just go with your original terms - particularly since you proposed them. Email me to discuss amounts. I have an agent in Sidney to act on my behalf. Look forward to hearing from you. (email is on my user link)





Domo said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by that sorry. . . . .


What you already swore to.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



mew88 said:


> This thread needs pictures.


Let's add another.


----------



## czarcasm (Mar 2, 2013)




----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

*Re: Attention to small details*



little big feather said:


> But first we must take it for a little swim....at least 100ft.on the Great Barrier reef, then climb Mt. Everest.
> How about a 9 month tour thru Vietnam, walking everyday....Then a short 3 months in the Sahara.
> When will you and Mickey be ready to go?


Well in that case yeah, yeah. All those Rolex owners swim 100 feet in the Great Barrier reef, then climb Mt Everest, do a 9 month tour through Vietnam, then 3 months in the Sahara. They must bang a different woman every night, save the world from Spectre, drive an Aston Martin, and have a martini, shaken, not stirred right? ;-)


----------



## lethaltoes (Mar 5, 2013)

pithy said:


> Would there be the possiblity of a wager? huh?


Woohoo! A betting man! I'm willing to stand by my opinion that your comments about the grand seiko 9s85 are profoundly ignorant. Let's hear the stakes! Cheers!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> What you already swore to.


Why did you send me a PM with your e-mail address? Keep it on the forum. Post the pics _right here _when you have the time. I'm willing to add the signature as soon as the requirements are fulfilled. I'm not sure where the confusion is?


----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

lethaltoes said:


> . . . . I'm willing to stand by my opinion that your comments about the grand seiko 9s85 are profoundly ignorant. . . .


lol.


----------



## Rob Roberts (Feb 16, 2014)




----------



## pithy (Aug 22, 2010)

Domo said:


> Why did you send me a PM with your e-mail address? Keep it on the forum. Post the pics _right here _when you have the time. I'm willing to add the signature as soon as the requirements are fulfilled. I'm not sure where the confusion is?


Oh, you're not interested in a wager? [FYI: Your endorsement is of no interest to me.]


----------



## balzebub (May 30, 2010)

why compare non GS seikos against Rolex? The price difference is huge, so obviously Rolex is of better quality, it is apparent when you handle them both and there is no need to talk about the movement and accuracy etc. Only thing in common is that they both tell the time. 

I guess only a GS level Seiko can hope to match Rolex? BUT given that their pricing is similar, i would personally prefer the Rolex, both have great designs, great finishing and are in house, but Rolex being Rolex will always hold value better than GS here; so it's easier for me to convince my SO that i am sane spending 10k on a watch. 

However i would love to add a non GS Seiko SD to my collection and a GS HAQ as well one day..


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

pithy said:


> Oh, you're not interested in a wager? [FYI: Your endorsement is of no interest to me.]


What? No I'm not interested. When did I say I was? If my endorsement is of no interest to you, why keep carrying on like this? 
Either come up with the pics or don't. The forum is waiting.


----------



## Quotron (Dec 6, 2013)

Domo said:


> Why did you send me a PM with your e-mail address? Keep it on the forum. Post the pics _right here _when you have the time. I'm willing to add the signature as soon as the requirements are fulfilled. I'm not sure where the confusion is?


----------



## bigvatch (Sep 25, 2007)

*Re: Attention to small details*



little big feather said:


> But first we must take it for a little swim....at least 100ft.on the Great Barrier reef, then climb Mt. Everest.
> How about a 9 month tour thru Vietnam, walking everyday....Then a short 3 months in the Sahara.
> When will you and Mickey be ready to go?


A $50 G Shock from Costco is ready.


----------



## spyderco10 (Mar 21, 2011)




----------



## bigvatch (Sep 25, 2007)

*Re: Attention to small details*



pithy said:


> Pithy has friends that have worn a sub or a gmt every day of their adult life with an eye towards possibly having to use it as a GOOJFC. Try that with a Grand Seiko or any other Mickey Mouse brand. onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnkk! Non-starter.


So these are unserviced subs and gmts being worn well beyond recommended service intervals? Would you recommended such a thing? If they are regularly serviced, why wouldn't A GS or even a $100 7s26 based seiko watch last just as long if properly serviced. I have heard of many stories of seiko autos lasting 20-30 years without servicing.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



bigvatch said:


> So these are unserviced subs and gmts being worn well beyond recommended service intervals? Would you recommended such a thing? If they are regularly serviced, why wouldn't A GS or even a $100 7s26 based seiko watch last just as long if properly serviced. I have heard of many stories of seiko autos lasting 20-30 years without servicing.


I think you missed the point of his post maybe not understanding the acronym. The point, i think, was try to trade a GS for goods or services in a pinch. In all honesty in that situation I would rather have a Rolex than a Patek.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

It's genuinely difficult to enter the subject at this point. Just a tip for the budding epistemologists in the crowd, knowing nothing is better than believing false things (as Socrates eloquently points out via Plato).

A few things to make clear before we begin: I'm not attacking Rolex at all. This is with regard to the anti-Seiko comments. Also, it should be noted that Pithy on several occasions explicitly states that he's attacking all of Seiko, not just Seiko 5s and the like, so any model is fair game.

_"__Plastic a plenty, hollow powder cast pallets, slopped adhesive, raw cast bridges and plates, phillips heads, opaque jewels, unpolished and unbrushed surfaces - the Seiko is truly ugly to its soul and overall - as a brand - a poor timekeeper."_

No.











And, interestingly, it's not possible to buy a Grand Seiko that does not, at the very least, _exceed_ chronometer specs. That's the worst case scenario. You can buy mechanical Seikos now rated for +4/-2.

_"__Here's the pallet from the 9s85. Slightly less crude. Wish I had a closeup. This kind of thing is one of the reasons that watchmakers openly scoff at Seiko."
_
The MEMS escapement has the tightest tolerances of any metallic escapement ever made. That escape wheel and pallet fork are hollow and skeletonized, in addition to being made with MEMS technology to achieve molecular-level precision.

Here's that "crude" part:











Here's a microscopic comparison of Seiko's pallet fork with an ordinary one:










_"__Glad you enjoyed that. lol. Here's the rest of it: From a detail aspect -particularly with regard to the movement - it's not that Rolex is such an exceptional brand. The are several that I find much more appealing. It's just that the Grand Seiko is so mediocre/ho-hum, like they didn't even bother to finish their work before they shipped it."_

You're comparing this:











To this:










And that's me being charitable. By the way, I'm not attacking Rolex at all, but to claim that the ENTIRE brand of Seiko has terrible finishing across the board is hopelessly unfounded, particularly in comparison to the movements you're holding up as shining examples. Were you comparing with an A. Lange, I would find this relatively uncontroversial, but the claim is basically that all Seikos ever have inferior finishing to all non-Seikos ever.

You go after all Seikos, not just Grand, which makes this eligible:










_"__You are very kind to defer, but this is simply my perspective from working on both. Under 100X magnification it's kind of hard to hide any comparative shortcomings in your product. The GS has been amply demonstrated to be a decent runner. I just don't understand why the company won't go the last ten miles to produce a truly superior product. As it stands they can have the best in Japan and not be in the top twenty in Europe."
_
You've never seen a Grand Seiko movement, taken apart, under magnification. You probably have never seen a Grand Seiko movement taken apart in a photo before this thread. You just made it up. I look at GS movements under heavy magnification frequently. I've seen Grand Seikos being made *in person*. I watched spring drives, like the 9R86 above, but in addition to that, I looked at the escape wheel and pallet fork, which Seiko kindly provided in a display, up close. They look great. I will take macros of them when Seiko returns to Dallas in a couple months.

_"__Virtually everyone that has ever produced a pallet fork in the history of mankind has done a better job from an aesthetic perspective than is reflected in the work on 7s26. Even Timex demonstrated higher quality. Every Swiss lever was better - even the worst ebauche produced on ran out tooling. To any one with any appreciable level of direct experience with watch repair this would be obvious."
_
You've defamed a $15 last-generation movement in the process of being phased out. You then try to apply that criticism to hand made Micro Artisan Studio Credors. No.

_"__Pithy has friends that have worn a sub or a gmt every day of their adult life with an eye towards possibly having to use it as a GOOJFC. Try that with a Grand Seiko or any other Mickey Mouse brand. onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnkk! Non-starter."_

That's a myth.

_"__That is abosolute rubbish. Seiko cheapened the manufacture on several calibers by utilizing sintered powder metal casting and they have never bothered to master the technique. Period. Remember these seven series are succeptable to running backwards. Junk. You may wish to educate yourself before being subjected to further embarassment."_

No, they don't. Again, made up. Grand Seiko actually uses incredibly hardened parts for their pallet fork and escape wheel:

*"The hardness of Seiko's steel components is actually number one in the industry today, at somewhere between 700-740 HV (Vickers), similar to the 740 HV of vintage Pateks (note, this is speculative and very difficult to verify). The recent decrease in steel hardness by the Swiss is unexplained, but may allow easier manufacturing of parts and less time since such hardness is usually accomplished by ice tempering of steel (heated to 1000 C, then quenched in 20 C oil, then frozen for -80 C for 1 hour, then baked at 160 C for several hours)."*

_"__Would there be the possiblity of a wager? huh?"
_
There's no *possibility *of a wager. He straight up challenged you. He didn't even ask you to take any risks on your end. Therefore, it is more of a dare.

_"__I think we'll just go with your original terms - particularly since you proposed them. Email me to discuss amounts. I have an agent in Sidney to act on my behalf. Look forward to hearing from you. (email is on my user link)"
_
Ok, keep fresh in your memory that last sentence.

_"__Oh, you're not interested in a wager? [FYI: Your endorsement is of no interest to me.]"
_
Just before that you said you wanted to stick to his original terms. Why should we believe that you proving your point is of no interest to you? You just went through this multi-page tirade slandering a brand and arguing with a very friendly member and now suddenly you need to be financially incentivized to back up your claims? It makes no sense. Unless, of course, you want to retreat. 

To be clear, you've made up virtually everything you've said. You have never worked on a 9S6X or 9S8X before. That you couldn't even be bothered to fact check yourself with a simple Google search is very disappointing. 

That frustrates me because you're misleading people who may not know better or have the time and interest to go fact checking themselves.

But more upsetting is the flippant tone you've taken with Domo. Domo would be a great teacher for you. You just need to quiet down and listen carefully to what he says. This is a learning opportunity for you. Even if your goal is to defame Grand Seiko, you do yourself no favors by not knowing what you're talking about because it destroys your credibility.

With regard to the dare that you accepted (when saying we'll go with your original terms): please, no more desperation tactics.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

^^^
Easily my favourite post on WuS, LOL! :-!

Thanks for the support CitizenM. It is you though who is the Seiko master however. You have access to information that we mere mortal customers can only dream of :-(


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)




----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

Seiko does some truly sloppy work on their movements... 










-adi4


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



sleepyhead123 said:


> Well in that case yeah, yeah. All those Rolex owners swim 100 feet in the Great Barrier reef, then climb Mt Everest, do a 9 month tour through Vietnam, then 3 months in the Sahara. They must bang a different woman every night, save the world from Spectre, drive an Aston Martin, and have a martini, shaken, not stirred right? ;-)


No,not all owners, but a Rolex can and has done all those things, now the test is,can the Mickey Mouse $10 watch do it and keep better time?
A general, over the top, totally idiotic statement was made that a Mickey Mouse was better at keeping time, so prove it under conditions
that Rolex has performed under. Oh, I don't own an Aston, it's a Maserati and I don't drink...;-)


----------



## Rattrapante Pete (Sep 5, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*

I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of the thread comparing $200 Seikos to $8K Subs, but shouldn't _someone _chime in that the Seiko crowd is just jealous because they're not successful enough to afford the Rolex, the watch that winners wear, because the Seiko crowd are poor and _losers?_ Come on, guys! Ha ha ha


----------



## Yankees2351 (Nov 10, 2012)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Rattrapante Pete said:


> I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of the thread comparing $200 Seikos to $8K Subs, but shouldn't _someone _chime in that the Seiko crowd is just jealous because they're not successful enough to afford the Rolex, the watch that winners wear, because the Seiko crowd are poor and _losers?_ Come on, guys! Ha ha ha


:rodekaartSPECULATION!!


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

And yet another Rolex vs Seiko thread derails and devolves into mudslinging. Oh well, in before the lock.:rodekaart


----------



## rdoder (Jul 13, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Rattrapante Pete said:


> I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of the thread comparing $200 Seikos to $8K Subs, but shouldn't _someone _chime in that the Seiko crowd is just jealous because they're not successful enough to afford the Rolex, the watch that winners wear, because the Seiko crowd are poor and _losers?_ Come on, guys! Ha ha ha


A middle class person who could afford an average car could afford a Rolex. I could buy a Rolex if I want, but I'm not rich/successful/a winner, and I don't want others to think that I want them to think that I'm rich/successful/a winner when I'm not; that would be boastful and distasteful. Why buy a Rolex when I could buy a Seiko, and use the savings on something else? People who wear Rolex as status symbol are concerned with what others think of them, whereas people who could afford a Rolex but who wear Seiko instead tend to be practical and humble folks who are not interested in flaunting their wealth/success and who spend money wisely.

I'm not sure if one could generalize that Rolex owners are winners, and Seiko owners are losers. There is a lot more to life than wealth.


----------



## blackbard (Mar 24, 2009)

Cannonball said:


> Good, me too. Besides, I've got this summer cold that won't let go of me.
> 
> But back OT, what I do like about Rolex is all of their watches meet their standard. There are no lesser models.
> 
> ...


What he said&#8230;.

I've owned both. I'll admit I'm a brand snob. BUT, comparing both watches in hand, I'd pick up the submariner every time. Its the watch that probably started Seiko even making dive watches...


----------



## charlieboy89 (Dec 21, 2011)

Come on now, you don't say you don't like Rolex redline sub and Seiko marinemaster? Whats wrong with you people!!


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

And I note that once again, in order to forward their personal bias and agendas, no one moved on my suggestion of looking at a Seiko 5 against a GS watch to see why x costs more than y.

Carry on.


----------



## lethaltoes (Mar 5, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Rattrapante Pete said:


> I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of the thread comparing $200 Seikos to $8K Subs, but shouldn't _someone _chime in that the Seiko crowd is just jealous because they're not successful enough to afford the Rolex, the watch that winners wear, because the Seiko crowd are poor and _losers?_ Come on, guys! Ha ha ha


Damn! You got me! I wish I could afford that 8k symbol of success but some of us guys just have to make do with what we have. That's life I guess! Good thing some seikos aren't too shabby. I still can't get over how very perceptive you are. Astounding. Cheers!


----------



## John MS (Mar 17, 2006)

drunken monkey said:


> And I note that once again, in order to forward their personal bias and agendas, no one moved on my suggestion of looking at a Seiko 5 against a GS watch to see why x costs more than y.
> 
> Carry on.


Why don't you give us your x y analysis?


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

I read the OP then scrolled to the last page to see what's going on with this thread since this is the first I've seen of it. 

Whoa.... Not what I was expecting lol


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



Rattrapante Pete said:


> I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of the thread comparing $200 Seikos to $8K Subs, but shouldn't _someone _chime in that the Seiko crowd is just jealous because they're not successful enough to afford the Rolex, the watch that winners wear, because the Seiko crowd are poor and _losers?_ Come on, guys! Ha ha ha


I don't really know if you meant this as a joke.....Some may think that you are a real A$$hole for saying that!
I will reserve my opinion and allow you to make a public apology,which I honestly believe is needed.


----------



## waterdude (Apr 19, 2012)

CitizenM said:


> It's genuinely difficult to enter the subject at this point. Just a tip for the budding epistemologists in the crowd, knowing nothing is better than believing false things (as Socrates eloquently points out via Plato).
> 
> A few things to make clear before we begin: I'm not attacking Rolex at all. This is with regard to the anti-Seiko comments. Also, it should be noted that Pithy on several occasions explicitly states that he's attacking all of Seiko, not just Seiko 5s and the like, so any model is fair game.
> 
> ...


THANK YOU!!


----------



## sirgilbert357 (Mar 21, 2012)

GlennO said:


>


LMAO!!!!


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

drunken monkey said:


> And I note that once again, in order to forward their personal bias and agendas, no one moved on my suggestion of looking at a Seiko 5 against a GS watch to see why x costs more than y.
> 
> Carry on.


Wouldn't that be just as futile as the topic of this thread...i.e. SKX v Sub?


----------



## sirgilbert357 (Mar 21, 2012)

CitizenM said:


> It's genuinely difficult to enter the subject at this point. Just a tip for the budding epistemologists in the crowd, knowing nothing is better than believing false things (as Socrates eloquently points out via Plato).
> 
> A few things to make clear before we begin: I'm not attacking Rolex at all. This is with regard to the anti-Seiko comments. Also, it should be noted that Pithy on several occasions explicitly states that he's attacking all of Seiko, not just Seiko 5s and the like, so any model is fair game.
> 
> ...


As anyone who plays the game of chess knows, there is a painful finality in hearing the words "Checkmate". I think that term could easily be applied here.

CitizenM, if there is beer for sale at the GTG @ Timeless, your first one is on me. See you Saturday (I assume you'll be there anyway).

Thank you to both Domo and CitizenM for shedding some light, I always pay attention to and enjoy your posts on Seiko.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

GlennO said:


> Wouldn't that be just as futile as the topic of this thread...i.e. SKX v Sub?


Maybe but at least people might actually look at the differences in production methods, tolerances, level of work and whatever instead of instantly devolving into brandick measuring.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

GlennO said:


> Wouldn't that be just as futile as the topic of this thread...i.e. SKX v Sub?


Well, not really. It at least takes the issue of styling and branding out of the discussion, and focuses more on precisely what one gets for the additional money. So, a comparison of a Seiko 5 to a SARB to a Grand Seiko with similar styling seems like an eminently reasonable thing to do.


----------



## charlieboy89 (Dec 21, 2011)

Lets lock the thread at 24 pages lol


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Well you're right about the branding part. Pretty sure Sarb v GS has been done before.

The thing is, it's not difficult to identify technical differences, but you'll never get consensus on the value of those differences, even within a brand.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

Toothbras said:


> I read the OP then scrolled to the last page to see what's going on with this thread since this is the first I've seen of it.
> 
> Whoa.... Not what I was expecting lol


You were expecting better? Worse? TBH, I'm surprised it took this many pages to reach this point.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

sirgilbert357 said:


> As anyone who plays the game of chess knows, there is a painful finality in hearing the words *"Checkmate"*. I think that term could easily be applied here.
> 
> CitizenM, if there is beer for sale at the GTG @ Timeless, your first one is on me. See you Saturday (I assume you'll be there anyway).
> 
> Thank you to both Domo and CitizenM for shedding some light, I always pay attention to and enjoy your posts on Seiko.


I was thinking something more in line with this:


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

GlennO said:


> Well you're right about the branding part. Pretty sure Sarb v GS has been done before.


I would actually love for someone to do a parallel tear down of watches from the three series of watches.
If appropriately accompanied by details of the production, it would be great insight to how it is done and how different it can be from one end to the other.

We've all seen individual videos of polishing parts but I hardly see videos of the initial making of those parts.

On the one hand we have automated machine cut bridges and at the far end we have hand cut bridges (and everything else) of the man in the Isle of Wight but thosr two are by no means all encompassing. Automated machines are not all equal and my hand cut bridge is not going to be the same as Roger's so just how does it vary across the board?

The essence of what the OP asks is a sound question and any watch fan should be interested. Alas, it seems that arguing about brands seem to be more important.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

sirgilbert357 said:


> As anyone who plays the game of chess knows, there is a painful finality in hearing the words "Checkmate". I think that term could easily be applied here.
> 
> CitizenM, if there is beer for sale at the GTG @ Timeless, your first one is on me. See you Saturday (I assume you'll be there anyway).
> 
> Thank you to both Domo and CitizenM for shedding some light, I always pay attention to and enjoy your posts on Seiko.


Oh definitely, I'll be there. Looking forward to it.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

CitizenM said:


> Oh definitely, I'll be there. Looking forward to it.


Almost makes me want to drive to Dallas for the GTG. Almost.


----------



## sirgilbert357 (Mar 21, 2012)

rfortson said:


> Almost makes me want to drive to Dallas for the GTG. Almost.


Do it. Dooooooo it.


----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*



pithy said:


> Pithy has friends that have worn a sub or a gmt every day of their adult life with an eye towards possibly having to use it as a GOOJFC. Try that with a Grand Seiko or any other Mickey Mouse brand. onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnkk! Non-starter.


Referring to ones self in the third person is creepy. That and the whole "I have a friend who knows a guy that has a watch and did cool stuff" argument is usually indicative of a lack of personal knowledge about the topic at hand and therefore nullifies any credibility one night be trying to establish.


----------



## EricM (Aug 18, 2014)

GlennO said:


>


Lol. That was some smackdown!!! Glorious!


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

rfortson said:


> You were expecting better? Worse? TBH, I'm surprised it took this many pages to reach this point.


I was expecting rolex bashing, not seiko bashing


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

drunken monkey said:


> I would actually love for someone to do a parallel tear down of watches from the three series of watches.
> If appropriately accompanied by details of the production, it would be great insight to how it is done and how different it can be from one end to the other.
> 
> We've all seen individual videos of polishing parts but I hardly see videos of the initial making of those parts.
> ...


I think we would all love to see such an article and I would like to see a Vacheron or Patek sports model included. I do think the author would become the new Walt Odet of the day though.

It will be interesting to see where this thread goes, my guess, round and round.

I do have one nit to pick with CitizenM the use of a Rolex as a GOOJFC (get out of jail free card) isn't a myth. When I was in grad school I left my apartment to grab some food and needed to fill up with gas, that was the time when you didn't have to pay first, I filled up my car and realized I had left my wallet at home, my Rolex 1680 kept me from having to call someone to bring me money. Later I was climbing in the Himalayas and our team had an issue with some of the oxygen tanks we had rented, there was a huge S. Korean contingent with enough Os to get half the continent up the mountain so we negotiated for replacements. In the end one of the other members of the team let them hold his TT Sub until we could get a wire transfer completed. It ended up being huge for us because we could continue on time with our summit attempt had we been forced to wait the weather that rolled in would have kept up on the mountain for another week. In either of these cases probably any recognizable high quality watch or piece of jewelry would have sufficed but I am guessing it was easier with the cornet of the face.

In the end with this thread the Sub and the GS Diver (spring drive, I have no idea if the quartz is even out yet) provide very similar quality overall. People will have their favorite and may feel the need to champion their chosen. In the end I think both Omega and GS have "won" their battle with Rolex on most of the WIS forums, the fact that there is actual discourse about Omega/GS vs Rolex is a win. Ten years ago the "argument" would have been extremely one sided.


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

ilitig8 said:


> I think we would all love to see such an article and I would like to see a Vacheron or Patek sports model included. I do think the author would become the new Walt Odet of the day though.
> 
> It will be interesting to see where this thread goes, my guess, round and round.
> 
> ...


Well said, I think since that incident with Walt Odets, everybody who would have enough experience to do such comparisons is steering far clear of controversy like that. It's a shame, but that just seems to be the way valid critiques are treated on the forums at times (sometimes with good reason, as there are plenty who claim to be "experts" bashing on other brands).

I still feel the GS diver and the Rolex sub are much too different to really be able to compare, starting from the movement up. They serve the same basic function, but approach it from wildly different angles. I think the same goes for the lower end Seiko divers to Rolex comparison as well, you really can't compare them because they are not playing in remotely the same field. Now, if Seiko comes out with a Hi-Beat diver, then all bets are off and you know a comparison with other divers in the same price range is in order!  They do have a historical hi-beat model to base it on if they do go that direction:


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

The mentions of Walt Odets prompted me to research the incident.. WOW, what a great review. Very in depth with excellent picture examples. I'm not surprised it caused a fire storm. I love Rolex (and adore Tudor), but I love them for what they are, not for what other people think they must be.

This line alone must have cause threads and threads of vehement anger:

"In the current watch market, the poor quality of the movement--and relatively good quality of the case and dial--suggests that this watch should retail in the $600 to $800 range."


----------



## Quotron (Dec 6, 2013)

Arthur M said:


> The mentions of Walt Odets prompted me to research the incident.. WOW, what a great review. Very in depth with excellent picture examples. I'm not surprised it caused a fire storm. I love Rolex (and adore Tudor), but I love them for what they are, not for what other people think they must be.
> 
> This line alone must have cause threads and threads of vehement anger:
> 
> "In the current watch market, the poor quality of the movement--and relatively good quality of the case and dial--suggests that this watch should retail in the $600 to $800 range."


Quotron's Law of Watch Forums:

"As a Rolex discussion grows longer, the probability of a mention of or reference to Walt Odets approaches 1"


----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

Quotron said:


> Quotron's Law of Watch Forums:
> 
> "As a Rolex discussion grows longer, the probability of a mention of or reference to Walt Odets approaches 1"


Had to Google to get that joke. lol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Odets


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Grand Seiko 9s65, looks excellent to me.


----------



## DarthVedder (Jun 12, 2011)

The Sub was originally conceived as a tool watch, it is still probably the best mechanical tool watch out there. The MM300 gives it a good run for its money as a tool watch and is a great watch on its own right, but it's not as recognizable. 

The BIG problem with the Sub is that its price is no longer compatible with a tool watch and it actually became a luxury item, but what can be done about it? If that's the market, then Rolex would be fools if they didn't take advantage of it. I personally wouldn't pay its current price (it is, after all, "just" a mass-produced stainless steel 3-hands watch), but if anyone wants to do it, they are free to do so.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

Rolex is great. Seiko is great. Seiko at the low end is a great value. GS plays in the same league as Rolex. That pretty much sums it up.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## DarthVedder (Jun 12, 2011)

BTW, I do agree with the notion that a Rolex is close to a GOOJFC. Because of its universal recognition, a Rolex can easily be sold/pawned anywhere in the world, so it's basically like having cash in case of an urgency. It is your decision if you want to carry something as valuable and recognizable on your wrist (thieves are known to prefer Rolex watches).


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

oak1971 said:


> Had to Google to get that joke. lol
> 
> Walt Odets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


First I think it is a different Walt Odets and I think Quotron was making his version of Godwin's law.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

cuchulain said:


> People wear Rolex for the prestige of the watch, like driving a fancy sports car. Some do it to appease their ego, some do it to compensate, and some just do it because it's a panty dropper. It's no mystery a lot of women are drawn to money, no better way to show that then with a Rolex on your wrist.
> 
> At the end of the day watches like Rolex are the apex in conspicuous consumption, it's all about showing you're better than the next guy and keeping up with the joneses.
> 
> I can't see any other reason to pay 10k for a watch that clearly isn't worth that.


I cant believe it took nearly 50 posts before a ridiculous one like this. You guys disappoint me.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

gagnello said:


> Rolex is great. Seiko is great. Seiko at the low end is a great value. GS plays in the same league as Rolex. That pretty much sums it up.


Hey! Stop being sensible!


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

little big feather said:


> Write this down...."Rolex is,what other watches hope to be"............;-)


Huh. Weird. I dont think any of my other watches hope to be a Rolex. I must be missing something.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

gagnello said:


> I cant believe it took nearly 50 posts before a ridiculous one like this. You guys disappoint me.
> 
> Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

ilitig8 said:


> First I think it is a different Walt Odets and I think Quotron was making his version of Godwin's law.


As far as I know it's the same guy, he took the hobby to seriously and became quite good as a self made (no instruction) "watchmaker". Remember reading the he "got mad" at JLC cause they wouldn't sell him some parts (yep, not a JLC certified professional).

Then he left the watch hobby and went to pursuit other hobbies (art related)


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

AAMC said:


> As far as I know it's the same guy, he took the hobby to seriously and became quite good as a self made (no instruction) "watchmaker". Remember reading the he "got mad" at JLC cause they wouldn't sell him some parts (yep, not a JLC certified professional).


Yup. JLC wouldn't give him a parts account, so he retracted a favourable JLC review.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

Quotron said:


> Quotron's Law of Watch Forums:
> 
> "As a Rolex discussion grows longer, the probability of a mention of or reference to Walt Odets approaches 1"


I propose a new Millennium Prize Problem: "Disprove Quotron's Law"

Ha! That'll have the thinkers of the 21st century stumped for a while. Move over, "P = NP"!!


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Domo said:


> I propose a new Millennium Prize Problem: "Disprove Quotron's Law"
> 
> Ha! That'll have the thinkers of the 21st century stumped for a while. Move over, "P = NP"!!


That's easy. Simply interject a Grand Seiko comment followed by an Omega comparison (preferably one that suggests Omega is the true Bond watch) finished with a "only douche-nozzles buy Rolex" and the thread will be locked long before Quotron's Law even has a chance.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

bu11itt said:


> That's easy. Simply interject a Grand Seiko comment followed by an Omega comparison (preferably one that suggests Omega is the true Bond watch) finished with a "only douche-nozzles buy Rolex" and the thread will be locked long before Quotron's Law even has a chance.


Ahh, but doesn't thread lock violate the first condition of Quotrons Law?

_"As a *Rolex discussion grows longer*, the probability of a mention of or reference to Walt Odets approaches 1"_


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

cedargrove said:


> Yup. JLC wouldn't give him a parts account, so he retracted a favourable JLC review.


An individual like that should not be in the watch reviewing business. That is a petty personality. Can't believe anything he would write. Good or bad


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Domo said:


> Ahh, but doesn't thread lock violate the first condition of Quotrons Law?
> 
> _"As a *Rolex discussion grows longer*, the probability of a mention of or reference to Walt Odets approaches 1"_


CURSES!!! Foiled by the zeroth law!!!


----------



## hpark21 (Oct 8, 2007)

Stellite said:


> An individual like that should not be in the watch reviewing business. That is a petty personality. Can't believe anything he would write. Good or bad


But... Think about it this way, you have studied a lot about fixing up cars. You successfully took apart many and serviced them (not professionally).

As a matter of fact, you took apart your old Rolls Royce and during that time, took pictures and showed the parts off saying how wonderful it was put together and how the parts were meticulously finished, etc.

Then, when you need to fix the car, you go to Rolls Royce dealer and ask to give you a quote on parts and they tell you, "We can not trust that you will fix the car right, we won't sell you the parts".. Won't you get some what of sour taste?

Of course, don't know about retracting the good review, but I don't know whether one should endorse a company if you can not agree on their part supply policy I guess.


----------



## dak_la (Sep 13, 2012)

DarthVedder said:


> BTW, I do agree with the notion that a Rolex is close to a GOOJFC. Because of its universal recognition, a Rolex can easily be sold/pawned anywhere in the world, so it's basically like having cash in case of an urgency. It is your decision if you want to carry something as valuable and recognizable on your wrist (thieves are known to prefer Rolex watches).


Really just out of curiosity as I had no experience in this. Has the notion of Rolex being a GOOJFC somewhat been weakened in recent years due to the influx of great quality fakes out there?


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

hpark21 said:


> But... Think about it this way, you have studied a lot about fixing up cars. You successfully took apart many and serviced them (not professionally).
> 
> As a matter of fact, you took apart your old Rolls Royce and during that time, took pictures and showed the parts off saying how wonderful it was put together and how the parts were meticulously finished, etc.
> 
> ...


If I didn't like their terms I would move on to another brand of car. I would not pull a review out of spite. That says more about my character than anything else.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Domo said:


> Ahh, but doesn't thread lock violate the first condition of Quotrons Law?
> 
> _"As a *Rolex discussion grows longer*, the probability of a mention of or reference to Walt Odets approaches 1"_


Did you just read the review? Or did you read about what really happened and who Walt is? Dig a little deeper, it is more interesting, the deeper you go.


----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> First I think it is a different Walt Odets and I think Quotron was making his version of Godwin's law.


Yes, but it made things more interestingly funny.


----------



## Quotron (Dec 6, 2013)

little big feather said:


> Did you just read the review? Or did you read about what really happened and who Walt is? Dig a little deeper, it is more interesting, the deeper you go.


Yeah, there's a lot of controversy with the article. Namely: the provenance of the watch, the fact that it was never made available for subsequent reviews, that he claims it was "destoyed", that no other watches with a similar caliber movement exhibit the poor craftsmanship shown in that review, etc... and etc...

I think Odets is a smart guy and I have a lot of respect for people with an autodidactic skill set, but given the surrounding factors, and the fact that he pulled a glowing review for a JLC watch, it makes me think he had an axe to grind against Rolex.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

The Walt Odets Explorer was instigated by Richard Paige (former owner of TZ), and below he mentions that Walt was essentially comparing the finishing on a Rolex to that on Trinity level watches.



> An anecdote about Walt from an interview with Richard Paige(former owner of Timezone.com)
> 
> What really happened with the Rolex Explorer review?
> 
> ...


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Well, rabid fans will be rabid fans. At least its not like in football where you can start a war over a game. We get enough of that over here when someone decides to badmouth Rolex, Omega, Seiko, Patek, Tudor . . . (*insert all other watch brands*) . . . Citizen, Swatch, Invicta. Well, maybe not Invicta. :-d


----------



## cadeallaw (Jun 5, 2014)

We figure out a winner yet?


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

cadeallaw said:


> We figure out a winner yet?


Asking that now is like waking up a toddler after he wore himself out in a 10 hour temper tantrum . . .


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

cadeallaw said:


> We figure out a winner yet?


It is either Seilex or Rolko not sure which.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

sleepyhead123 said:


> Asking that now is like waking up a toddler after he wore himself out in a 10 hour temper tantrum . . .


Don't worry in the next 24 hours there will be a late comer post that will be like giving said, now awake, toddler Red Bull and doughnuts with meth sprinkled on them.


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

cadeallaw said:


> We figure out a winner yet?


I think around page 10 Omega was declared the winner


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

bu11itt said:


> That's easy. Simply interject a Grand Seiko comment followed by an Omega comparison (preferably one that suggests Omega is the true Bond watch) finished with a "only douche-nozzles buy Rolex" and the thread will be locked long before Quotron's Law even has a chance.


That's what it always devolves to. The recent ones I've read have had the Rolex guys kind of staying out of it, commenting scarcely while the Omega and GS guys bash on Rolex. We can read into that whatever we want.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

AAMC said:


> I think around page 10 Omega was declared the winner


If you like Hockey pucks:-d


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

Stellite said:


> If you like Hockey pucks:-d


Look guys! Omega basher here  hehehe...


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

AAMC said:


> Look guys! Omega basher here  hehehe...


Many watches have come and gone, but my SMP is still with me. It will be hard times when I let that one go. :-d


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

Stellite said:


> Many watches have come and gone, but my SMP is still with me. It will be hard times when I let that one go. :-d


This thread went places anyway so a pic of my "puck's" can't derail it...


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

Like to see them play hockey with this one...


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

AAMC said:


> This thread went places anyway so a pic of my "puck's" can't derail it...


I am anti chronograph, but someday I have to get a Speedy and Daytona. I like your combination, looks great.


----------



## Rusty427 (Jan 3, 2009)

I know of no other watch that brings so much for so little to the wrists of the common man as the skx007.
I just wish they still made a quartz one.


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

Stellite said:


> I am anti chronograph, but someday I have to get a Speedy and Daytona. I like your combination, looks great.


I really don't have a grail watch but the white dial Daytona it's as close as it gets


----------



## Perseus (Mar 25, 2010)




----------



## sirgilbert357 (Mar 21, 2012)

Only two more pages to go before my prediction of 25 pages in 72 hours is fulfilled! Keep it coming!!!


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

sirgilbert357 said:


> Only two more pages to go before my prediction of 25 pages in 72 hours is fulfilled! Keep it coming!!!


Sorry but I only have 5 pages here.

(But I do have my page settings at 50 posts per page ;-) )


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

My poor thread lol. Out of 23 pages all I got from it was Seiko = Honda, Rolex = BMW. Both good but if money isn't a factor then youd choose the latter. I just wanted to know much in quality is my Seiko diver different from Rolex but apparently the reliability is roughly the same, it's just Rolex having better craftsmanship!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

sirgilbert357 said:


> Only two more pages to go before my prediction of 25 pages in 72 hours is fulfilled! Keep it coming!!!


Since it doesn't look like I'll be seeing any pics from pithy, here's some fresh ones of my own.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

MissSummerStorm said:


> My poor thread lol. Out of 23 pages all I got from it was Seiko = Honda, Rolex = BMW. Both good but if money isn't a factor then youd choose the latter. I just wanted to know much in quality is my Seiko diver different from Rolex but apparently the reliability is roughly the same, it's just Rolex having better craftsmanship!


Hmm...I was going to add a little but without saying something that would prompt another 23 pages I'd say that's not a bad summary.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

Domo said:


> Since it doesn't look like I'll be seeing any pics from pithy, here's some fresh ones of my own.


Now we're talkin', nice Domo!!


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Sorry but I only have 5 pages here.
> 
> (But I do have my page settings at 50 posts per page ;-) )


Finally. Someone else who has the same posts/page setting.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

MissSummerStorm said:


> My poor thread lol. Out of 23 pages all I got from it was Seiko = Honda, Rolex = BMW. Both good but if money isn't a factor then youd choose the latter. I just wanted to know much in quality is my Seiko diver different from Rolex but apparently the reliability is roughly the same, it's just Rolex having better craftsmanship!


I think you maybe should have got a bit more than this from all of the posts. My suggestion would be to go back and reread.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

drhr said:


> Now we're talkin', nice Domo!!


Thanks, Dr!

We all know it takes a Rolex to survive an overseas deployment, but only a Seiko can survive.....The onion pickle jar!!!



To answer the OP's question, perhaps thats what separates a modern Rolex Sub from a Seiko diver. Seiko's are for going where you wouldn't take the Rolex


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

MissSummerStorm said:


> My poor thread lol. Out of 23 pages all I got from it was Seiko = Honda, Rolex = BMW. Both good but if money isn't a factor then youd choose the latter. I just wanted to know much in quality is my Seiko diver different from Rolex but apparently the reliability is roughly the same, it's just Rolex having better craftsmanship!


Don't fret is went MUCH better than most of us probably expected! The only way to answer this question for ones self is to have them both in your hands at one time, even better live with both at the same time for a few months.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

Domo said:


> To answer the OP's question, perhaps thats what separates a modern Rolex Sub from a Seiko diver. Seiko's are for going where you wouldn't take the Rolex


And the Rolex is for going where you wouldn't take a Patek!


----------



## Rusty427 (Jan 3, 2009)

^^ in a nutshell.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Domo said:


> &#8230;only a Seiko can survive.....The onion pickle jar!!!


Well&#8230; that just happened.


----------



## Victor Cruz (Aug 27, 2013)

In the interest of not having this thread fall short of any Nostradamian efforts, my first post here.

I'm with Pithy!!!!


----------



## DarthVedder (Jun 12, 2011)

MissSummerStorm said:


> My poor thread lol. Out of 23 pages all I got from it was Seiko = Honda, Rolex = BMW. Both good but if money isn't a factor then youd choose the latter. I just wanted to know much in quality is my Seiko diver different from Rolex but apparently the reliability is roughly the same, it's just Rolex having better craftsmanship!


As someone who recently traded a Honda (Accord V6 EX) for a BMW (3 series coupe), I can tell you that both are great and, depending on models, pretty close. The big difference in these comparisons is that a BMW doesn't cost as much as 3-4 equivalent Hondas, like the Rolex does against the Seiko.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Domo said:


> Thanks, Dr!
> 
> We all know it takes a Rolex to survive an overseas deployment, but only a Seiko can survive.....The onion pickle jar!!!
> 
> ...


All those onion pickle jar divers have found their watch of choice! This is settled!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> All those onion pickle jar divers have found their watch of choice! This is settled!


You can almost see the look of staunch determination on the two watches when they were perched on top of the pickled onion jar in post #232. They knew they were gonna end up in the jar one day or another....



bu11itt said:


> Well&#8230; that just happened.


perhaps that photo would have been better posted in your thread....

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/watches-food-2-previously-watches-dinner-1068394.html

I gotta say, that thread is taking a turn for the worse for me. Anyone can take a photo of their wrist next to their dinner. The watch is supposed to BE the food!


----------



## John MS (Mar 17, 2006)

jkpa said:


> I predict 25+ pages.


Good guess!!! The thread made 25 pages in two days without being closed. What are the odds for fifty pages of discussing why Rolex or Seiko dive watches are better?


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Domo said:


> perhaps that photo would have been better posted in your thread....
> 
> https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/watches-food-2-previously-watches-dinner-1068394.html
> 
> I gotta say, that thread is taking a turn for the worse for me. Anyone can take a photo of their wrist next to their dinner. The watch is supposed to BE the food!


While I do prefer the more "unique" posts in that thread, I will not shun anyone snapping a quick wrist shot and food (shoot, I'm guilty of that myself), because let's be honest, the other way is a little... Odd (like a Grand Seiko on a raw steak or a Rolex in a tub of butter).


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

John MS said:


> Good guess!!! The thread made 25 pages in two days without being closed. What are the odds for fifty pages of discussing why Rolex or Seiko dive watches are better?


We are due for the late comer that throws that extra dash of spice in the mix and sends it into the abyss, it seems to always happen when the thread derails and all the people watching the thread have said everything they wanted to say.


----------



## sirgilbert357 (Mar 21, 2012)

ilitig8 said:


> We are due for the late comer that throws that extra dash of spice in the mix and sends it into the abyss, it seems to always happen when the thread derails and all the people watching the thread have said everything they wanted to say.


My SKX171 is WAYYY better than ANY Rolex watch. You'll never change my mind and I'm right, youre wrong!!!!!

(Something like that? LMAO)

Edit: Woo-Hoo, we made 25 pages in 3 days!! *Victory dance* I was RIGHT!!!


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

CitizenM said:


> To be clear, you've made up virtually everything you've said. You have never worked on a 9S6X or 9S8X before. That you couldn't even be bothered to fact check yourself with a simple Google search is very disappointing.
> 
> That frustrates me because you're misleading people who may not know better or have the time and interest to go fact checking themselves.
> 
> ...


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

So I hear that the Oysterquartz vs 9F62 is like comparing Timex vs Patek... Is this enough to derail the thread? 


-adi4


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

sirgilbert357 said:


> My SKX171 is WAYYY better than ANY Rolex watch. You'll never change my mind and I'm right, youre wrong!!!!!
> 
> (Something like that? LMAO)
> 
> Edit: Woo-Hoo, we made 25 pages in 3 days!! *Victory dance* I was RIGHT!!!


If you really want the best just get a Fifty Fathoms, all else bows.


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

adi4 said:


> So I hear that the Oysterquartz vs 9F62 is like comparing Timex vs Patek... Is this enough to derail the thread?
> 
> -adi4


No mention of Omega, thread fails to derail :-d


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

mew88 said:


> No mention of Omega, thread fails to derail :-d


Any objective assessment should consider quality of construction/finish + timekeeping ability + VFM + long term maintenance costs.
The new GS 9F diver will beat any diver in existence, including the Omega SMP & PO!

OMG...this thread has turned me into a troll!


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Any objective assessment should consider quality of construction/finish + timekeeping ability + VFM + long term maintenance costs.
> The new GS 9F diver will beat any diver in existence, including the Omega SMP & PO!


That would depend on how one weights the criteria.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> That would depend on how one weights the criteria.


Yayy..it worked!
hmm...let's say equally?


----------



## RumbleOfThunder (Jan 1, 2012)

Well "pithy" turned out to be quite the disingenuous, pompous, patronising shill. Yet he appears to be held in such high regard.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Yayy..it worked!
> hmm...let's say equally?




Considering the Rolex (don't need to go up the ladder for this) will win VFW (in the long term view Rolex being significantly buoyed by resell), maintenance costs (and ease) and will basically tie fit/finish (win fit lose finish) it is going to be hard for the SD to make up the deficit on time keeping, again that will depend on how the values are assigned within the accuracy category alone.

In the end the person or persons that determine how the points will be garnered in each category will decide the victor before the judging.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

RumbleOfThunder said:


> Well "pithy" turned out to be quite the disingenuous, pompous, patronising shill. Yet he appears to be held in such high regard.


For me that depends, he gets more then 24 hours to come up with the pictures in my book. I could care less if he had one in the past or gets one in the future, my only interest is whether said pictures bear out his claims.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> Considering the Rolex (don't need to go up the ladder for this) will win VFW (in the long term view Rolex being significantly buoyed by resell), maintenance costs (and ease) and will basically tie fit/finish (win fit lose finish) it is going to be hard for the SD to make up the deficit on time keeping, again that will depend on how the values are assigned within the accuracy category alone.
> 
> In the end the person or persons that determine how the points will be garnered in each category will decide the victor before the judging.


Yep. But it's 9F not SD. Long term maintenance is an easy win. In any case, I left off one rather important criteria...I don't really like the look of it that much!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

RumbleOfThunder said:


> Well "pithy" turned out to be quite the disingenuous, pompous, patronising shill. Yet he appears to be held in such high regard.





ilitig8 said:


> For me that depends, he gets more then 24 hours to come up with the pictures in my book. I could care less if he had one in the past or gets one in the future, my only interest is whether said pictures bear out his claims.


I hope you're comfortable in your seat for the 'slightly less crude' GS escapement. Instead of cutting it from sheet metal like Rolex, they sloppily assemble it at an almost molecular level, making it both skeletonised and hollow. Frankly, I'm surprised the watch runs at all.

Do read: 
Microelectromechanical systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While I didn't bring a Zeiss with a DSLR adaptor to the AD, under 10x magnifying glass every element within the 9S85 was machine made to absolute perfection. When my SBGJ005 finally arrives (sigh) I'll do my best to capture the escapement for you under a 90mm macro.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Yep. But it's 9F not SD. Long term maintenance is an easy win. In any case, I left off one rather important criteria...I don't really like the look of it that much!


Sorry wasn't paying attention. Quartz = Fail Can't be bothered by anything past the Q word.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

Domo said:


> I hope you're comfortable in your seat for the 'slightly less crude' GS escapement. Instead of cutting it from sheet metal like Rolex, they sloppily assemble it at an almost molecular level, making it both skeletonised and hollow. Frankly, I'm surprised the watch runs at all.
> 
> Do read:
> Microelectromechanical systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


For me the onus is on pithy, he made what I see as a bold statement against "conventional wisdom". When one bucks the trend I always see the burden of proof to be on the one that makes the "new" claim. I am already out of popcorn but will pop more if/when the evidence is presented.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

ilitig8 said:


> I am already out of popcorn but will pop more if/when the evidence is presented.


He seems to have disappeared, so either he's banned or in hiding.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

emaja said:


> He seems to have disappeared, so either he's banned or in hiding.


In light of his recent milestone, I'm going to make a post in honour and of the style of Watchbreath. *Ahem* here it goes....

"The latter"


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

emaja said:


> He seems to have disappeared, so either he's banned or in hiding.


In fairness it has barely been 48 hours.


----------



## fenderjapan (Nov 1, 2013)

I think we should also compare ferrari to lambo, fender to gibson, pepsi to coke, sharpie to marks-a-lot, and nestle to hersheys.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

fenderjapan said:


> I think we should also compare ferrari to lambo, fender to gibson, pepsi to coke, sharpie to marks-a-lot, and nestle to hersheys.


Those are easy, Ferrari, Martin, Coke, Sharpie and Hersheys.

It is time for us to really dig deep: Lange vs Parnis


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

fenderjapan said:


> I think we should also compare ferrari to lambo, fender to gibson, pepsi to coke, sharpie to marks-a-lot, and nestle to hersheys.


Don't know but going with Ferrari, don't care, obviously Coca-Cola, depends on what you're using it for and Hershey's for sure.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Seiko actually keeps 9S85 parts in these glass displays they travel around with, so if you get a chance to go to the roadshow they will probably be out. They were out at Timeless last November but I don't normally carry around a DSLR to cocktail parties (maybe I'm going to the wrong parties). 

Unfortunately, as is the case on pretty much all non skeletonized watches, it's really hard to get a good look at the pallet fork through the back--you can see it, but I'm not sure I can get a satisfactory pic there even with a really good camera. I'd give it a whirl just to see but it's kind of a pain to unlink the bracelet for the shots. Maybe I'll get around to it tomorrow night, but I don't think the photos will be satisfactory for our purposes. 

I'll let Pithy off the hook (for me, personally, it's up to everyone else if they want to). I'm just interested interested in making sure everyone has accurate information.


----------



## alx007 (Jan 28, 2013)

Oh, boy! This thread has a lot of potential for train wreck. 

Put it this way: if you are looking for a Rolex diver, you wouldn't consider a Seiko Diver. At the same token, if you are looking for a Seiko diver, you probably would never be willing to spend the premium of a Rolex. 

In short: both nice watches, when you consider the expectations for what you're paying.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> Sorry wasn't paying attention. Quartz = Fail Can't be bothered by anything past the Q word.


Yet you were comparing the SD quartz? 9F is a big win for me. Just illustrates how subjective it all is.


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

GlennO said:


> Yet you were comparing the SD quartz? 9F is a big win for me. Just illustrates how subjective it all is.


But there's no "soul" in quartz... 









Although the Oysterquartz 5035 is not a bad looker either, just not the same performance specs









Personally, I'm on a Seiko 8J kick at the moment. The independent hour hand won me over, and the performance doesn't look too shabby based on results reported by fellow HAQer's


----------



## spyderco10 (Mar 21, 2011)

alx007 said:


> Put it this way: if you are looking for a Rolex diver, you wouldn't consider a Seiko Diver. At the same token, if you are looking for a Seiko diver, you probably would never be willing to spend the premium of a Rolex.


Not true. There are many who have Rolex and Seiko, particularly the Monster. I am one such person.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Yet you were comparing the SD quartz? 9F is a big win for me. Just illustrates how subjective it all is.


First, I am playing along.

Second, the SD at least has a mechanical soul of sorts.

Third, I would compare the SD in real life. Its hybrid nature allows me to contemplate owning one. A battery powered quartz watch does absolutely nothing for ME. In my world they exist to be beaten on and subjected to the worst torture I will allow my wrist to see. I understand the allure for some people as I do the interest in a Prius or a Tesla but I prefer to be propelled by thousands of explosions fueled by rotted dinosaur bones, as Neolithic as that may be.

As for the 9F itself it reminds me of a story about pigs and some sort of makeup. Same for the Oysterquartz.


----------



## alx007 (Jan 28, 2013)

spyderco10 said:


> Not true. There are many who have Rolex and Seiko, particularly the Monster. I am one such person.


I see how my statement may be confusing. What i meant is at the time you got your Rolex, you didn't think that the Seiko would be a better value. And when you got your Seiko, you didn't care that the Rolex was a better watch. All I mean is that this comparison is as pointless as it gets. Different watches, different price points, different expectations!

Salut!


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

adi4 said:


> Personally, I'm on a Seiko 8J kick at the moment. The independent hour hand won me over, and the performance doesn't look too shabby based on results reported by fellow HAQer's


I think the 8F56 may have been the best Seiko quartz movement ever, balanced cost vs performance. I have one that hasn't been hacked in over 7 years and is better than 12 SPY for that time. GMT, perpetual calender, independent hour hand and 10 year battery life! All this for a watch that retailed for $400 and streeted for under $250. I think it is a shame it is discontinued, if it hadn't my beaters would always be a 8F56 movement watch. I actually have more love for it than all my highend pieces combined and it is the ONLY watch I own I would pick for a scenario where there was a gun to my head and the only thing keeping the hammer off the primer was knowing the correct date and time. Take that Patek, Lange, Vacheron and AP!


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

alx007 said:


> I see how my statement may be confusing. What i meant is at the time you got your Rolex, you didn't think that the Seiko would be a better value. And when you got your Seiko, you didn't care that the Rolex was a better watch. All I mean is that this comparison is as pointless as it gets. Different watches, different price points, different expectations!
> 
> Salut!


Shorter version, there is very little cross-shopping of the two (save the GS Seikos).


----------



## alx007 (Jan 28, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> Shorter version, there is very little cross-shopping of the two (save the GS Seikos).


Precisely


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Macro of my Datejust's pallet fork. Note the polished sinks and chamfering on the entry and exit pallets:









Pithy's job just got a whole lot easier.


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

ilitig8 said:


> I think the 8F56 may have been the best Seiko quartz movement ever, balanced cost vs performance. I have one that hasn't been hacked in over 7 years and is better than 12 SPY for that time. GMT, perpetual calender, independent hour hand and 10 year battery life! All this for a watch that retailed for $400 and streeted for under $250. I think it is a shame it is discontinued, if it hadn't my beaters would always be a 8F56 movement watch. I actually have more love for it than all my highend pieces combined and it is the ONLY watch I own I would pick for a scenario where there was a gun to my head and the only thing keeping the hammer off the primer was knowing the correct date and time. Take that Patek, Lange, Vacheron and AP!





> As for the 9F itself it reminds me of a story about pigs and some sort of makeup. Same for the Oysterquartz.




True, the 8F56 was quite a good movement, although I doubt you'll hear many Seiko engineers stating it was the best quartz movement they've ever produced. 

Real-life performance may have been great for you, but it's not thermo-compensated and susceptible to temperature differences. Personally, I think the 8J56 is the "best" in my book, although it does lack the perpetual calendar and has a 5 year battery. Plus, it comes cased in a GS body, and that lipstick makes that pig look like a supermodel to me.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> First, I am playing along.
> 
> Second, the SD at least has a mechanical soul of sorts.
> 
> ...


:-d That's quite an interesting and aggressive relationship that you have with batteries ;-)
I'd like a SD at some point myself, mainly to experience the technology as a whole. I have hand wind mechanicals, auto's, standard quartz, solar & kinetic quartz...pretty obvious I'm not that fussy where the energy comes from.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

adi4 said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> True, the 8F56 was quite a good movement, although I doubt you'll hear many Seiko engineers stating it was the best quartz movement they've ever produced.
> 
> Real-life performance may have been great for you, but it's not thermo-compensated and susceptible to temperature differences. Personally, I think the 8J56 is the "best" in my book, although it does lack the perpetual calendar and has a 5 year battery. Plus, it comes cased in a GS body, and that lipstick makes that pig look like a supermodel to me.


I was applying my own quartz criteria to the movement. While I don't bat an eye at spending 5 figures for the right mechanical watches above $500-600 my tolerance for quartz goes downhill quick. To me the 8F56 has about the perfect feature set and while it is listed as a 20 SPY movement my luck has given me a beater (which is SERIOUSLY beat on) that I don't have to hack a single time between battery changes since it has an independent hour hand for travel and DST. Mine will be less than 2 minutes fast over 10 years which is within my personal tolerance. I keep contemplating replacing it since it is getting pretty ragged but the feature set, accuracy and price equation seems to be unmatched in my 20+ years as a WIS. I bought it as an impulse and if I knew then what I know now I would have bought 4 or 5 of them (on sale from Amazon at the time for about $200). For me it is the pinnacle of what Seiko does best but then I am not moved by the GS and Credor pieces.... except the SCQE001 which is the only Credor/GS that I would personally buy as of this moment, that said I still feel like a GS will grab me once I finish my correct "to buy" list which is thankfully under 10 now!!!!

Edit: the beater deserves some air time:


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

GlennO said:


> Any objective assessment should consider quality of construction/finish + timekeeping ability + VFM + long term maintenance costs.
> The new GS 9F diver will beat any diver in existence, including the Omega SMP & PO!
> 
> OMG...this thread has turned me into a troll!


What is the oldest GS 9F diver?


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Of note...This thread* is* being monitored by the Rolex Lovers International Fraternal Group, names *are* being taken...b-)

b-)....Rolex...We put the watch in watching..b-)


----------



## John MS (Mar 17, 2006)

ilitig8 said:


> We are due for the late comer that throws that extra dash of spice in the mix and sends it into the abyss, it seems to always happen when the thread derails and all the people watching the thread have said everything they wanted to say.


Yeah, it the thread seems to be twitching some now. When-oh-when will we head off on that one big tangent?


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Stellite said:


> What is the oldest GS 9F diver?


The first of them should be shipping soon.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

I couldn't be bothered to read this thread, so my answer to the question is: Different.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

The fact that this thread hasn't locked yet is a testament to civility of (most of) the players involved. It is, however, running thin. What hasn't been said? We've even had the obligatory Omega hockey puck statement somewhere, and the thread isn't even about omega!


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

John MS said:


> Yeah, it the thread seems to be twitching some now. When-oh-when will we head off on that one big tangent?


Rolex is Mercedes and Seiko is Honda.

Both great cars but in completely different class.


----------



## Au Hasard Balthazar (Feb 18, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Rolex is Mercedes and Seiko is Honda.
> 
> Both great cars but in completely different class.


I haven't read through all the threads but is the first arbitrary car comparison?

I think Seiko is sushi and Rolex is chocolate. No wait Seiko is sake and Rolex is cognac. Hmmmm. Seiko is Akira Kurosawa and Rolex is Jean-Luc Godard.


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Rolex is Mercedes and Seiko is Honda.
> 
> Both great cars but in completely different class.


I'd say Seiko is more like Merc. Mercedes makes little hatchbacks to MPVs to the AMG Blacks to that crazy SLS AMG Black Electric to delivery trucks and semis. Seiko does a bit of everything under the sun too. Heck, they even sell groceries. Rolex is maybe Maserati. Mid level to kind of high end. But unlike Masers, Rolexes never blew up.


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

ljb187 said:


> Macro of my Datejust's pallet fork. Note the polished sinks and chamfering on the entry and exit pallets:
> 
> View attachment 1605449
> 
> ...


Did you get that thing DLC'd? Sweet........


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

sleepyhead123 said:


> I'd say Seiko is more like Merc. Mercedes makes little hatchbacks to MPVs to the AMG Blacks to that crazy SLS AMG Black Electric to delivery trucks and semis. Seiko does a bit of everything under the sun too. Heck, they even sell groceries. Rolex is maybe Maserati. Mid level to kind of high end. But unlike Masers, Rolexes never blew up.


Good points.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Can it just die...NOW!


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

Cannonball said:


> Rolex is Mercedes and Seiko is Honda.
> 
> Both great cars but in completely different class.


Whatevs. Seiko is Tata and Rolex is Pagani.

Scratch that. Both brands are dull and obvious and overpriced and overhyped. Like crossovers, continuing the car analogy.

What we need is something fresh and exciting, with *****in' designs and good value. The answer starts with A and ends in X.


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

^^there should be a rule to ban any member that makes car analogies.... 'cuz you crazy bastards don't know cars nor watches....


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

Memphis1 said:


> ^^there should be a rule to ban any member that makes car analogies.... 'cuz you crazy bastards don't know cars nor watches....


 Don't ban me, bro.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

little big feather said:


> Can it just die...NOW!


;-)


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

Memphis1 said:


> ^^there should be a rule to ban any member that makes car analogies.... 'cuz you crazy bastards don't know cars nor watches....


Ha! That'll go over great!

How about Seikos are flip flops and Rolex are shoes.

I'm a member of another forum where when you're starting a thread, as you move from the title to the actual post, it pulls a list of very similar threads.

This thread was answered by the OP in the OP. But hey, we obviously like to be amused.


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Memphis1 said:


> ^^there should be a rule to ban any member that makes car analogies.... 'cuz you crazy bastards don't know cars nor watches....


We could try feminine hygiene products or hemorrhoid cream comparisons if you like. Or if you want to stick to watches, we could do watch analogies like Rolex is like Omega is like IWC is like Seiko is like Patek is like ALS. I'm sure that'll go over better than car analogies . . . :-d


----------



## Magu (Jan 15, 2014)

I dont think its all about Seiko v rolex...its more the owners of Seiko and rolex and their opinions...far more interesting in my book...Seiko and rolex make awesome things to tell the time....the owners on the other hand come in such a wide variety of flavours from the sensible coherent non judgemental to the outright rabid....so much more entertaining !


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

sleepyhead123 said:


> We could try feminine hygiene products or hemorrhoid cream comparisons if you like. Or if you want to stick to watches, we could do watch analogies like Rolex is like Omega is like IWC is like Seiko is like Patek is like ALS. I'm sure that'll go over better than car analogies . . . :-d


Or you could learn about both products before making analogies


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Seiko is more like the taste of the letter M but Rolex is more like the sound of red.


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

CitizenM said:


> Seiko is more like the taste of the letter M but Rolex is more like the sound of red.


Gotta love drugs that makes your senses get mixed up


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

I heard that Seiko invented the question mark.


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

^^and the ampersand


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Yeah but M weighs more than red, so you have to take that into account.


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

It's minimal weight difference, you probably wouldn't notice


----------



## incontrol (Sep 11, 2010)

Interesting thread. I feel like I spent the entire morning reading this thread from beginning to end and the one post I really enjoyed was CitizenM schooling us on the GS brand. Thank you for the very thorough comparison of what was said in the thread vs what is reality. 

Oh and I also loved the Intermission post. I am now starving. Definitely time to get something to eat!


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

CitizenM said:


> Seiko is more like the taste of the letter M but Rolex is more like the sound of red.


I have that synesthesia thing so the name "Rolex" does in fact taste like either dirty pennies or brass house keys to me. The noun / adverb "a lot" tastes and smells like Cheez-its - don't ask me why.



Toothbras said:


> Did you get that thing DLC'd? Sweet........


That's actually GreyEx(tm). It's a proprietary Rolex alloy that significantly increases my ability to post a bad joke.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

...2X post.


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

ljb187 said:


> I have that synesthesia thing so Rolex does in fact taste like either dirty pennies or brass house keys to me. The noun / adverb "a lot" tastes and smells like Cheezi-ts - don't ask me why.


oh i know why.... some o'dat good s***

chocolate feels like a fluffy fleece throw.... time tastes like standing barefoot on a metal grill... you get the idea:-d:-x


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Memphis1 said:


> Or you could learn about both products before making analogies


So I'm to assume you know everything about cars and watches and I don't?


----------



## Memphis1 (Feb 19, 2011)

sleepyhead123 said:


> So I'm to assume you know everything about cars and watches and I don't?


yup and more...


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Memphis1 said:


> yup and more...


Well it's nice to know who's around here who has a good grasp of their ego . . .


----------



## hpark21 (Oct 8, 2007)

Has this thread run its course? For whole page, there wasn't much of comparisons nor argument (And I have 100 posts/pg set so this thread only goes to 4pages for me....)

Where is Pithy when you need him to thrown some more kindlings to get this fire going again.

Unfortunately, 2 GS that I had were both SD so no palet fork shots.

I had Rolex no date sub and GMT2c and Air king and DJ. They do make a solid watch. I am STILL amazed at the accuracy of my wife's Rolex as it did not needed to be adjusted for last 4 months (I don't think show knows it is auto.. She just puts it on and goes. I secretly wind it up whenever I see it left on the table especially during the weekend - about 4 months ago, it must have died over night, she called me and just told me that it isn't set to correct time, I set the watch up again to correct time, and did not need to adjust it)

That said, GS markers and finishing is just incredible. I do want to get a Hi-beat someday.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Rad Red Brick said:


> Whatevs. Seiko is Tata and Rolex is Pagani.
> 
> Scratch that. Both brands are dull and obvious and overpriced and overhyped. Like crossovers, continuing the car analogy.
> 
> What we need is something fresh and exciting, with *****in' designs and good value. The answer starts with A and ends in X.


----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

You don't wear a Seiko, Seiko wears you.....boom, you don't tell time with a Seiko the Seiko tells you the time....you don't own a Seiko the Seiko owns you. SEIKO FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SFFS!!!!!


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

wristclock said:


> You don't wear a Seiko, Seiko wears you.....boom, you don't tell time with a Seiko the Seiko tells you the time....you don't own a Seiko the Seiko owns you. SEIKO FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SFFS!!!!!


Sounds like a REALLY good argument for Rolex, or any other watch besides Seiko.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

bu11itt said:


> View attachment 1606384


The urchin is prettier...


----------



## DaveTOG (Apr 15, 2012)

over 300 posts on this thread. I guess people have strong opinions on this topic, but for the life of me who has time to read all these posts?


----------



## at2011 (Jan 23, 2011)

When I wasn't into watches I noticed a colleague of mine would always glance at my wrist. I've owned and wore a black Tag Heuer 1000 for the longest time. I never once cared about what he wore, much less glanced at his wrist to look at what he wore. I still own that Tag Heuer, and I still think it's better than a Sub


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

ilitig8 said:


> Sounds like a REALLY good argument for Rolex, or any other watch besides Seiko.


Are you sure you're ready to step up to a Seiko? 

-adi4


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

adi4 said:


> Are you sure you're ready to step up to a Seiko?
> 
> -adi4


I have spent over 20 years climbing the steps of the Horology Tower what possible rationale would I have for getting on the express elevator and pressing the second floor button?


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> I have spent over 20 years climbing the steps of the Horology Tower what possible rationale would I have for getting on the express elevator and pressing the second floor button?


I can only conclude that you're still lost somewhere in the underground car park


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> I have spent over 20 years climbing the steps of the Horology Tower what possible rationale would I have for getting on the express elevator and pressing the second floor button?


Second floor? You must be talking about the GS...all the Seiko's I've seen are in the bargain basement....;-)


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

ilitig8 said:


> I have spent over 20 years climbing the steps of the Horology Tower what possible rationale would I have for getting on the express elevator and pressing the second floor button?


:-d I see, omeglycine (inside joke, from another thread) . . . too funny . . .


----------



## Rob Roberts (Feb 16, 2014)

I thought this was a watch appreciation Forum….seems like jealousy being that you would have to be blind not to at least acknowledge the Submariner as a fine quality Swiss watch. What I see is " look at me look at me... my Seiko is better than your Rolex oh yeah, my dad can beat your dad up!"


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Rob Roberts said:


> I thought this was a watch appreciation Forum&#8230;.seems like jealousy being that you would have to be blind not to at least acknowledge the Submariner as a fine quality Swiss watch. What I see is " look at me look at me... my Seiko is better than your Rolex oh yeah, my dad can beat your dad up!"


Nah, it's Domo...It's OK, He's a nice guy....Just a little confused, that's all......:-!


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Memphis1 said:


> ^^there should be a rule to ban any member that makes car analogies.... 'cuz you crazy bastards don't know cars nor watches....


I'll be your huckleberry. :-d

UMW2B


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

Stellite said:


> I'll be your huckleberry. :-d
> 
> UMW2B


Sidetrack>>>>> Tombstone was on the country music channel this week, damn that's a good movie!


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Toothbras said:


> Sidetrack>>>>> Tombstone was on the country music channel this week, damn that's a good movie!


One of the best westerns ever made.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

drhr said:


> :-d I see, omeglycine (inside joke, from another thread) . . . too funny . . .


...and extremely well played, sir. Well played indeed!


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

Toothbras said:


> Sidetrack>>>>> Tombstone was on the country music channel this week, damn that's a good movie!


I don't remember it being a musical?


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

33 pages of monotony.


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

Cannonball said:


> 33 pages of monotony.


BAM!










-adi4


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

adi4 said:


> BAM!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Truly one of the great videos of the watch world. It's so good I almost wonder if it's brilliant satire.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

wristclock said:


> You don't wear a Seiko, Seiko wears you.....boom, you don't tell time with a Seiko the Seiko tells you the time....you don't own a Seiko the Seiko owns you. SEIKO FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SFFS!!!!!


Lol it's funny to read this and then your signature that follows


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

adi4 said:


> BAM!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I just watched that video for the first tine... Man, that was awesome! I don't know why any company bothers making watches anymore, the Invicta Skeletonized Russian Diver has clearly surpassed them all!


----------



## Tudoris (Mar 13, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Rolex is Mercedes and Seiko is Honda.
> 
> Both great cars but in completely different class.


Second that!!

But I like BMW, but don't own a Breitling, so.....

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met behulp van Tapatalk


----------



## XOR (Apr 19, 2011)

*Re: Beauty is only skin deep,*

I'm in Tokyo now and have hit most major watch stores. There are scores of Rolex models here of every kind you can imagine new and vintage. Also, many Seiko prospex and Grand Seiko. After handling both maker of watches side by side, the Grand Seikos are extraordinarily well finished.


----------



## XOR (Apr 19, 2011)

pithy said:


> Glad you enjoyed that. lol. Here's the rest of it: From a detail aspect -particularly with regard to the movement - it's not that Rolex is such an exceptional brand. The are several that I find much more appealing. It's just that the Grand Seiko is so mediocre/ho-hum, like they didn't even bother to finish their work before they shipped it.


Indeed! After all, what could a multi billion dollar watch making company that completely fabricates their entire movements in house, and sells parts to many swiss watchmakers, possibly know about watchmaking?


----------



## Tagdevil (Jul 20, 2013)

XOR said:


> Indeed! After all, what could a multi billion dollar watch making company that completely fabricates their entire movements in house, and sells parts to many swiss watchmaker, possibly know about watchmaking?


Do me a favor....find the guy who designed and engineered the MM300 and give him a big fat hug and a kiss for me!! I love his watch! 










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## XOR (Apr 19, 2011)

Tagdevil said:


> Do me a favor....find the guy who designed and engineered the MM300 and give him a big fat hug and a kiss for me!! I love his watch!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I will be touring the Grand Seiko watch studios in two days. I will try to find them for you as I too will have on my marinemaster.

But from what I've read from all these internet keyboard master watchmakers, the people at this watch studio are all a bunch of hacks. Because when I think Japan, I think crappy products and a bunch of people who have no idea how to make highly efficient and advanced miniaturized machinery. Nope, not the Japanese at all to be able to do anything well on a small precision scale.


----------



## Tagdevil (Jul 20, 2013)

XOR said:


> I will be touring the Grand Seiko watch studios in two days. I will try to find them for you as I too will have on my marinemaster.
> 
> But from what I've read from all these internet keyboard master watchmakers, the people at this watch studio are all a bunch of hacks. Because when I think Japan, I think crappy products and a bunch of people who have no idea how to make highly efficient and advanced miniaturized machinery. Nope, not the Japanese at all to be able to do anything well on a small precision scale.


Have fun and for all us poor souls who are so misguided, please be sure to take and share plenty of pictures of all that crap you find. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## XOR (Apr 19, 2011)

Tagdevil said:


> Have fun and for all us poor souls who are so misguided, please be sure to take and share plenty of pictures of all that crap you find.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I will. I'll post the photos on the seiko forum though so we don't subject everyone to the horrible conditions that will undoubtedly be present at their master watchmaker facility.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

alx007 said:


> Oh, boy! This thread has a lot of potential for train wreck.
> 
> Put it this way: if you are looking for a Rolex diver, you wouldn't consider a Seiko Diver. At the same token, if you are looking for a Seiko diver, you probably would never be willing to spend the premium of a Rolex.
> 
> In short: both nice watches, when you consider the expectations for what you're paying.


Not true even remotely. Its funny 3 people liked this post.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

gagnello said:


> Not true even remotely. Its funny 3 people liked this post.
> 
> Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


You are correct. I own Seiko divers and Rolex Divers. If you enjoy watches, there is no reason why you can't like both, like I do and truly, even after I owned Rolex, I was still buying cheap Seikos. I enjoy watches at all price ranges.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

gagnello said:


> Not true even remotely. Its funny 3 people liked this post.
> 
> Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


How so? Seems pretty logical to me. If you are on the hunt for a 5K Submariner, I doubt a $200 skx diver will sway you. The reverse also works; if you are in the market for a seiko diver, a 5k Sub is probably not an option for that particular purchase. They just aren't competing on the same market field.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Arthur M said:


> How so? Seems pretty logical to me. If you are on the hunt for a 5K Submariner, I doubt a $200 skx diver will sway you. The reverse also works; if you are in the market for a seiko diver, a 5k Sub is probably not an option for that particular purchase. They just aren't competing on the same market field.


Well, in actuality I disprove this theorem. And I am sure I am not the only one.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

Stellite said:


> Well, in actuality I disprove this theorem. And I am sure I am not the only one.


I think it is less about a collection in general and more about a specific purchase. It's not to say a person can't own both, just if you wake up one morning saying "Hm, I feel like buying a Rolex Submariner", barring huge budget constraints, odds are you aren't going to end up with a SKX on your wrist when you get back from the mall. Unless I'm misunderstanding what he's saying.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

If Seiko really thought the SKX was a Submariner fighter, they wouldn't have made a spring drive tuna or SBGA029.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

Arthur M said:


> How so? Seems pretty logical to me. If you are on the hunt for a 5K Submariner, I doubt a $200 skx diver will sway you. The reverse also works; if you are in the market for a seiko diver, a 5k Sub is probably not an option for that particular purchase. They just aren't competing on the same market field.


The comment never said skx series seiko divers. If someone was looking at a submariner there are many seiko divers that may in the running for their money. GS diver is only one of them. MM300 is another, for those who may not want to spend as much money.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

gagnello said:


> The comment never said skx series seiko divers. If someone was looking at a submariner there are many seiko divers that may in the running for their money. GS diver is only one of them. MM300 is another, for those who may not want to spend as much money.
> 
> Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


True enough; Overlook on my part. Seiko has some legitimately great offerings in the $2000ish range.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Arthur M said:


> I think it is less about a collection in general and more about a specific purchase. It's not to say a person can't own both, just if you wake up one morning saying "Hm, I feel like buying a Rolex Submariner", barring huge budget constraints, odds are you aren't going to end up with a SKX on your wrist when you get back from the mall. Unless I'm misunderstanding what he's saying.


Ok, so those that cannot afford a Sub, but can afford an SKX is the only scenario that would be correct. If you can afford a Sub, you can easily afford a few SKX's.


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

Ace McLoud said:


> I don't remember it being a musical?


I don't like country music, but was in a hotel and the elliptical only had like 5 stations, and that was one of them. It's better than listening to country music!


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

Stellite said:


> Ok, so those that cannot afford a Sub, but can afford an SKX is the only scenario that would be correct. If you can afford a Sub, you can easily afford a few SKX's.


Had to go back and look for the original remark. Forgot what it was about:

_"if you are *looking* for a Rolex diver, you wouldn't consider a Seiko Diver. At the same token, if you are *looking *for a Seiko diver, you probably would never be willing to spend the premium of a Rolex."

_"Looking" is the key word there. If you are actively looking on watchrecon for a (let's say) 14060 at around 4.5K, you may be swayed to a PO 8500 around the same price, or maybe a Tudor BB to save a little cash, but a SKX007 (probably) isn't even in your mind as an option. The reason is because you are in the market for an upper mid-tier luxury diver and seiko's skx series just doesn't exist in that market. It's the reason price brackets exist. Looking for a diver? What's your budget? 200: SKX. 1000: Longines hydroconquest. 2000: Longines legend diver. 3000: Tudor Black Bay. 4000: Rolex 14060. etc etc. All subjective, yes, but an SKX isn't on the list of considerations for most people with a budget of $5000 for one watch. Would you recommend a SKX007 to someone who is actively looking to buy a sub? Or would you recommend a sub to someone actively looking at a monster?

Edit: although I disagree with the "never be willing part":

_"if you are looking for a Rolex diver, you wouldn't consider a Seiko Diver. At the same token, if you are looking for a Seiko diver, *you probably would never be willing* to spend the premium of a Rolex."

_ A seiko SKX175 was my first real watch.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

But, assuming the omniscience of the searcher, wouldn't they be considering the spring drive tuna SBDB009 and SBGA029, around $4100 and $6500 respectively (in addition to the other great divers)? 

I agree with you on the SKX specifically though.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Arthur M said:


> Had to go back and look for the original remark. Forgot what it was about:
> 
> _"if you are *looking* for a Rolex diver, you wouldn't consider a Seiko Diver. At the same token, if you are *looking *for a Seiko diver, you probably would never be willing to spend the premium of a Rolex."
> 
> _"Looking" is the key word there. If you are actively looking on watchrecon for a (let's say) 14060 at around 4.5K, you may be swayed to a PO 8500 around the same price, or maybe a Tudor BB to save a little cash, but a SKX007 (probably) isn't even in your mind as an option. The reason is because you are in the market for an upper mid-tier luxury diver and seiko's skx series just doesn't exist in that market. It's the reason price brackets exist. Looking for a diver? What's your budget? 200: SKX. 1000: Longines hydroconquest. 2000: Longines legend diver. 3000: Tudor Black Bay. 4000: Rolex 14060. etc etc. All subjective, yes, but an SKX isn't on the list of considerations for most people with a budget of $5000 for one watch. Would you recommend a SKX007 to someone who is actively looking to buy a sub? Or would you recommend a sub to someone actively looking at a monster?


If someone was ignorant enough(lack of knowledge, not in a bad way) to not know the difference I would recommend the Seiko until they actually learn about watches. 
I guess it is terminology. No, I would not compare both, but that is what OP is doing. I agree, if you are considering a Sub, you will compare it to something within a grand of it. But the truth is that if you can get the sub, you can just go and get the SKX as well. That is why this thread just makes no sense. Sometimes I wonder if people start these threads because they know the **** storm they cause or if they truly are that ignorant or so lazy that they can't spend sometime reading about the watches they are interested in.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

CitizenM said:


> But, assuming the omniscience of the searcher, wouldn't they be considering the spring drive tuna SBDB009 and SBGA029, around $4100 and $6500 respectively (in addition to the other great divers)?
> 
> I agree with you on the SKX specifically though.


Agreed. Seiko has a lot of good stuff at an impressive amount of price points.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

Stellite said:


> Sometimes I wonder if people start these threads because they know the **** storm they cause or if they truly are that ignorant or so lazy that they can't spend sometime reading about the watches they are interested in.


Not everybody understands what you may already understand about watches, hence why people make these "pointless threads". I asked because I've never held a Rolex before but wanted to know more information about them compared to my current watch. Should I have tried on the watch before making this thread? Probably. But I already know that Rolex is a better purchase. As a beginner WIS , was unsure as to why it was better. Was it the name itself? The history? Better internal parts? or two or more of these reasons. They are so many overpriced watches that do not perform as efficient as one would think so I was curious as to how similar they were in quality to seiko.

Like many of you, I've considered a submariner but because I have a 6in wrist, I don't know if I want a 40mm watch as my daily watch and was curious if my 38mm seiko skx013 could last just as long and serviced with the same availability in parts over the next several decades. Being as though I like to wear one watch, if Seiko does not compare with Rolex in availability of parts, I might have to eat my wishes and wear a 40mm watch, since I like the submariner style. There aren't a lot of decent female divers out there so size along with quality is important to me since I'm slender.

I also asked why is Swiss said to be so much better than Japanese in higher end watches to a lot of enthusiasts but those answers have been masked with some people telling me how pointless my thread is. Lol, I hope some of you only hang around experienced WIS and never have to speak with beginners or your wives who may be curious about your watches.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

i've recommended to my girlfriend a 34mm Tudor mini sub or a 36mm Tudor mid size sub. If 40mm is intimidating, I'd make the same recommendation here, if you love the look of the sub. If you can, try a full size sub; they wear quite small, actually. As for the rest, when you get caught up in a passion, you sometimes forget that we all start ignorant and work our way up.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I also asked why is Swiss said to be so much better than Japanese in higher end watches to a lot of enthusiasts but those answers have been masked with some people telling me how pointless my thread is. Lol, I hope some of you only hang around experienced WIS and never have to speak with beginners or your wives who may be curious about your watches.


Swiss watches are often labeled as better since it was long the case and Japanese watches didn't stray from their continent. Japan makes some of the best watches in the world but the Swiss have many Haute Horology houses and produce a ton of HH designs.

Look at it another way the VAST majority of the Seiko catalog does not compare very favorably with a Rolex or Omega except in the value proposition.

This forum actually has a high tolerance for "newbies" BUT the tolerance wanes when it is a extremely broad question that has the makings of a firestorm. To be honest the direct comparison of Seiko and Rolex divers was pretty well covered, better than I expected. The Swiss vs Japanese is worth 50 or so pages and probably won't be approached since it is so broad and impossible to deal with on a forum level, that's a locked thread before it begins. It is very much like a Ford vs Chevrolet discussion most try not to get sucked in.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

Thanks Arthur M and ilitig8. I probably will try on a sub before I totally disregard it. While I like small 34mm is too small for my liking. 37-38 is probably my sweet spot. 


And yea my question was pretty much answered and yea my question was poorly asked lol but I do appreciate a lot of the responses I got. I guess it's because a lot is personal preference and each watch being in to categories of craftsmanship.


Thanks for answer my question about Swiss and Japanese. Understandable.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

MissSummerStorm said:


> Not everybody understands what you may already understand about watches, hence why people make these "pointless threads". I asked because I've never held a Rolex before but wanted to know more information about them compared to my current watch. Should I have tried on the watch before making this thread? Probably. But I already know that Rolex is a better purchase. As a beginner WIS , was unsure as to why it was better. Was it the name itself? The history? Better internal parts? or two or more of these reasons. They are so many overpriced watches that do not perform as efficient as one would think so I was curious as to how similar they were in quality to seiko.
> 
> Like many of you, I've considered a submariner but because I have a 6in wrist, I don't know if I want a 40mm watch as my daily watch and was curious if my 38mm seiko skx013 could last just as long and serviced with the same availability in parts over the next several decades. Being as though I like to wear one watch, if Seiko does not compare with Rolex in availability of parts, I might have to eat my wishes and wear a 40mm watch, since I like the submariner style. There aren't a lot of decent female divers out there so size along with quality is important to me since I'm slender.
> 
> I also asked why is Swiss said to be so much better than Japanese in higher end watches to a lot of enthusiasts but those answers have been masked with some people telling me how pointless my thread is. Lol, I hope some of you only hang around experienced WIS and never have to speak with beginners or your wives who may be curious about your watches.


Let me just say that no amount of reading on the subject is an adequate substitute for some hands on time with the watch you're asking about. If you're curious about the differences in quality between a Seiko diver and a Rolex Submariner, find one of the many Rolex dealers littered throughout the country, and head over to try the watch on.

If you want something with a better value proposition, then consider a watch from Tudor, with almost the same level of precision fit in their case manufacture as Rolex, but at a small fraction of the price.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

MissSummerStorm said:


> Thanks for answer my question about Swiss and Japanese. Understandable.


In the end people become fans of brands and to an extent countries of origin for many products and watches are certainly one of them. Also watches like so many other things are very visual and watch manufacturers from the same country often have similar aesthetics. People also tend to recommend and defend what they own. Far more people here and in general own mid and high level Swiss watches than those levels of German and Japanese watches. While I don't know how universal it is but the phrase "runs like a Swiss watch" is ingrained in the US consciousness so brands from other countries are at an automatic disadvantage.

The best education one can get is take a day and hold divers from as many of the price points of Seiko as one can then hold a Submariner, it is worth more than a lifetime of reading the internet. The issue is finding many of the price point and quality levels of Seiko divers in the US.


----------



## CCCP (Jul 1, 2006)

MissSummerStorm said:


> If both are so durable and reliable and low end Japanese $100-250USD movements are capable of performing just as efficiently as high end Swiss


Low-end movements aren't reliable and they performance is crappy... with few remarkable exceptions (i.e. Swatch automatics).


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

MissSummerStorm said:


> Not everybody understands what you may already understand about watches, hence why people make these "pointless threads". I asked because I've never held a Rolex before but wanted to know more information about them compared to my current watch. Should I have tried on the watch before making this thread? Probably.* But I already know that Rolex is a better purchase.* As a beginner WIS , was unsure as to why it was better. Was it the name itself? The history? Better internal parts? or two or more of these reasons. They are so many overpriced watches that do not perform as efficient as one would think so I was curious as to how similar they were in quality to seiko.
> 
> *Like many of you, I've considered a submariner but because I have a 6in wrist, I don't know if I want a 40mm watch as my daily watch and was curious if my 38mm seiko skx013 could last just as long and serviced with the same availability in parts over the next several decades. Being as though I like to wear one watch, if Seiko does not compare with Rolex in availability of parts, I might have to eat my wishes and wear a 40mm watch, since I like the submariner style. There aren't a lot of decent female divers out there so size along with quality is important to me since I'm slender. *
> 
> I also asked why is Swiss said to be so much better than Japanese in higher end watches to a lot of enthusiasts but those answers have been masked with some people telling me how pointless my thread is. Lol, I hope some of you only hang around experienced WIS and never have to speak with beginners or your wives who may be curious about your watches.


I have no issue with people asking questions, and I help whenever I can. However, the Submariner is not one of those watches that there isn't information about. It is one of the most iconic watches ever made. It has an incredible history and all you need do is google it to find it. You don't have to take anyone's word for it. Some research is necessary, but that is also the fun part about learning. What I bolded in your response is what your original question should have been. Your original question did not imply this. As for 6 inch wrist, well, it may be too large, not sure. The SKX wears large for it's size by the way, so if an SKX fits you so will a Sub. Unfortunately for you 40mm is on the small side for a diver these days.

The other issue here is like others have indicated, if you are considering a Sub, why would you consider a $200 watch as a replacement. That just does not makes sense, and I get what the others were saying.

For got to answer in red part: I have hung around plenty of beginners, and none of them asked a question in the way you did. Your post above should have been your question. I still say your original post is pointless. Your question above is better worded. I hope you see the difference. 

your original question to me reeked of trying to prove to yourself that your $200 purchase is equal to the 6k purchase of a Sub and thus no need to get a Sub or anything in the Subs range for that matter like the GS diver or SMP's etc. You will never get confirmation of that. Probably not what you meant, but how I took it and from the responses, how some others may have taken it as well.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

CCCP said:


> Low-end movements aren't reliable and they performance is crappy... with few remarkable exceptions (i.e. Swatch automatics).


Dang, we were almost through with this thread and then you have to drop this flare into it. Guess you just wanted the thread to heat up again.

I'll just say that these movements are reliable and the performance is more than adequate. There, that should keep it going for a bit.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Stellite said:


> your original question to me reeked of trying to prove to yourself that your $200 purchase is equal to the 6k purchase of a Sub and thus no need to get a Sub or anything in the Subs range for that matter like the GS diver or SMP's etc. You will never get confirmation of that. Probably not what you meant, but how I took it and from the responses, how some others may have taken it as well.


That was certainly how the original post came across to me as well.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

rfortson said:


> Dang, we were almost through with this thread and then you have to drop this flare into it. Guess you just wanted the thread to heat up again.
> 
> I'll just say that these movements are reliable and the performance is more than adequate. There, that should keep it going for a bit.


I predicted this, though said it would happen a couple of days ago. The thread is so dead now it didn't even cause a blip.

Back to Miss SS it hit me the real way to get intel from this type of query is to be specific on both sides ie: Sumo vs Sub or GS SD diver vs Sub or even Monster vs Sub, the problem is there the Sumo and Monster comparisons also smell of troll, you might get away with some Tuna on the hook but in the end GS watches vs Rolex is really the only real and or fair comparison between the brands.

I think in the end you were asking a much more general question: What do I get for more money spent and dollar for dollar how does Seiko compare to Rolex or Japanese compare to Swiss.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

mleok said:


> That was certainly how the original post came across to me as well.


Sorry guys, that's not what I meant lol. This post wasn't to advocate for Seiko. It's probably my favorite affordable brand but I wouldn't choose it over a sub. And Grand Seikos just don't it aesthetically enough for me to justify their price.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

ilitig8 said:


> I think in the end you were asking a much more general question: What do I get for more money spent and dollar for dollar how does Seiko compare to Rolex or Japanese compare to Swiss.


 yea pretty much


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

MissSummerStorm said:


> Sorry guys, that's not what I meant lol. This post wasn't to advocate for Seiko. It's probably my favorite affordable brand but I wouldn't choose it over a sub. And Grand Seikos just don't it aesthetically enough for me to justify their price.


In any case, I reiterate my suggestion that you find a Rolex AD, and give them a visit. Having hands on experience with nicer watches will provide the necessary context to place the discussions on this thread in perspective.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

So what you're asking is should you pay $200 for a Seiko or $8000 for a Rolex....

Sigh. 

Just get the Seiko.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

mleok said:


> In any case, I reiterate my suggestion that you find a Rolex AD, and give them a visit. Having hands on experience with nicer watches will provide the necessary context to place the discussions on this thread in perspective.


I would go farther and say try to get some hands on with some high end watches at the same time. Hands on with some Patek, Vacheron, AP etc watches gives a great frame of reference. Since she is also interested in the Japanese vs Swiss (vs German but she didn't mention it) I would suggest also finding a GS dealer (even though she isn't interested in their aesthetic) I feel the same way about them but holding them gives a whole new respect for Japanese value.

In the end in the majority of situations with watches you get what you pay for with Japanese watches you tend to get a little more "in the metal" and a little less "in the prestige" but it is more complicated than that as well.

Good luck MSS.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Compromise:









Maybe $600 used. Original. Big but wears smaller. Substantial but comfortable. It's an ingenious little contraption.

*Also:* I could say that after about $200 they all work pretty well but then Orient's $125 Mako would sorta make a liar out of me. 
*Next*: I'd rather have an 8k Sub than a $200 SKXX any day, it's just that there's no way I'd pay 8K for a dive watch.
*But: *That wouldn't stop me from paying almost as much for a watch with less functionality.
*So:* To sum things up I recommended my Oris Divers Date (that's my pic) which I sold in favor of a DOXA Sharkhunter that cost three times as much and was already 10 years old when I got it.
*OP: *Somewhere between math, psychology and the limbic system exists the justifications of all watch enthusiasts. The sooner you accept that arrangement the happier you'll be with your collection - and everybody else's.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> I would go farther and say try to get some hands on with some high end watches at the same time. Hands on with some Patek, Vacheron, AP etc watches gives a great frame of reference. Since she is also interested in the Japanese vs Swiss (vs German but she didn't mention it) I would suggest also finding a GS dealer (even though she isn't interested in their aesthetic) I feel the same way about them but holding them gives a whole new respect for Japanese value.
> 
> In the end in the majority of situations with watches you get what you pay for with Japanese watches you tend to get a little more "in the metal" and a little less "in the prestige" but it is more complicated than that as well.
> 
> Good luck MSS.


Good point, it's always eye opening to experience watches at different price points (even if you'll never buy a watch at that price point), to better appreciate the refinements that are available at each higher price point. I focused on Rolex ADs, since it's easy to find one, whereas ADs carrying higher-end brands are more difficult to find. If she's near Philadelphia, then Govberg might be a good one stop choice.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

mleok said:


> If she's near Philadelphia, then Govberg might be a good one stop choice.


Was thinking the same thing, if she is anywhere in the Eastern side a trip into NYC opens up tons of fun.


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

ilitig8 said:


> Was thinking the same thing, if she is anywhere in the Eastern side a trip into NYC opens up tons of fun.


I actually visited a Govberg outside of Philadelphia to specifically try a on a Sub but I didn't see Rolex in there. I'll probably make some time this week to try one one somewhere around there. And the Oris is nice, but I'd want a black dial and all black bezel. Will definitely research some more though.


----------



## Kluber (Aug 9, 2014)

Forgive me but I didn't read all the posts besides the OP so maybe this was said already. If your not comparing GS to rolex but just seiko divers to modern rolex divers, that is insane. Completely different watch and quality and seiko (outside of GS) is not even in the same league as a modern rolex.


----------



## spyderco10 (Mar 21, 2011)




----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

MissSummerStorm said:


> Sorry guys, that's not what I meant lol. This post wasn't to advocate for Seiko. It's probably my favorite affordable brand but I wouldn't choose it over a sub. And Grand Seikos just don't it aesthetically enough for me to justify their price.


No prob. I didn't think you did. I think the issue most have with this thread is the wide discrepancy between the two watches. If you are truly considering something along the price of Rolex, then just get Sub and the SKX or even better, get an SRP orange Monster that you can wind. The tax on the Sub alone is more than the Seiko. IF getting the Sub is not an option there are countless watches in between that will suit your needs. Chris Ward makes a 38mm diver for under $1000. Great Swiss watch with excellent construction.


----------



## at2011 (Jan 23, 2011)

Wide discrepancy or not, I'm one of the very few who thinks Rolex is worth way less than its asking price. That's all.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

at2011 said:


> Wide discrepancy or not, I'm one of the very few who thinks Rolex is worth way less than its asking price. That's all.


If your watch collection is any indication, you seem to favor Japanese mechanicals over Swiss mechanicals, is there a reason why? Do you consider all Swiss mechanical watches to be overpriced? If so, wouldn't the same reasoning apply to Swiss quartz watches as well? How do you feel about mechanical Grand Seikos, are they priced right, undervalued, or overpriced? I am simply trying to contextualize your comment.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

Longines' Hydroconquest comes in 29, 39, and 41 mm sizes.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

at2011 said:


> Wide discrepancy or not, I'm one of the very few who thinks Rolex is worth way less than its asking price. That's all.


I would agree with mleok in that the statement needs more context to understand.

From a value perspective Rolex is one of two brands (Patek being the other) which offer exceptional resell. The cost to own a Rolex is often equal to or less than many watches with a (much) lower buy in price.

In the end each person will have a different cost/benefit analysis and have a different view of where diminishing returns makes spending more money silly.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

at2011 said:


> Wide discrepancy or not, I'm one of the very few who thinks Rolex is worth way less than its asking price. That's all.


Naw, you wouldn't be alone. Here's my sappy thought though:

In the end I think quality is a word best used to define the owner's personal experience. If a someone adds up all the factors that went into their decision and still gets a kick out of strapping on the watch they chose then it's a quality watch. Earlier I said I'd rather have a 116610 over an SKX and while that's true on many levels, if my choice was between any Rolex...ehem...tool watch made since the two-line / no-date Sub was killed and any Seiko diver for around $500 or less...well then I'd much rather wear this:

(WUS member sergserg's pic)









Hell I'd do it for the drilled lugs alone. What good is an exceptionally well-made made diver from a brand that I like (if < 36mm or older than say seven years) with a history second to none and unmatched residual value if I really, really don't want to wear it? That sorta how I tend to value my watches...


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

ljb187 said:


> Hell I'd do it for the drilled lugs alone.


Plus, you you can't make the Subs second hand spin around really fast with the touch of a button!


----------



## sierra11b (Jan 7, 2011)

Proudly own many of both.

The SKX is a lot of watch for the money and I enjoy it on jubilee, but it'll never be a Rolex. 

The argument can be made more for Prospex but still seiko really needs to put some real R&D in their bracelets (GS too) if they want to keep up. Prospex are great and I will be getting an sbbn015 next, but I'm not expecting it to take any of my Rolex place. They're beautiful watches but even the MM300 has issues. The new SBDB009 looks like a solid contender but it would be over the top cool if it came on bracelet sans the PVD treatment. If you're into that type of finish and rubber strap then think it's perfect. I still haven't discounted this model myself.

Crowns on prospex have always lacked in the fitment area, too. Rolex dual and trip lock crowns have always been so positive in thread lock-up and smoothness regardless of where you start the wind. I have never had this with GS even let alone prospex. In fact, some have left me apprehensive in attempting to screw down.

Look, as someone already stated, if you're asking this question just get the seiko and be happy. The perceived value of a Rolex may not be there for you in that a watch like the SKX does everything a dive watch is supposed to do. A lot of Rolex owners appreciate seiko and own a few like myself, but the fact is they really aren't quite there in the end game... The exception being GS but that's not what the OP is asking. The question is if that additional amount of finish, fitment and overall quality is worth the additional price.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

ljb187 said:


> Naw, you wouldn't be alone. Here's my sappy thought though:
> 
> In the end I think quality is a word best used to define the owner's personal experience. If a someone adds up all the factors that went into their decision and still gets a kick out of strapping on the watch they chose then it's a quality watch. Earlier I said I'd rather have a 116610 over an SKX and while that's true on many levels, if my choice was between any Rolex...ehem...tool watch made since the two-line / no-date Sub was killed and any Seiko diver for around $500 or less...well then I'd much rather wear this:
> 
> ...


:-! Quite the purist you are, love it . . .


----------



## billiybop (Feb 22, 2011)

The old saying, you can't compare apples to oranges? 
Well, in this case, you can't compare a zircon (Seiko) to a diamond.


----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

billiybop said:


> The old saying, you can't compare apples to oranges?
> Well, in this case, you can't compare a zircon (Seiko) to a diamond.


At the risk of being redundant, it depends on the model of Seiko. Rolex has an output of over 1 million per year, so on that scale the Grand Seiko is hardly out of the league. People want to pretend like some old Swiss gentleman makes Rolex by hand one at a time.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

oak1971 said:


> People want to pretend like some old Swiss gentleman makes Rolex by hand one at a time.


Most of those people don't post here or are pretty new. Most here understand Rolex is far from a hand made haute horology house, they are a mass production manufacturer who use the best machines in the industry to make a very high quality mid-level watch.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

oak1971 said:


> At the risk of being redundant, it depends on the model of Seiko. Rolex has an output of over 1 million per year, so on that scale the Grand Seiko is hardly out of the league. People want to pretend like some old Swiss gentleman makes Rolex by hand one at a time.


If you read, OP wasn't asking about Grand Seiko. He was asking about Seiko. He already stated he did not care for GS designs. This was covered in the 5 million odd pages, lol. I guess that is the problem when threads get to long, no one wants to read any more.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Stellite said:


> If you read, OP wasn't asking about Grand Seiko. He was asking about Seiko. He already stated he did not care for GS designs. This was covered in the 5 million odd pages, lol. I guess that is the problem when threads get to long, no one wants to read any more.


For that matter, she wasn't even asking about the higher end non-Grand Seikos like the Anata, but literally the entry-level SKX models.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

oak1971 said:


> People want to pretend like some old Swiss gentleman makes Rolex by hand one at a time.


Please...A young Nordic Goddess makes Rolex by hand, caressing and guiding the hard steel parts into just the right spot.....
And then the watch sings out! P-E-R-F-E-C-T-I-O-N.....has been reached....;-)
If you owned one, you would know this....:-!


----------



## ShortOnTime3 (Dec 23, 2013)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I actually visited a Govberg outside of Philadelphia to specifically try a on a Sub but I didn't see Rolex in there. I'll probably make some time this week to try one one somewhere around there. And the Oris is nice, but I'd want a black dial and all black bezel. Will definitely research some more though.


You need to visit the govberg location in the city to see rolex, not the mainline location.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

drhr said:


> :-! Quite the purist you are, love it . . .


I am glad you get him:-d

Kinetics have a bad rep and they deserve it. I would not dare trade my SKX or SRP for any kinetic on the planet.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Stellite said:


> Kinetics have a bad rep and they deserve it. I would not dare trade my SKX or SRP for any kinetic on the planet.


Had a bad rep. Current calibres are just as reliable as any other rechargeable cell.


----------



## novedl (May 20, 2009)

What the what? This thread has grown like a MRSA infection!


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

GlennO said:


> Had a bad rep. Current calibres are just as reliable as any other rechargeable cell.


what in this last year? Google seiko kinetic. How can you claim reliability in a year or two? The four that I had all failed within 2 years. And even more recently there is still issues. If you want reliability stay with quarts, quarts solar or automatic.

Just a minute search and I remember this thread

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/kinetics-downside-1064442.html

But you are right, no complaints a of 2014, lol


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Stellite said:


> what in this last year? Google seiko kinetic. How can you claim reliability in a year or two? The four that I had all failed within 2 years. And even more recently there is still issues. If you want reliability stay with quarts, quarts solar or automatic.
> 
> Just a minute search and I remember this thread
> 
> ...


In almost all cases they stopped because of a failed capacitor. All current models have lithium ion cells.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

GlennO said:


> In almost all cases they stopped because of a failed capacitor. All current models have lithium ion cells.


Yes, but they still have a bad rep. It will take time before they can overcome the bad press, regardless of their current reliability. Whenever someone asks for recharging quartz, I would direct them in the eco-drive direction, simply because most stories I've heard about Seiko kinetic have been negative. Once more positive anecdotes come out, their reputation will improve.


----------



## czarcasm (Mar 2, 2013)

I'm pretty sure the troll is satiated, no need to keep bickering.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

czarcasm said:


> I'm pretty sure the troll is satiated, no need to keep bickering.


..who..?


----------



## npulaski (May 3, 2012)

wristclock said:


> You don't wear a Seiko, Seiko wears you.....boom, you don't tell time with a Seiko the Seiko tells you the time....you don't own a Seiko the Seiko owns you. SEIKO FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SFFS!!!!!


You never actually own a Seiko.
You merely look after it until our inevitable robot overlords seize it and integrate it into the collective.


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Dang this thread metastasized over the weekend.


----------



## czarcasm (Mar 2, 2013)

mikeylacroix said:


> ..who..?


OP. Surely they knew how this thread would develop when they created it.


----------



## fjblair (Apr 24, 2009)

sutherland said:


> Sorry...but no. Having owned two Submariners and three Grand Seikos (SBGH001, SBGA029, SBGE001), the attention to detail and the fit and finish of the Grand Seikos are on another level. Not taking anything away from the Rolex, I love my Submariner and always will...but it takes more than fancy chamfers to beat the GS in the finish department.


I don't own either but have toyed with both and I agree that the GS is the better fit and finish. It looks more refined. Just my opinion.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

sutherland said:


> Sorry...but no. Having owned two Submariners and three Grand Seikos (SBGH001, SBGA029, SBGE001), the attention to detail and the fit and finish of the Grand Seikos are on another level. Not taking anything away from the Rolex, I love my Submariner and always will...but it takes more than fancy chamfers to beat the GS in the finish department.


Are you basing this on your 16610 or do you have experience with the newer 116610/114060 Submariners? I ask because while not everyone is a fan of the newer beefier cases, the quality of the Submariners improved significantly with the ceramic versions.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

fjblair said:


> I don't own either but have toyed with both and I agree that the GS is the better fit and finish. It looks more refined. Just my opinion.


I hate to sound like a broken record but the current Rolex watches have better fit than the GSs and arguably any other watch. Even my high end pieces don't have the level of fit Rolex does currently. These are actually demonstrable objective facts.

I will say many people tend to use "fit and finish" as if it is one attribute but it is two distinct things. Case in point GS has better finish than Rolex BUT that one is much more subjective but I rarely if ever see anyone argue that.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

ilitig8 said:


> I hate to sound like a broken record but the current Rolex watches have better fit than the GSs and arguably any other watch. Even my high end pieces don't have the level of fit Rolex does currently. These are actually demonstrable objective facts.
> 
> I will say many people tend to use "fit and finish" as if it is one attribute but it is two distinct things. Case in point GS has better finish than Rolex BUT that one is much more subjective but I rarely if ever see anyone argue that.


I agree, it's not always clear to me that everyone using the term "fit and finish" understands that fit refers to the precision with which the individual components fit together, and is a distinct concept from finish (which is a more well understood if somewhat subjective notion).


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

How many arguments have gone on for too long before the sides realize they have their own definitions for what they are arguing about?


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

ilitig8 said:


> I hate to sound like a broken record but the current Rolex watches have better fit than the GSs and arguably any other watch. Even my high end pieces don't have the level of fit Rolex does currently. These are actually demonstrable objective facts.
> 
> I will say many people tend to use "fit and finish" as if it is one attribute but it is two distinct things. Case in point GS has better finish than Rolex BUT that one is much more subjective but I rarely if ever see anyone argue that.


I agree. I still marvel over the way that my air king is put together. It is about as perfect as possible.


----------



## fjblair (Apr 24, 2009)

ilitig8 said:


> I hate to sound like a broken record but the current Rolex watches have better fit than the GSs and arguably any other watch. Even my high end pieces don't have the level of fit Rolex does currently. These are actually demonstrable objective facts.
> 
> I will say many people tend to use "fit and finish" as if it is one attribute but it is two distinct things. Case in point GS has better finish than Rolex BUT that one is much more subjective but I rarely if ever see anyone argue that.


Fair enough, I don't have the experience with the watches to really make an argument. I just stated my opinion based on my limited time with them. As to the OP, of course the Submariner is a higher quality watch than the 7sxx Seiko divers. Just as silly as wondering if Grand Seiko is of higher quality than the SKX.

The thread topic is well worn troll bait and I should have known better


----------



## fjblair (Apr 24, 2009)

pithy said:


> What you can afford to buy (or not buy ) is your business. lol, If I could've laid my hands on one today - it would have been documented.
> 
> That is abosolute rubbish. Seiko cheapened the manufacture on several calibers by utilizing sintered powder metal casting and they have never bothered to master the technique. Period. Remember these seven series are succeptable to running backwards. Junk. You may wish to educate yourself before being subjected to further embarassment.


Thus saith the king of the trolls....


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

sutherland said:


> Sorry...but no. Having owned two Submariners and three Grand Seikos (SBGH001, SBGA029, SBGE001), the attention to detail and the fit and finish of the Grand Seikos are on another level. Not taking anything away from the Rolex, I love my Submariner and always will...but it takes more than fancy chamfers to beat the GS in the finish department.


I've owned both and pretty much prefer the fit of the newer 6 digit Rolex over Grand Seiko.

Two GS I've owned had noticable gaps (SBGR053/SBGR081) between the endlink and the watch lugs. No such issue with the new Rolex made with the temperature controlled CNC process.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

mew88 said:


> I've owned both and pretty much prefer the fit of the newer 6 digit Rolex over Grand Seiko.
> 
> Two GS I've owned had noticable gaps (SBGR053/SBGR081) between the endlink and the watch lugs. No such issue with the new Rolex made with the temperature controlled CNC process.


The end link fitment is what I always proffer since it is the easiest to see and feel. The one thing that would satiate everyone's mind is if they tried to remove the bracelet on a current Rolex. They pretty much require a caliper (compass) type tool to compress both sides of the spring bar at once because there is not enough play to move the spring bar out of the hole on one side at a time. The only watch more difficult that I have personal experience with is the PP 5167 but that is a whole other story.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

Rolex/chocolate. 

Seiko/banana split with either sprinkles or whipped cream. You can also add 2 more cherries on top and some crushed peanuts for 50 cents more, or go with our triple swirl fudge delight and get the sprinkles for free. 

Rolex/chocolate.


----------



## Ajax_Drakos (Aug 20, 2014)

To the OP: I skipped right over most of the pages because I know the kind of things that these debates bring out, so I'll just ask you this: what do you want in a watch?

Unless you're talking with a person who really knows and appreciates watches, you're not going to impress too many people with a Seiko. Of course it's respected among watch fans like us, and rightly so, but the general public regards Seiko lightly. With Rolex, it's just the opposite. 

But if you couldn't care less about impressing others and just want a great watch at a great value, then Seiko is the way to go. I have nine Seikos, six of which are mechanical. I've never had any of them serviced -- and that includes the ones that are more than 40 years old -- and have never had a single problem with any of them. As far as I'm concerned, Seiko makes movements that are as rugged as mechanical movements can be. Rolex movements have a reputation for being robust, as well, but of course you'll pay a great deal more for your typical Rolex. Ultimately, though, I don't think quality or durability would be an issue with either brand.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Ajax_Drakos said:


> To the OP:* I skipped right over most of the pages because I know the kind of things that these debates bring out*, so I'll just ask you this: what do you want in a watch?
> 
> Unless you're talking with a person who really knows and appreciates watches, you're not going to impress too many people with a Seiko. Of course it's respected among watch fans like us, and rightly so, but the general public regards Seiko lightly. With Rolex, it's just the opposite.
> 
> But if you couldn't care less about impressing others and just want a great watch at a great value, then Seiko is the way to go. I have nine Seikos, six of which are mechanical. I've never had any of them serviced -- and that includes the ones that are more than 40 years old -- and have never had a single problem with any of them. As far as I'm concerned, Seiko makes movements that are as rugged as mechanical movements can be. Rolex movements have a reputation for being robust, as well, but of course you'll pay a great deal more for your typical Rolex. Ultimately, though, I don't think quality or durability would be an issue with either brand.


By assuming you missed some pretty good stuff from some pretty knowledgeable people. I do admit that it's tough and probably not all that worthwhile to sort through many points of view when the best answer is already so obvious to so many.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

ljb187 said:


> By assuming you missed some pretty good stuff from some pretty knowledgeable people. I do admit that it's tough and probably not all that worthwhile to sort through many points of view *when the best answer is already so obvious to so many.*


Exactly. If you have to ask about a 40X price difference while clearly explaining the answers to your questions, go with the Seiko.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

drhr said:


> :-! Quite the purist you are, love it . . .


Thanks a bunch! Practically speaking I'm just trying to get as close as possible to the right answers for me before I die or go broke. When I'm finished I'd like to think I've done what I could to sort through my biases, vanities, impulsiveness, spendthrift-y ways, ignorance...and so on to have a group of watches that suit me. I look at the box now and know why things have stayed or why they're gone and get a sense of a "job well done". It's the sort of feeling that has to be earned, you just can't buy it with money...hmm...wait a minute...that's precisely what I did. Alright, then it's "money well spent" and "job well done". I'm OK with that.

Speaking of all of this, I'm working my way down to somewhere between 12 and 8 watches and have only a few things left to do before giving Nomos' Ludwig a chance to be the missing piece of the puzzle. After that I'll take you up on your SOC challenge and see what you guys think. There won't be the oohs and aahs that your pieces rightfully deserve, but if three people reply and only one of them calls me a moron I'll take that as a sign that I'm on the right track.



Stellite said:


> I am glad you get him:-d
> 
> Kinetics have a bad rep and they deserve it. I would not dare trade my SKX or SRP for any kinetic on the planet.


And thanks for the laugh! I know you're right about the new Sub and maybe Seiko too, but while I don't especially need a Kinetic movement it would be something new so taking a chance on one wouldn't be the worst thing...Not after the money I've wasted money hitting Staid bracelets with single-jacks or trying to dye custom alligator straps with this stuff anyway. Besides, the Grey Ghost is like the third best looking diver currently being made and hand-to-God, if it only lasted six months before crapping out that would still be better than being sticking generations of progeny with what used to be the Rolex Submariner.

Read all this knowing that if right now you asked me what a balance wheel did my answer would be decidedly in the C- range.



sierra11b said:


> Proudly own many of both.
> 
> The SKX is a lot of watch for the money and I enjoy it on jubilee, but it'll never be a Rolex.
> 
> ...


Regardless of brand, what you've written is exactly why I sometimes like to spend a bit more money on the watches I own. Flimsy stems, sloppy hands, stamped dials...none of that necessarily stops a watch from being a great value, but for me those little things ad up. The less I'm distracted by the corners that were cut or the technology / skill that wasn't there the more I tend to enjoy the watch. This doesn't have to be true for everyone, but it's why I think a $6000 watch can legitimately be a better value than a $200 one.


----------



## watchvaultnyc (Jun 5, 2014)

how long do these threads usually go?


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

I'm amazed someone hasn't said something to get this thread shut down this many pages in.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

ljb187 said:


> And thanks for the laugh! I know you're right about the new Sub and maybe Seiko too, but while I don't especially need a Kinetic movement it would be something new so taking a chance on one wouldn't be the worst thing...Not after the money I've wasted money hitting Staid bracelets with single-jacks or trying to dye custom alligator straps with this stuff anyway. Besides, the Grey Ghost is like the third best looking diver currently being made and hand-to-God, if it only lasted six months before crapping out that would still be better than being sticking generations of progeny with what used to be the Rolex Submariner.
> 
> .


Well, looks is in the eye of the beholder. So if you like the looks that is all that matters. I will stick with something that has already proven itself to me and to millions. Say what you want about the Sub, but Rolex has been continuously improving it over the years. Today's sub is much better than the ones even 5-8 years ago. Oh and it is still the Submariner, from someone qualified to speak of it, since I have owned many generations of such. You keep your so far unknown reliability Kinetic and I will stick with my time proven SUBMARINER!!!:-!


----------



## Ajax_Drakos (Aug 20, 2014)

Stellite said:


> Well, looks is in the eye of the beholder. So if you like the looks that is all that matters. I will stick with something that has already proven itself to me and to millions. Say what you want about the Sub, but Rolex has been continuously improving it over the years. Today's sub is much better than the ones even 5-8 years ago. Oh and it is still the Submariner, from someone qualified to speak of it, since I have owned many generations of such. You keep your so far unknown reliability Kinetic and I will stick with my time proven SUBMARINER!!!:-!


I'm curious about how the Sub has gotten better in the past few years -- and I'm seriously asking, not being a wiseguy. I know the glide-lock clasp on Subs has been a very cool and definitely practical development. I tried a Sub with that clasp and thought it was fantastic. Have there been other developments?

As for the Kinetic issue, I have one Kinetic and haven't had any problems with it, but I don't wear it very often and I know that my experience isn't indicative of a any kind of a broader truth about Kinetics. But one of the great things about Seiko is that there are so many choices in terms of design and movement -- Kinetic, basic automatic, hand-winding, Spring Drive, high beat, solar, electronic, etc.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

ljb187 said:


> Thanks a bunch! Practically speaking I'm just trying to *get as close as possible to the right answers for me before I die* or go broke. When I'm finished I'd like to think I've done what I could to sort through my biases, vanities, impulsiveness, spendthrift-y ways, ignorance...and so on to have a group of watches that suit me. I look at the box now and know why things have stayed or why they're gone and get a sense of a "job well done". It's the sort of feeling that has to be earned, you just can't buy it with money...hmm...wait a minute...that's precisely what I did. Alright, then it's "money well spent" and "job well done". I'm OK with that.
> 
> Speaking of all of this, I'm working my way down to somewhere between 12 and 8 watches and have only a few things left to do before giving Nomos' Ludwig a chance to be the missing piece of the puzzle. After that I'll take you up on your SOC challenge and see what you guys think. There won't be the oohs and aahs that your pieces rightfully deserve, but if three people reply and only one of them calls me a *moron* I'll take that as a sign that I'm on the right track.


You're more than welcome! My life's quest, nice to know there are others, though it doesn't surprise me you're one of 'em . . .
And whoever would use that word to describe you perhaps really doesn't know the definition . . .


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Ajax_Drakos said:


> I'm curious about how the Sub has gotten better in the past few years -- and I'm seriously asking, not being a wiseguy. I know the glide-lock clasp on Subs has been a very cool and definitely practical development. I tried a Sub with that clasp and thought it was fantastic. Have there been other developments?
> 
> As for the Kinetic issue, I have one Kinetic and haven't had any problems with it, but I don't wear it very often and I know that my experience isn't indicative of a any kind of a broader truth about Kinetics. But one of the great things about Seiko is that there are so many choices in terms of design and movement -- Kinetic, basic automatic, hand-winding, Spring Drive, high beat, solar, electronic, etc.


Fair question. Rolex, keeps on improving the internal components of it's movements, they have dramatically improved the bracelets and clasps, and the bezel is better, so they are small improvements but they are better.

Seiko makes a broad variety of movements and their auto's and solar are great, but for me until I see long term reliability in the kinetics I am staying away


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

Ajax_Drakos said:


> I'm curious about how the Sub has gotten better in the past few years -- and I'm seriously asking, not being a wiseguy. I know the glide-lock clasp on Subs has been a very cool and definitely practical development. I tried a Sub with that clasp and thought it was fantastic. Have there been other developments?


The new Ceramic Bezel comes to mind. Many notice the change in the insert material but Rolex revamped the entire bezel design; the old click spring mechanism was replaced with a ball bearing mechanism.
The build process has also been updated with temperature controlled CNC to ensure better fit between parts.
Parachrom blue hairspring was also introduced a little earlier in the 16610/14060Ms before those model was discontinued, this was also brought forward to the newer 6 digit subs.
Lume was changed from Superluminova to Chromalight. While many argue that it is just the Rolex marketing machine at work, it is said to offer better visibility underwater.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Another noticeable difference is that the 16610 Submariner has hollow midlinks, and these were changed over to solid midlinks on the 116610 Submariner.


----------



## mt_hangglider (Feb 20, 2007)

GlennO said:


> Why would you even try to compare a $200 watch with an $8,000 one?


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## Rob Roberts (Feb 16, 2014)

I find that I like the diver style, I think it looks masculine and sporty. I happen to offshore fish, scuba and spearfish for a hobby and always have. When I was in my teens my father gave me his Seiko diver and I loved that watch. I was always aware of the pros at the docks and most had subs. At almost 50 years old I moved from Seiko to Omega to now Rolex DSSD. I still own all of them but the Omega and DSSD get most of my wrist time. SO, in other words, I am impressed that someone chooses to wear a great looking dive watch no matter the brand. They mostly all copied the Rolex sub style anyway so the other companies must have liked them too.


----------



## KangarueTheDay (Jul 27, 2014)

This escalated quickly.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

KangarueTheDay said:


> This escalated quickly.


Not quickly enough. This thread is becoming it's own forum.


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

broudie said:


> how long do these threads usually go?


Not long enough!


----------



## fjblair (Apr 24, 2009)

Looks like the troll bailed out.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

Rolex blows Seiko away at any level. 

GS is just an attempt to play in the same ballpark. They would fail miserably if they tried to produce as many watches and maintain the level of quality as Rolex does.

There, I said it!


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Cannonball said:


> Rolex blows Seiko away at any level.


The ball continues to roll. There's quite a few Rolex owners that would disagree, even if only in relation to particular aspects:

Is the build quality of grand seiko greater than rolex? - Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum

Of course if we all agreed it would be a boring place.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Of course if we all agreed it would be a boring place.


Don't let that cat out of the bag!!

It's more fun to see people get pissed off about what's strapped to their wrists.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

C'mon guys, let's not get this thread locked. I'm-a waitin' to see my high-res 'slightly less crude' Grand Seiko escapement! Aaannny day now.....


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Domo said:


> C'mon guys, let's not get this thread locked. I'm-a waitin' to see my high-res 'slightly less crude' Grand Seiko escapement! Aaannny day now.....


I'm gonna send him a bill 'cause my popcorn has gone stale.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

fjblair said:


> Looks like the troll bailed out.


She bought a Seiko.

Come on, OP wanted justification on buying a $300 Seiko (top dollar) to getting an $6200 (pre tax and below MSRP, and well used price) Rolex dive watch.

I've even skewed the numbers to... to.... oh hell, I don't know what point I'm trying to make...

*JUST GET THE SEIKO. YOU CAN'T AFFORD THE ROLEX!!*


----------



## czarcasm (Mar 2, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Rolex blows Seiko away at any level.
> 
> GS is just an attempt to play in the same ballpark. They would fail miserably if they tried to produce as many watches and maintain the level of quality as Rolex does.
> 
> There, I said it!


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> She bought a Seiko.
> 
> Come on, OP wanted justification on buying a $300 Seiko (top dollar) to getting an $6200 (pre tax and below MSRP, and well used price) Rolex dive watch.
> 
> ...


The point is, I think, that she wasn't trolling and was asking what the justification of going up in price was, as you said in this post. That point has been thoroughly covered. I wouldn't make any assumptions as to whether or not she can or cannot afford a Rolex, just whether or not it is worth it and that is a personal matter.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

WrnrG said:


> The point is, I think, that she wasn't trolling and was asking what the justification of going up in price was, as you said in this post. That point has been thoroughly covered. I wouldn't make any assumptions as to whether or not she can or cannot afford a Rolex, just whether or not it is worth it and that is a personal matter.


I don't think she's a troll per se, in that it doesn't really seem like she's intentionally trying to be controversial. Rather, she comes across as a person seeking some sort of affirmation or validation that the Seiko SKX is a sensible choice and that the price differential between the Seiko and Rolex is not justified by the increase in quality.

Of course, such questions are intrinsically a question of what one values, since while it might be possible to impose a partial ordering on issues of quality, there is no way to canonically and objectively distill it to a numerical score.

I do find the original post to be silly though, since Rolex is the single most readily available luxury watch brand, and any questions she had about the differences in quality would have been quickly and definitively addressed by a visit to one of the many Rolex ADs.


----------



## chasecj7 (Sep 23, 2013)

ljb187 said:


> By assuming you missed some pretty good stuff from some pretty knowledgeable people. I do admit that it's tough and probably not all that worthwhile to sort through many points of view when the best answer is already so obvious to so many.


Did they happen to compare Timex to Aquadive for me while they were at it?


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

mleok said:


> I don't think she's a troll per se, in that it doesn't really seem like she's intentionally trying to be controversial. Rather, she comes across as a person seeking some sort of affirmation or validation that the Seiko SKX is a sensible choice and that the price differential between the Seiko and Rolex is not justified by the increase in quality.
> 
> Of course, such questions are intrinsically a question of what one values, since while it might be possible to impose a partial ordering on issues of quality, there is no way to canonically and objectively distill it to a numerical score.
> 
> I do find the original post to be silly though, since Rolex is the single most* readily available luxury watch brand*, and any questions she had about the differences in quality would have been quickly and definitively addressed by a visit to one of the many Rolex ADs.


I don't know where in PA, USA she is, but a quick search indicates that there are 18 (out of 57) cities with ADs. I didn't get to see and feel my first (modern, anyway; picked up a used 14060 at the bay in Toronto) Rolex in the metal until I moved out of Quebec City and to Montréal. Sometimes, they just aren't as accessible as one would think. In the meantime, I read and read here and on TRF and got educated. But I'm more autodidactic in my learning, whereas others like to ask questions. I'm inclined to think the wording was just badly chosen and she isn't a troll at all. Also, I think Tag is actually the most readily available luxury watch brand; even Quebec City (No Rolex. No Omega.) has two ADs!


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

I don't even know what to say anymore lol. It's apparent that some of you are only reading the original post. Call me what you want


----------



## MissSummerStorm (Apr 18, 2014)

Arthur M said:


> I don't know where in PA, USA she is, but a quick search indicates that there are 18 (out of 57) cities with ADs. I didn't get to see and feel my first (modern, anyway; picked up a used 14060 at the bay in Toronto) Rolex in the metal until I moved out of Quebec City and to Montréal. Sometimes, they just aren't as accessible as one would think. In the meantime, I read and read here and on TRF and got educated. But I'm more autodidactic in my learning, whereas others like to ask questions. I'm inclined to think the wording was just badly chosen and she isn't a troll at all. Also, I think Tag is actually the most readily available luxury watch brand; even Quebec City (No Rolex. No Omega.) has two ADs!


 I live near Philadelphia, so there is a lot of access to Rolex, it's just finding the time (and a parking space) to get to these places to look, especially when you're just looking and not buying that day. I am also reading and learning info on this forum and other forums/sites as well, and while I do agree it would have been beneficial to have held a Rolex first before posting some answers could were best answered by people who know more about the internals of watches than me as opposed to aesthetics.


----------



## mjkerr (Mar 5, 2013)

*Re: Attention to small details*

Clearly the Seiko diver 200m is better - it has day (in 2 languages, even) and a date! Just the same, I'd take the Rolex Sub, even though I don't need a hot new GF. My tall, blue eyed, brunette, wife is already 20 years younger than me, and waaayy hotter than I deserve, so I did buy her a Rolex (actually, she bought it herself, on ebay, but she did put it on my PayPal, and I didn't even scold her, so that's true love right there). Back to the point though, I knew guys working offshore with me in Alaska, in the mid - late '80s, that loved their Rolex Subs and wore them on the job everyday, but they did admit that they had to send them in for service about every 2 years, when they noticed that they started losing time. I was wearing my Eterna-matic Kon-Tiki 20 at that time, and felt kind of smug that I could go for 3 or 4 years between servicing it. Then, I got my $150 Seiko Diver and that crazy thing kept going strong and accurate for the next 23 years, without any service at all, before it finally slowed down last year. I even dived with it and took it down to a bit over 30 meters, or 100 ft, probably slightly exceeding my recreational dive limit. So, why do I still want a Rolex Sub? The short answer is that I don't, because I think the Tudor Black Bay just looks even nicer! Too bad it doesn't have that date that all my Seikos do, though.


----------



## mjkerr (Mar 5, 2013)

Great advice on those 34 mm Tudor Mini Submariners, or the 36 mm Mid size sub. You can even find nice vintage blue ones in those sizes that won't break the bank like any decent full size vintage Tudor (by Rolex) "snowflake" Submariner will, these days. Also, you might want to have a look at a Longines HydroConquest in the smaller 39 mm size. Last years model blue ones (with just the 3 big numerals at the 6, 9 & 12:00 positions and the date window at the 3:00 position) also have the "snowflake" style hands and are super good looking if you can wear something that big. Watchmaxx.com still has them in stock for about $890. I just bought myself the 41 mm version and my wife thought it was really pretty. The new model has smaller arabic numerals all the way aroung the dial, which I don't like as much, except in the version of the new model with the red bezel and the white face. The new model does have the ETA 2892-2 movement, which is a bit of a step up from the ETA 2824-2 movement they used in the old model, so that can justify the $100 or so higher price for the new model, at least if you like the styling of it. These are considered to be one of the 10 best mechanical dive watches that you can get for under $1000, and at least a little smaller than average.


----------



## mjkerr (Mar 5, 2013)

I had a Seiko Kinetic when they first came out. It died after about 2 years. On the other hand, my Seiko Automatic Diver took 23 years to just sort of slow down and get a little bit ctotchety, kind of like me. So, yes, I think you're right to stay away from those things. Seiko Solar Divers look great, especially for the price and will surely be more accurate than the Seiko automatics, but for true longevity, I'd still put my money on the tried and true Seiko Automatic Divers. I doubt if I'll ever cough up as much money as it would take to buy a Rolex Sub, even a used one, but I'm almost for sure gonna eventually get a nice, used Tudor Heritage Black Bay. IMHO, those things blow away even the competition from their parent company's (Rolex) offerings, as does the Tudor Pelagos (at least as a true divers tool watch, as opposed to an all around desk diver).


----------



## fjblair (Apr 24, 2009)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I don't even know what to say anymore lol. It's apparent that some of you are only reading the original post. Call me what you want


For the record the "troll" I was referring to was "pithy" or some such username, not the OP.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

mjkerr said:


> Great advice on those 34 mm Tudor Mini Submariners, or the 36 mm Mid size sub. You can even find nice vintage blue ones in those sizes that won't break the bank like any decent full size vintage Tudor (by Rolex) "snowflake" Submariner will, these days. Also, you might want to have a look at a Longines HydroConquest in the smaller 39 mm size. Last years model blue ones (with just the 3 big numerals at the 6, 9 & 12:00 positions and the date window at the 3:00 position) also have the "snowflake" style hands and are super good looking if you can wear something that big. Watchmaxx.com still has them in stock for about $890. I just bought myself the 41 mm version and my wife thought it was really pretty. The new model has smaller arabic numerals all the way aroung the dial, which I don't like as much, except in the version of the new model with the red bezel and the white face. The new model does have the ETA 2892-2 movement, which is a bit of a step up from the ETA 2824-2 movement they used in the old model, so that can justify the $100 or so higher price for the new model, at least if you like the styling of it. These are considered to be one of the 10 best mechanical dive watches that you can get for under $1000, and at least a little smaller than average.


Yeah, Tudor Submariner prices have been skyrocketing in the past couple of years (for the full size models anyway). Just two years ago, a Vintage snowflake could have been had for around $2000; today. it's a bargin when under $4000. The only one under $3000 with any regularity is the 79090 and even the newer 79190 has creeped above the $3000 on average mark. I wish I had picked up a snowflake two years ago.. I wish I had been into watches two years ago..


----------



## iam7head (Dec 16, 2010)

Arthur M said:


> Yeah, Tudor Submariner prices have been skyrocketing in the past couple of years (for the full size models anyway). Just two years ago, a Vintage snowflake could have been had for around $2000; today. it's a bargin when under $4000. The only one under $3000 with any regularity is the 79090 and even the newer 79190 has creeped above the $3000 on average mark. I wish I had picked up a snowflake two years ago.. I wish I had been into watches two years ago..


you and me both 

Those nice blue snowflake is almost the price of a used 14060 or 16610, a decent sample cost more than the new Black Bay


----------



## alx007 (Jan 28, 2013)

I have been wearing my SKX009 the past few days, and forgot what a nice, sturdy and reliable watch it was. I've made a point earlier on this thread saying that the motivations of getting a Rolex and a Seiko divers are completely different. I want to reiterate this point, noting that then and now I was specifically talking about the sub vs the cheapest breed of Seiko divers (usually what the comparison is).

The sub is a superior dive watch? Yes. But aside from a few exceptions, I'm yet to meet someone in person that didn't get a Rolex only for the status symbol.

Then comes the SKX, this little and cheap wonder. It is still one of the greatest ways to get into and start appreciating mechanical watches. And it is a fantastic, reliable watch while doing that.

This all to say that I'm still aiming for a sub, but definitely appreciate the SKX for what it is.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I live near Philadelphia, so there is a lot of access to Rolex, it's just finding the time (and a parking space) to get to these places to look, especially when you're just looking and not buying that day. I am also reading and learning info on this forum and other forums/sites as well, and while I do agree it would have been beneficial to have held a Rolex first before posting some answers could were best answered by people who know more about the internals of watches than me as opposed to aesthetics.


There are plenty of parking structures within a stone throw of Govberg in Philadelphia. I guess if I was seriously contemplating going from a $200 watch to a $8000 watch, I would take the time and effort to see the watch in person. If I wasn't serious enough to take the time to do so, then I would give people who buy Rolexes the benefit of doubt and assume that there was probably a difference in quality between a $200 and $8000 watch and that the difference in price goes beyond the name on the dial.

If you're interested in the differences in movements, then some notable features of the Rolex 3135 calibre that might be worth reading up on include chronometer certification, isochronism, low positional variance, Breguet overcoils, free-sprung balances, variable inertia balance springs, and the cam and lever date change design that allows the date to be quickset at any time without fear of damage to the movement. It is also hand-windable, and has a hacking (stop seconds) feature, which is typically not worth mentioning, but the 7S26 movement in the SKX doesn't have these two features.

To me, the two most notable issues with the 7S26 movement is the lack of isochronism (rate depends on the level of power reserve) and the positional variance. This means that even a well regulated movement is limited in terms of the accuracy it can achieve if your wearing pattern changes.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

chasecj7 said:


> Did they happen to compare Timex to Aquadive for me while they were at it?


About 14 pages back...somebody said that the Timex was like Cessna while Aquadive was like an Evergreen Supertanker. What happened next was sort of weird:

Long time WUS member Skyhawk172 chimed into say that Cessna was more like Seiko given the wide range of planes they make. This really angered Seiko fan TyphoonDriver who was adamant that while yes, Cessna did offer a lot of models, none of them could be considered an equivalent to the Ananta line never mind GS. He stated that repeated testing on both PlayStation on PC flight simulators have proven this to be true. Then, for whatever reason Datejustifier started bragging about his Learjet and gold Day-Date but got shot down by nearly everybody except little big feather who defended him because...well...he just genuinely loves Rolex. Next thing you know, everybody but little big feather was arguing about flight dynamics until someone revealed a bit too much about the F22's static stability characteristics. This spurred long time lurker NSASpook to post saying he and a bunch a watch collectors were monitoring the thread during a GTG at Fort Meade, MD and that if the conversation didn't return to watches he'd have to shut down the Internet.

It turned out the F22 was just an old watch movement, but by then it was a non-issue since everybody had shaken hands and bought rounds of virtual beers.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I don't even know what to say anymore lol. It's apparent that some of you are only reading the original post. Call me what you want


I certainly dont think you are a troll. I have seen women wear submariner size watches. It happens to be the trend these days.

I would personally recommend the small Omega SMP Diver. It will be a lot less than the Sub but still offer class and quality.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

So the winner is Nomos, right?


----------



## Au Hasard Balthazar (Feb 18, 2013)

CitizenM said:


> So the winner is Nomos, right?


I'm not sure about the winner but the loser is Invicta. It's always Invicta. They are the Washington Generals of horology.


----------



## Lazycollegekid (Nov 19, 2012)

I suppose It all depends on perspective. I work at a bank. I might get some strange looks sporting a Rolex  

Jokes aside. The quality is on par with value. You want an awesome 200$ watch? Seiko. You want an awesome 5k watch? GS 
Want an awesome 4k watch with a logo worth 3k? Rolex.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

ljb187 said:


> About 14 pages back...somebody said that the Timex was like Cessna while Aquadive was like an Evergreen Supertanker. What happened next was sort of weird:
> 
> Long time WUS member Skyhawk172 chimed into say that Cessna was more like Seiko given the wide range of planes they make. This really angered Seiko fan TyphoonDriver who was adamant that while yes, Cessna did offer a lot of models, none of them could be considered an equivalent to the Ananta line never mind GS. He stated that repeated testing on both PlayStation on PC flight simulators have proven this to be true. Then, for whatever reason Datejustifier started bragging about his Learjet and gold Day-Date but got shot down by nearly everybody except little big feather who defended him because...well...he just genuinely loves Rolex. Next thing you know, everybody but little big feather was arguing about flight dynamics until someone revealed a bit too much about the F22's static stability characteristics. This spurred long time lurker NSASpook to post saying he and a bunch a watch collectors were monitoring the thread during a GTG at FT. Meade, MD and that if the conversation didn't return to watches he'd have to shut down the Internet.
> 
> It turned out the F22 was just an old watch movement, but by then it was a non-issue since everybody had shaken hands and bought rounds of virtual beers.


Nominated: Best post of the thread.*

* By someone who actually hasn't taken a very active part in the thread.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Lazycollegekid said:


> Want an awesome 4k watch with a logo worth 3k? Rolex.


That's unfair, but I guess you're intentionally being provocative.


----------



## Lazycollegekid (Nov 19, 2012)

mleok said:


> That's unfair, but I guess you're intentionally being provocative.


Unintentionally I'm afraid. After I said "Jokes Aside" I went and made another joke without even realizing it lol.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Lazycollegekid said:


> Unintentionally I'm afraid. After I said "Jokes Aside" I went and made another joke without even realizing it lol.


Seriously, you said the logo accounted for $3K of the price and you weren't trying to be provocative? What happens when you put some effort into it?


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

Lazycollegekid said:


> I suppose It all depends on perspective. I work at a bank. I might get some strange looks sporting a Rolex
> 
> Jokes aside. The quality is on par with value. You want an awesome 200$ watch? Seiko. You want an awesome 5k watch? GS
> Want an awesome 4k watch with a logo worth 3k? Rolex.


Your screen name says it all.


----------



## Rob Roberts (Feb 16, 2014)

Where is there a $4,@00 Rolex sub? I'll take 2 please


----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

Can somebody give me the cliff notes from pg14 on?


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

Rob Roberts said:


> Where is there a $4,@00 Rolex sub? I'll take 2 please


Plenty of 5513s and 14060s fit the bill.

As an aside I think the 5512/5513 references are on the verge of exploding in price. One by one all the vintage pieces are skyrocketing I think the 5512/5513s are gonna hit soon.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

How does working in a bank and wearing a rolex not match?? This kinda ridiculousness is beyond my comphrension..


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

mikeylacroix said:


> How does working in a bank and wearing a rolex not match?? This kinda ridiculousness is beyond my comphrension..


I think the idea is that the banker is supposed to be saving/protecting your money, not using your money to pay himself.


----------



## mew88 (Jun 1, 2010)

Rob Roberts said:


> Where is there a $4,@00 Rolex sub? I'll take 2 please


About $4k.


----------



## Lazycollegekid (Nov 19, 2012)

mleok said:


> Seriously, you said the logo accounted for $3K of the price and you weren't trying to be provocative? What happens when you put some effort into it?


Usually something that makes about half the readers approximate this emoji o|

And the other half approximate this little fellow :-d


----------



## Lazycollegekid (Nov 19, 2012)

BarracksSi said:


> I think the idea is that the banker is supposed to be saving/protecting your money, not using your money to pay himself.


Yes, sadly I hear there are people in the world who can't sleep at night knowing they entrusted their money to someone wearing a Rolex. Not my personal belief, but I can't change the beliefs of others.


----------



## pinkybrain (Oct 26, 2011)

Umm, that may be like buying appreciating real estate in 2006. I think you might be a little late to the party as prices have already doubled in the last 6-ish years. Obviously, I could be wrong, but I can't imagine 5513's getting any more expensive.

btw: what in the h-ll is this thread about anyways and why is it still going?



ilitig8 said:


> Plenty of 5513s and 14060s fit the bill.
> 
> As an aside I think the 5512/5513 references are on the verge of exploding in price. One by one all the vintage pieces are skyrocketing I think the 5512/5513s are gonna hit soon.


----------



## pinkybrain (Oct 26, 2011)

holy crap. Can you do my taxes for me? Certainly the best post of the thread, and I don't think my opinion is lessened by the fact that I haven't even read many posts in this thread.



ljb187 said:


> About 14 pages back...somebody said that the Timex was like Cessna while Aquadive was like an Evergreen Supertanker. What happened next was sort of weird:
> 
> Long time WUS member Skyhawk172 chimed into say that Cessna was more like Seiko given the wide range of planes they make. This really angered Seiko fan TyphoonDriver who was adamant that while yes, Cessna did offer a lot of models, none of them could be considered an equivalent to the Ananta line never mind GS. He stated that repeated testing on both PlayStation on PC flight simulators have proven this to be true. Then, for whatever reason Datejustifier started bragging about his Learjet and gold Day-Date but got shot down by nearly everybody except little big feather who defended him because...well...he just genuinely loves Rolex. Next thing you know, everybody but little big feather was arguing about flight dynamics until someone revealed a bit too much about the F22's static stability characteristics. This spurred long time lurker NSASpook to post saying he and a bunch a watch collectors were monitoring the thread during a GTG at FT. Meade, MD and that if the conversation didn't return to watches he'd have to shut down the Internet.
> 
> It turned out the F22 was just an old watch movement, but by then it was a non-issue since everybody had shaken hands and bought rounds of virtual beers.


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

I've owned a GS Diver and 2 Subs. Both are great without a doubt. I'd say GS build quality is definitely better, but the Sub design, versatility, history, is better. I'd like to reiterate; both are great, but I prefer the Sub.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

pinkybrain said:


> Umm, that may be like buying appreciating real estate in 2006. I think you might be a little late to the party as prices have already doubled in the last 6-ish years. Obviously, I could be wrong, but I can't imagine 5513's getting any more expensive.
> 
> btw: what in the h-ll is this thread about anyways and why is it still going?


LOL, one of the two of us is right.

Here is my view based on 20 years of watching the vintage Rolex market (not suggesting expert status just pointing out the time period I have paid attention). References seem to sit at the standard slow creep of price UNTIL the current darling becomes stupidly expensive. When that happens those stupid prices continue to rise but the ones being offered and sold reduce in frequency. Once this happens a new "reasonably" priced "darling" comes to the front and the prices take off. I know people that thought when the 6541 hit $50,000 there was no way it would go higher, try to buy a decent one for less than $100K now and a pristine tropical for sale and you better bring a quarter mil if you want to make sure you are the last man standing when the gavel drops. As for the 5512/5513 look at what faded bezels are beginning to sell for, never mind many (most) are probably artificially aged. I think at worst they are going to continue to follow the new Rolex price increases, but I still think they will explode.

The difference I see in vintage watch prices and real estate and say American muscle car prices and the subsequent bubble pop is speculators. When the speculators get in the price goes nuts buts stays unstable. If the prices start to readjust the speculators jump ship and the supply goes up and the prices tank. The difference I see is the vast majority of vintage watches are still bought by serious collectors. One that chases a pristine 5517, 6263 or 6541 for years doesn't dump it when the price drops 10 points, they may not smile but they still want to possess it since to them it is the watch not the money it could realize if sold. As long as the watch market doesn't become saturated by speculators/investors I think the prices are safe, though often crazy. My suggestion is watch the early 5512s, gilt dials, pointy crowns, meters first and especially the explorer dials, when these finally really explode they will drag the more mundane 5512/5513s right along with them, just in a different zip code in price.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

pinkybrain said:


> holy crap. Can you do my taxes for me?


I could, but the problem is they'd pretty much look like that...just with a few more numbers...added wrong...and in the incorrect columns...signed with a "X"...which I wouldn't have spelled right either.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

ljb187 said:


> I could, but the problem is they'd pretty much look like that...just with a few more numbers...added wrong...and in the incorrect columns...signed with a "X"...which I wouldn't have spelled right either.


:-d More peals of laughter here, it would be fun to be straight man to you even though I have little comedic talent . . . :-!


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

BarracksSi said:


> I think the idea is that the banker is supposed to be saving/protecting your money, not using your money to pay himself.


How much smarts does it take to realize, they got the keys!
Ever seen a poor Banker? Top 10 richest men in any,small town in America, is the Banker.


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

little big feather said:


> How much smarts does it take to realize, they got the keys!
> Ever seen a poor Banker? Top 10 richest men in any,small town in America, is the Banker.


Right. The flip side is, would you trust your money to somebody who can barely afford a Casio?


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

BarracksSi said:


> I think the idea is that the banker is supposed to be saving/protecting your money, not using your money to pay himself.


Is anyone still naive enough to believe that? It's unrealistic to expect that a banker will deprive himself so as to maximize my return on investment, and it's not as if banking is in the top ten list of careers for young idealists hoping to change the world for the better. This is not the Bailey Building and Loan Association from it's a Wonderful Life. The best one can hope for is enlightened self-interest, that both the banker and I will profit from well-planned and well-executed financial decisions.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

BarracksSi said:


> I think the idea is that the banker is supposed to be saving/protecting your money, not using your money to pay himself.


Heaven forbid that your banker is wise enough with his money to save for a fine watch.

Once the bank pays him, what difference does to make to the bank what he does with his money?


----------



## PK73 (Sep 24, 2013)

I can't afford this Swiss brand but I don't actually care about Rolexes, nor about the people wearing them (99% of them don't have a clue about watches anyway), these watches are overpriced and overrated, on the other hand I just love Seiko and especially their Diver's items, they have great quality, they have character and these watches are the definition of the term VFM.
If someone gave me like 10.000 euros to spend on a watch I would definitely spend them on a Grand Seiko or on a couple of Marinemasters and Tunas!


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)




----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

PK73 said:


> I can't afford this Swiss brand but I don't actually care about Rolexes, nor about the people wearing them (99% of them don't have a clue about watches anyway)


Given that Seiko sells even more watches at much lower prices to the general public, I'd bet that even more people who buy Seiko don't have a clue about watches, even if it is the same 99% of buyers.


----------



## Patekista (Jan 2, 2014)

PK73 said:


> I can't afford this Swiss brand but I don't actually care about Rolexes, nor about the people wearing them (99% of them don't have a clue about watches anyway), these watches are overpriced and overrated, on the other hand I just love Seiko and especially their Diver's items, they have great quality, they have character and these watches are the definition of the term VFM.
> If someone gave me like 10.000 euros to spend on a watch I would definitely spend them on a Grand Seiko or on a couple of Marinemasters and Tunas!


I don't think you can afford anything and you wish you could have a Rolex like I wish I could have a Rolex. But we must both settle for Seiko. The difference is that I am not so ignorant as you or maybe lie so much as you.


----------



## KiwiRed (Feb 1, 2014)

Taking pot shots at Rolex being overly priced and as good as a much cheaper copy is fun for a thread but the reality is Rolex Subs are the best.

My reasons:

- The Rolex Submariner is the most bulletproof/reliable/versatile watch I own. 
- I have finally taken my Sub in to get serviced after 12 years of service (Rolex recommend every 5). I have tried taking it in multiple times over the years but the dealers have told me no need it keeps perfect time. The reality? It STILL keeps perfect time I am just getting it serviced as a preventative measure so I can pass it down to one of my kids when all my other watches have fallen apart (yes its that solid).
- My neighbor has had his for 40+ years and wears it almost every day as it remains his favorite watch (that is staying power).
- Most people I know who sold/traded their subs regretted it and bought another one or are planning on it

Seiko Diver? I'm definitely not going to slag it off. Its an absolutely brilliant feat of engineering at an almost unbelievable price. But quality on par with a Rolex Submariner??? If you think that I have a modest bridge next to my house that takes you to Brooklyn I'd love to sell you. PM me immediately.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Patekista said:


> I don't think you can afford anything and you wish you could have a Rolex like I wish I could have a Rolex. But we must both settle for Seiko. The difference is that I am not so ignorant as you or maybe lie so much as you.


I like you. I like your honest opinion...You get four thumbs up, buddy..|>..|>..|>..|>..:-!
PK 73...You need to see a doctor, because my Buddy here, burned you baaad!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

little big feather said:


> I like you. I like your honest opinion...You get four thumbs up, buddy..|>..|>..|>..|>..:-!
> PK 73...You need to see a doctor, because my Buddy here, burned you baaad!


LBF, that's FIVE thumbs up!! I thought four was the maximum in the LBF watchuseek post grading scheme™


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

little big feather said:


> I like you. I like your honest opinion...You get four thumbs up, buddy..|>..|>..|>..|>..:-!
> PK 73...You need to see a doctor, because my Buddy here, burned you baaad!


Man, you've never give me five thumbs up:-|


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I've tried researching Japanese vs. Swiss movements and Rolex vs Seiko threads throughout various forums to understand why a majority of people are interested in high end Swiss movements over Japanese moments and to understand what separates Seiko from Rolex besides movement and price.
> 
> I've read that:
> 
> ...


oh no you didnt...........

ok. you did.

im gonna keep this simple. A Seiko Marinemaster 300 is EASILY on par with a Rolex submariner......The Marinemaster 300 is a 'pure' tool watch and Japanese Domestic Model in their PROSPEX lineup....

a Grand Seiko diver?...yup..im gonna say it....wipes the floor with a Rolex submariner.....

GS. The Japanese Patek Phillipe. lets keep this a secret on these forums.


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> oh no you didnt...........
> 
> ok. you did.
> 
> ...


A bit optimistic, don't you think?


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

AAMC said:


> A bit optimistic, don't you think?


no. not at all. in fact i am 1000000000000000% correct.


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> no. not at all. in fact i am 1000000000000000% correct.


Oh boy


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

snakeeyes said:


> GS. The Japanese Patek Phillipe. lets keep this a secret on these forums.


If Grand Seiko doesn't exactly refute traditional European haute-horology it certainly offers a different way to demonstrate excellence. Seiko has made a 400K watch, but it's telling those Credors aren't part of their flagship collection.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

snakeeyes said:


> no. not at all. in fact i am 1000000000000000% correct.


So, you're overcorrecting?


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

Zombie thread!!!!!!

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

snakeeyes;8353045
GS. The Japanese Patek Phillipe. lets keep this a secret on these forums.[/QUOTE said:


> WOW!! That's fantastic! So...when I go to Wal-Mart, do I ask for the Japanese Patek Phillipe, or what?
> Like..... they know about this deal right?


----------



## Horologic (Apr 26, 2012)

snakeeyes said:


> no. not at all. in fact i am 1000000000000000% correct.


Never handled an MM300, but I've seen numerous people on this forum say the end links are poor fitting compared to a Rolex bracelet's end links.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Domo said:


> LBF, that's FIVE thumbs up!! I thought four was the maximum in the LBF watchuseek post grading scheme™


No, he got four thumbs up,( |>)as a grade, which is the maximum allowed the Smiley Thumb up -!)isn't a grade...It's an ATTA-BOY,
totally different...;-)


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

snakeeyes said:


> A Seiko Marinemaster 300 is EASILY on par with a Rolex submariner......The Marinemaster 300 is a 'pure' tool watch and Japanese Domestic Model in their PROSPEX lineup....


Seiya, who is a reputable JDM dealer felt the need to post the following disclaimer on the MM300 product page:



> NOTE:
> The chapter ring and index & bezel index and face index not being aligned perfectly.
> In general, Seiko's screw down crowns are not smooth as Swiss manufactures'.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

the bracelet also is a tad clunkish


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Just when I thought I was out!


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

Yeah, and you can hack the MM300


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

little big feather said:


> WOW!! That's fantastic! So...when I go to Wal-Mart, do I ask for the Japanese Patek Phillipe, or what?
> Like..... they know about this deal right?


Wow. Walmart sells grand seiko????

Since when?

Rookie comment.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

little big feather said:


> WOW!! That's fantastic! So...when I go to Wal-Mart, do I ask for the Japanese Patek Phillipe, or what?
> Like..... they know about this deal right?


Wait, you have a walmart around you that sells GS? You have got to tell us where that is!


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

I'm not reading through all that. I assume fan boys of both manufacturers are kicking each other to bits?

I have never wore a Seiko so I cannot comment upon their quality or finish (although their excellent reputation goes before them - especially the GS). I do own a Rolex Submariner No Date though and can testify to it's quality without reservation.

Regards,


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

GETS said:


> I'm not reading through all that. I assume fan boys of both manufacturers are kicking each other to bits?


You should. It's a great read. P=NP was solved and there were inroads made for cold fusion. At one point Domo and LBF were set to dual at dawn with 1860's Colt Navy's but that fell apart when they couldn't decide who's dawn to use (different sides of the world and all) and all was forgiven.

There was also a great discussion about avocados (or was that the other Rolex thread?)


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> Wow. Walmart sells grand seiko????
> 
> Since when?
> 
> Rookie comment.


Wal-Mart, Target, Sears, Mall kiosks.....It's a Seiko, that's all....:roll:


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

little big feather said:


> Wal-Mart, Target, Sears, Mall kiosks.....It's a Seiko, that's all....:roll:


lmao. go away troll. either your trolling or your an ignorant buffoon who knows nothing about watches period LMAO|>

i really hope your a troll because your embarassing yourself with your complete and utter lack of knowledge

one more thing...in your world i assume Rolex is Tudor? or better yet Tudor is Rolex???

7000 posts and you know nothing about hand made Grand Seikos????????. go back to house league rookie


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> lmao. go away troll. either your trolling or your an ignorant buffoon who knows nothing about watches period LMAO|>
> 
> i really hope your a troll because your embarassing yourself with your complete and utter lack of knowledge
> 
> ...


Oh yeah...Well your Mother wears combat boots!! So there....:-| At the end of the day, Grand Seiko, is still a Seiko.


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

little big feather said:


> Oh yeah...Well your Mother wears combat boots!! So there....:-| At the end of the day, Grand Seiko, is still a Seiko.


so Tudor is a Rolex at the end of the day and Tissot is an Omega?

got it. thanks rookie.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

little big feather said:


> Oh yeah...Well your Mother wears combat boots!! So there....:-| At the end of the day, Grand Seiko, is still a Seiko.


LBF, just ignore this one. He seems to be a bit ignorant and certainly vapid. Not worth the effort.


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

Arthur M said:


> LBF, just ignore this one. He seems to be a bit ignorant and certainly vapid. Not worth the effort.


so you just told LBF to ignore himself?

whats your stance on Grand Seiko Arthur? enlighten all of us


----------



## big_raji (Apr 1, 2012)

jkpa said:


> I predict 25+ pages.


Nice prediction.

-Posted from Tapatalk


----------



## Rattrapante Pete (Sep 5, 2013)

big_raji said:


> Nice prediction.
> 
> -Posted from Tapatalk


And STILL no substantive conclusions. Fanboys to the left of me, fanboys to the right...


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

Rattrapante Pete said:


> And STILL no substantive conclusions. Fanboys to the left of me, fanboys to the right...


Actually, considering the thread was about SKX divers vs Rolex Sub, there were very few people who disagreed that The Sub is the much better watch but with the worse quality to price ratio of the two. Seems like a substantive conclusion to me.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> lmao. go away troll. either your trolling or your an ignorant buffoon who knows nothing about watches period LMAO|>
> 
> i really hope your a troll because your embarassing yourself with your complete and utter lack of knowledge
> 
> ...


Well, I was going to ignore you, as I would something that I stepped in outside then wiped off my boot...But.
Tudor is Tudor, simply read the dial...and Rolex is Rolex, again read the dial. I never called you any name in any form, but using your words,
not mine...Any buffoon that thinks Grand Seiko is hand made is, your words an ignorant buffoon. If it was hand made it would be quite large, because every part would 
be cut by hand, filed, you get the point. Accuracy would be really bad, each watch would take many, many months of assembly,
testing, taking apart, filing,putting back together! Each of these "hand made Grand Seikos" would in fact, be one of a kind(no parts interchangeable)
No modern watches are "hand made"...That went out over 100 years ago....Please in the future, if you wish to call me names please feel free,
I can take it....I'm secure in my "Limited" knowledge, I'm secure in everything I do...But I'm not the one who doesn't know the difference in "hand made".
You have a nice day...and be careful crossing streets...Those colors, can confuse you (red-yellow-green)...:-!


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

little big feather said:


> Well, I was going to ignore you, as I would something that I stepped in outside then wiped off my boot...But.
> Tudor is Tudor, simply read the dial...and Rolex is Rolex, again read the dial. I never called you any name in any form, but using your words,
> not mine...Any buffoon that thinks Grand Seiko is hand made is, your words an ignorant buffoon. If it was hand made it would be quite large, because every part would
> be cut by hand, filed, you get the point. Accuracy would be really bad, each watch would take many, many months of assembly,
> ...


GS are hand 'assembled'. clearly what i meant. well documented. Tudor is a part of Rolex so no, Tudor is not Tudor. There is no Tudor service centre. warranty done by Rolex.

explain to all of us your knowledge of Grand Seiko because clearly you feel its just another Seiko?

if your problem is the Seiko name on the dial than get over it, as it also has GS and/or Grand Seiko on the dial as well. Have you ever handled a GS? maybe do some research before making ignorant comments regarding the brand.

i cannot believe im arguing with a 7000 plus post member who has absolutely no clue in to what hes talking about. sad.


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

is credor credor? or is credor seiko? let us all know with your infinite wisdom;-)


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> is credor credor? or is credor seiko? let us all know with your infinite wisdom;-)


You know, after your statement that a Marinemaster is on par with a Submariner without mentioning any features, facts, comparative review or at least a sustained point of view (even if it is biased) and after your "10000000%" certain about it, pretty much any opinion (or nonsense) is as valid as yours


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

snakeeyes said:


> lmao. go away troll. either your trolling or your an ignorant buffoon who knows nothing about watches period LMAO|>
> 
> i really hope your a troll because your embarassing yourself with your complete and utter lack of knowledge
> 
> ...


It took almost a month, but we finally got our flamethrower!

Congratulations Snakeeyes! Well done!


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> GS are hand 'assembled'. clearly what i meant. well documented. Tudor is a part of Rolex so no, Tudor is not Tudor. There is no Tudor service centre. warranty done by Rolex.
> 
> explain to all of us your knowledge of Grand Seiko because clearly you feel its just another Seiko?
> 
> ...


We only know what you clearly say....The lights do confuse you?


----------



## hidden by leaves (Mar 6, 2010)

snakeeyes said:


> lmao. go away troll. either your trolling or your an ignorant buffoon who knows nothing about watches period LMAO|>
> 
> i really hope your a troll because your embarassing yourself with your complete and utter lack of knowledge
> 
> ...


Although I'm sure you have a stance of some kind behind all the bluster and hysterics, your delivery is weak - to say the least. Please compose yourself and come back with better game. You're embarrassing yourself. You're embarrassing Canada!


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> GS are hand 'assembled'. clearly what i meant. well documented.


Not sure if you're suggesting otherwise, but Rolex movements are also hand assembled.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

*
I have been trying to fit a strap to this totally hand made watch, but The nicest fitting strap is this:*


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

Surely there is a troll on one of the other less civilized forums that needs feeding. I'ma go make some guac now.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Rad Red Brick said:


> Surely there is a troll on one of the other less civilized forums that needs feeding. I'ma go make some guac now.










......


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

little big feather said:


> Oh yeah...Well your Mother wears combat boots!! So there....:-| At the end of the day, Grand Seiko, is still a Seiko.





snakeeyes said:


> so Tudor is a Rolex at the end of the day and Tissot is an Omega?
> 
> got it. thanks rookie.


Here's the thing fellas. I'm pretty sure Seiko is perfectly happy with Grand Seiko being considered a Seiko. It's the biggest thing on the dial for cryin' out loud! The sole purpose of the line is for Seiko to make the best Seiko they can possibly make. If that's good enough for them it ought to be good enough for the rest of us. If some people don't feel that way then Seiko has shown for the last 50 years that they could care less...and that includes disregarding all the terrific free advice I've given them lately.


----------



## adi4 (Dec 20, 2011)

And now time a pretty picture of a completely unrelated watch. 










-adi4


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

hidden by leaves said:


> Although I'm sure you have a stance of some kind behind all the bluster and hysterics, your delivery is weak - to say the least. Please compose yourself and come back with better game. You're embarrassing yourself. You're embarrassing Canada!


So whats your stance on Grand Seiko?

You seem to know your watches unlike some

Lmk


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

adi4 said:


> And now time a pretty picture of a completely unrelated watch.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ahhh...Seikos Credor

clearly walmart material according to some.......

shame


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

snakeeyes said:


> GS are hand 'assembled'. clearly what i meant. well documented.


Well, it's not at all clear that's what you meant, since you seem to view "hand assembled" as a great distinction, whereas in reality every single mechanical watch, with the exception of the Swatch Sistem51, has some degree of hand assembly. On the other hand, very few modern timepieces are handmade, unless you're looking at haute horlogerie timepieces like a Philippe Dufour Simplicity.


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

cedargrove said:


> Not sure if you're suggesting otherwise, but Rolex movements are also hand assembled.


cmon cedergrove, we both know not to the extent of GS. Rolex still use robots and machines in a good portion of the process simply due to the sheer # of watches they must produce daily to keep up with annual #'s.

keep drinking that Rolex marketing kool-aid


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

mleok said:


> Well, it's not at all clear that's what you meant, since you seem to view "hand assembled" as a great distinction, whereas in reality every single mechanical watch, with the exception of the Swatch Sistem51, has some degree of hand assembly. On the other hand, very few modern timepieces are handmade, unless you're looking at haute horlogerie timepieces like a Philippe Dufour Simplicity.


GS is 100% hand assembled from start to finish. not 50% hand assembled...not 75% hand assembled....100%. no machines. no robots. all human hands.


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

snakeeyes said:


> GS is 100% hand assembled from start to finish. not 50% hand assembled...not 75% hand assembled....100%. no machines. no robots. all human hands.


Certainly 0% wart-covered troll hands involved.


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

AAMC said:


> You know, after your statement that a Marinemaster is on par with a Submariner without mentioning any features, facts, comparative review or at least a sustained point of view (even if it is biased) and after your "10000000%" certain about it, pretty much any opinion (or nonsense) is as valid as yours


no need to review. plenty of marinemaster 300 v.s rolex sub threads/reviews out there.


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> GS is 100% hand assembled from start to finish. not 50% hand assembled...not 75% hand assembled....100%. no machines. no robots. all human hands.


So?


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> no need to review. plenty of marinemaster 300 v.s rolex sub threads/reviews out there.


And all of them clearly showing that the MM is NOT on pair with the Sub...I was hoping that you would tell us another of your's "best kept secrets"...


----------



## hidden by leaves (Mar 6, 2010)

snakeeyes said:


> So whats your stance on Grand Seiko?
> 
> You seem to know your watches unlike some
> 
> Lmk


Well I'm not sure how well I know watches, but since you asked...

I appreciate GS for their quality and what (I've read) goes into their workmanship. Yes, I have seen and handled them in person (at the Seiko boutique here before it closed). However, my appreciation essentially ends at a technical level. Frankly i find their design and aesthetics boring: they don't turn me on, to be blunt.

Other manufacturers' models (current and historical) appeal more to me in terms of desirability, and so those are the ones I... desire. As a result, whether they (be it Rolex or Omega or any other brand) are by some measure "better" or "worse" than GS does not matter to me. I simply don't care because it is irrelevant to me. If anyone here is happy to wear GS or Rolex or Timex, then bully for them - Just don't try and ram it down my throat! (No, I can't stand the psycho fanbois around here...)


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

snakeeyes said:


> cmon cedergrove, we both know not to the extent of GS. Rolex still use robots and machines in a good portion of the process simply due to the sheer # of watches they must produce daily to keep up with annual #'s.
> 
> keep drinking that Rolex marketing kool-aid


Enough independant journalists/writers/bloggers/watch enthusiasts have toured Rolex's facilities that we know it to be a fact that their movements are hand assembled (among other components).

I'm not sure which drink is associated with ignorance, but whatever it is, you've obviously consumed gallons.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

hidden by leaves said:


> Well I'm not sure how well I know watches, but since you asked...
> 
> I appreciate GS for their quality and what (I've read) goes into their workmanship. Yes, I have seen and handled them in person (at the Seiko boutique here before it closed). However, my appreciation essentially ends at a technical level. Frankly i find their design and aesthetics boring: they don't turn me on, to be blunt.
> 
> Other manufacturers' models (current and historical) appeal more to me in terms of desirability, and so those are the ones I... desire. As a result, whether they (be it Rolex or Omega or any other brand) are by some measure "better" or "worse" than GS does not matter to me. I simply don't care because it is irrelevant to me. If anyone here is happy to wear GS or Rolex or Timex, then bully for them - Just don't try and ram it down my throat! (No, I can't stand the psycho fanbois around here...)


But, without those psycho fanboys life on here would be sooo boring. I believe Seikophants were put on this forum for my enjoyment.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> But, without those psycho fanboys life on here would be sooo boring. I believe Seikophants were put on this forum for my enjoyment.


Except Domo...Domo is a cool Seikophant and he's Australian too....For you Domo, even if you are a Seikophant...:-!


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

little big feather said:


> Except Domo...Domo is a cool Seikophant and he's Australian too....For you Domo, even if you are a Seikophant...:-!


Well, there are always outliers


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> But, without those psycho fanboys life on here would be sooo boring. I believe Seikophants were put on this forum for my enjoyment.





little big feather said:


> Except Domo...Domo is a cool Seikophant and he's Australian too....For you Domo, even if you are a Seikophant...:-!


So....I'm not even a _little _ bit amusing?


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Domo said:


> So....I'm not even a _little _ bit amusing?


You have your moments.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Domo said:


> So....I'm not even a _little _ bit amusing?


I thoroughly enjoyed your discussion with pithy. I would post a photo of my watch with my Domo, but it's on my desk at work and I'm anywhere but there right now.


----------



## balzebub (May 30, 2010)

Woah, this thread still lives? Come on....this is a never ending debate.. let's just all buy what we like and be a happy WIS family..

Sent via carrier pigeons


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

hidden by leaves said:


> Well I'm not sure how well I know watches, but since you asked...
> 
> I appreciate GS for their quality and what (I've read) goes into their workmanship. Yes, I have seen and handled them in person (at the Seiko boutique here before it closed). However, my appreciation essentially ends at a technical level. Frankly i find their design and aesthetics boring: they don't turn me on, to be blunt.
> 
> Other manufacturers' models (current and historical) appeal more to me in terms of desirability, and so those are the ones I... desire. As a result, whether they (be it Rolex or Omega or any other brand) are by some measure "better" or "worse" than GS does not matter to me. I simply don't care because it is irrelevant to me. If anyone here is happy to wear GS or Rolex or Timex, then bully for them - Just don't try and ram it down my throat! (No, I can't stand the psycho fanbois around here...)


Im not ramming nothing down anyones throat. i took exception to a GS/walmart statement. thats it thats all. for one to make that statement actually implies to me rolex fanboy.

you just acknowledged their workmanship and quality in which i think many will agree meets or exceeds rolex. definitly not anything less than rolex other than 'desireabilty' or 'status'.

this isnt a new debate. its stuck around for a reason. japan v.s swiss. to dismiss GS as just another Seiko is simply a uninformed comment, to say the least.

you clearly dont like their style as i dont like APs style but i will still acknowledge APs quality. and thats ok.

as for MM300 v.s Sub. subjective. rolex has evolved more into a desk diver with the new ceramics/bracelet. the MM300 matched up equally with the discontinued 16610's in the tool watch category. unless of course one views the 3135 as a better movement than the 8L35.

so am i ramming the mm300 down anyones throat. nope. am i asking someone to explain how GS is a walmart brand. yes.

:roll:


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

snakeeyes said:


> Im not ramming nothing down anyones throat. i took exception to a GS/walmart statement. thats it thats all. for one to make that statement actually implies to me rolex fanboy.
> 
> you just acknowledged their workmanship and quality in which i think many will agree meets or exceeds rolex. definitly not anything less than rolex other than 'desireabilty' or 'status'.
> 
> ...


Everyone's moved on, dude. You need to chill out. They're just watches. Jewelry. Accessories. Not the end of the world if people say stuff you disagree with.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

snakeeyes said:


> GS is 100% hand assembled from start to finish. not 50% hand assembled...not 75% hand assembled....100%. no machines. no robots. all human hands.


I hate to burst your bubble, but nearly all parts in Grand Seikos (save for the pallet forks because they're too roughly hewn) are assembled by these:











WrnrG said:


> But, without those psycho fanboys life on here would be sooo boring. I believe Seikophants were put on this forum for my enjoyment.


Here's the thing though: The guys that really understand/know/appreciate/buy Seikos provide some of the best content on WUS. In general I'd guess they're only equaled by members with superior watchmaking knowledge, the scientists and engineers in HEQ and the bona fide high-enders...there's a few social conciseness fellas like Mr. Walrus running around too, but after that you're down to nuts like me and Chronopolis and while you may not believe it now, 50+ pages of robot jokes would get tedious surprisingly quickly.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> Im not ramming nothing down anyones throat. i took exception to a GS/walmart statement. thats it thats all. for one to make that statement actually implies to me rolex fanboy.
> 
> you just acknowledged their workmanship and quality in which i think many will agree meets or exceeds rolex. definitly not anything less than rolex other than 'desireabilty' or 'status'.
> 
> ...


You'll come to realise that little big feather is just stirring you up, and isn't being serious. Just like I enjoy stirring the Omega pot every now and then. He's right that anyone who sees the brand of your watch will think it's 'just a Seiko' and that's the way I happen to like it.

On your point about movements, although I'm a big MM300 fan, the 3135 is the better movement. The 8L35 may be an undecorated Grand Seiko movement, but it's also old and unadjusted and does not contain the MEMS escapement or SPRON mainspring and hairspring, doesn't benefit from the newer versions 3 day PR and has the magic level winder as opposed to the current 9S's very nice winding setup. They use it because it's a tried and tested bulletproof calibre. Much like the 3135.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

ljb187 said:


> I hate to burst your bubble, but nearly all parts in Grand Seikos (save for the pallet forks because they're too roughly hewn) are assembled by these:
> 
> Here's the thing though: The guys that really understand/know/appreciate/buy Seikos provide some of the best content on WUS. In general I'd guess they're only equaled by members with superior watchmaking knowledge, the scientists and engineers in HEQ and the bona fide high-enders...there's a few social conciseness fellas like Mr. Walrus running around too, but after that you're down to nuts like me and Chronopolis and while you may not believe it now, 50+ pages of robot jokes would get tedious surprisingly quickly.


a) I can't believe I got a mention

and

b) I refuse to believe that 50 pages of robot jokes (or avocado debate) could ever get tedious.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

TheWalrus said:


> a) I can't believe I got a mention
> 
> and
> 
> b) I refuse to believe that 50 pages of robot jokes (or avocado debate) could ever get tedious.


I can't believe I spelled "conscious" wrong. Essentially I said you were a guy who likes to go out in public, but doesn't speak much when he does. If you feel that's Steve McQueen then it's job well done. If you're thinking more Dolph Lundgren then you have my apologies.


----------



## hankaarons (Jul 8, 2011)

Well the Stig wears a Snowflake... take that however you want...


----------



## DarthVedder (Jun 12, 2011)

Domo, as a Seiko fan, I always like yo read your posts. I learn a lot from them. 

Thanks.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

ljb187 said:


> I hate to burst your bubble, but nearly all parts in Grand Seikos (save for the pallet forks because they're too roughly hewn) are assembled by these: _[daft picture of a robot] _


I think it perhaps was just bad phrasing, but there is no machine assembly of a GS whatsoever. Every single part inside is _machine made, _but the entire movement is hand assembled, hand regulated (9S only), the dial is hand set with indices, the plates are even jewel set by hand using a press, the case, bracelet, indices, hands are hand polished, bracelet hand assembled, etc etc. The balance wheel is even minutely adjusted by hand for regulation.



hankaarons said:


> Well the Stig wears a Snowflake... take that however you want...


For SRS?



DarthVedder said:


> Domo, as a Seiko fan, I always like yo read your posts. I learn a lot from them.
> 
> Thanks.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Domo said:


> I think it perhaps was just bad phrasing, but there is no machine assembly of a GS whatsoever. Every single part inside is _machine made, _but the entire movement is hand assembled, hand regulated (9S only), the dial is hand set with indices, the plates are even jewel set by hand using a press, the case, bracelet, indices, hands are hand polished, bracelet hand assembled, etc etc. The balance wheel is even minutely adjusted by hand for regulation.


In fairness, that was a Seiko robot clock, but the rest is understood without question.


----------



## Tagdevil (Jul 20, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> Im not ramming nothing down anyones throat. i took exception to a GS/walmart statement. thats it thats all. for one to make that statement actually implies to me rolex fanboy.
> 
> you just acknowledged their workmanship and quality in which i think many will agree meets or exceeds rolex. definitly not anything less than rolex other than 'desireabilty' or 'status'.
> 
> ...


I basically see the MM300 as almost incomparable. It's got a size, thickness, and personality to it that makes it unique to the point it's hard to compare to others. It's a phenomenal very high-quality watch but not for everyone for sure due to the way it wears and feels. IMO guys with bigger wrists can tame and love the beast where as it might make others crazy.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

Cant we all just get along? 









Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

gagnello said:


> Cant we all just get along?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I sure can&#8230;


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

bu11itt said:


> I sure can&#8230;


Yay


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Tagdevil said:


> I basically see the MM300 as almost incomparable. It's got a size, thickness, and personality to it that makes it unique to the point it's hard to compare to others. It's a phenomenal very high-quality watch but not for everyone for sure due to the way it wears and feels. IMO guys with bigger wrists can tame and love the beast where as it might make others crazy.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



"Those who actually believe this are said to live in LA LA Land":-d


----------



## Tagdevil (Jul 20, 2013)

Stellite said:


> "Those who actually believe this are said to live in LA LA Land":-d


Not incomparable in that it has no equal in quality, but incomparable in that the nature of the watch with its extraordinary height to width ratio makes it a different watch to wear and difficult (and unique) to compare to most others. I'd bet that many with a smaller than 7.5" wrist would probably hate it.......IMO of course.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Tagdevil said:


> Not incomparable in that it has no equal in quality, but incomparable in that the nature of the watch with its extraordinary height to width ratio makes it a different watch to wear and difficult (and unique) to compare to most others. I'd bet that many with a smaller than 7.5" wrist would probably hate it.......IMO of course.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Got it. That makes sense. The Deep Blue Depthmaster 3000 fits that category as well.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

These videos might give hints about how Rolexes are produced and assembled. They suggest there is quite a high degree of hand assembly in the production of a Rolex.


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

TheWalrus said:


> Everyone's moved on, dude. You need to chill out. They're just watches. Jewelry. Accessories. Not the end of the world if people say stuff you disagree with.


Can't...


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)




----------



## U_Devrim (Mar 24, 2014)

jkpa said:


> I predict 25+ pages.


It already reached 58 pages..


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

Despite the posts, I think it's telling how civilized this thread is that is pushing 600 posts without being shut down. Well, civilized RELATIVELY . . .


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)




----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Rad Red Brick said:


>


I had no idea.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

It's haas or go home for me.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Domo said:


> It's haas or go home for me.


*+1*


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Rad Red Brick said:


>


I don't know where this came from, but I have a avocado tree in my backyard that yields what according to this chart might be Oro *****.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Also, as promised to Domo, here is my desk Domo with an SNK809:


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> I don't know where this came from, but I have a avocado tree in my backyard that yields what according to this chart might be Oro *****.


My avocado analogy from the Anti-Rolex sentiments thread has gone WUS memetic.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Arthur M said:


> My avocado analogy from the Anti-Rolex sentiments thread has gone WUS memetic.


I believe I brought it into this thread with an above posting because I couldn't remember which Rolex thread spawned the avocado love.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

Haas is #1 on the chart for a reason...:-!
When you're the best...You're the best...b-)


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

little big feather said:


> Haas is #1 on the chart for a reason...:-!
> When you're the best...You're the best...b-)


So you're saying that Haas is the Rolex of the Avocado world?


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> I don't know where this came from, but I have a avocado tree in my backyard that yields what according to this chart might be Oro *****.


Pics or it didn't happen.

:-d


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Ace McLoud said:


> Pics or it didn't happen.
> 
> :-d


You want pics of my avocado tree? Okay, but I'm at work right now.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> You want pics of my avocado tree? Okay, but I'm at work right now.


Yes.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

With your screen name and the day's newspaper in the shot.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Ace McLoud said:


> Pics or it didn't happen.
> 
> :-d





Domo said:


> With your screen name and the day's newspaper in the shot.


Here are the avocados I'm holding hostage:










And a wider shot of the tree:


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> Here are the avocados I'm holding hostage:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You get a like just for going the distance. I hate avocado though; texture's nasty.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Arthur M said:


> You get a like just for going the distance. I hate avocado though; texture's nasty.


Not even guacamole?


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

ljb187 said:


> Not even guacamole?


Not even guacamole. It's just one of those foods for me; I can't stand them. I don't want to touch or taste them. The lady likes them, however. All the better for her; she doesn't have to share.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Arthur M said:


> Not even guacamole. It's just one of those foods for me; I can't stand them. I don't want to touch or taste them. The lady likes them, however. All the better for her; she doesn't have to share.


Fair enough...the no touch thing is extra fascinating though.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

WrnrG said:


> Here are the avocados I'm holding hostage:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bet you never thought you'd be doing that today?


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Ace McLoud said:


> Bet you never thought you'd be doing that today?


I definitely don't go around taking pictures of avocados.


----------



## Rad Red Brick (Mar 30, 2006)

WrnrG said:


> Here are the avocados I'm holding hostage:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sweet avo tree! You guys must get a crazy surplus from that - what do you do with them all? Delicious stuff growing on trees in people's backyards is one of my favorite things about socal.


----------



## cpl (Jan 21, 2014)

How did we get to Seiko vs Rolex vs avocado?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Rad Red Brick said:


> Sweet avo tree! You guys must get a crazy surplus from that - what do you do with them all? Delicious stuff growing on trees in people's backyards is one of my favorite things about socal.


It used to be a lot taller, but we trimmed the top because branches were breaking.

When the season hits we get more avocados than we know what to do with. Everyone that comes over, family or friend, goes home with a grocery bag full of them. There are way more avocados than we have the ability to eat.

My neighbor has a pomegranate tree. Growing up in L.A. we used to pick fruits from all kinds of trees from all kinds of yards. Always liked the sugar cane though.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

Arthur M said:


> You get a like just for going the distance. I hate avocado though; texture's nasty.


*how dare u indirectly somehow imply that us rolex owners are the devils' spawn????????*


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

Wow. I haven't been back to this thread for almost a week and it's taken me a pizza and two coffees to catch up and learn that the use of a flame-thrower results in black avocados.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

cpl said:


> How did we get to Seiko vs Rolex vs avocado?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Everyone knows Avocado >> Rolex & Seiko


----------



## drunken monkey (Jun 22, 2011)

bu11itt said:


> Everyone knows Avocado >> Rolex & Seiko


Only if it's in-haas


----------



## inhaus (Jul 30, 2014)

I don't have time to read all 61 pages... Who won?


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

inhaus said:


> I don't have time to read all 61 pages... Who won?


The Avocado.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

guac


TheWalrus said:


> The Avocado.


----------



## WatchNRolla (Feb 4, 2014)

inhaus said:


> I don't have time to read all 61 pages... Who won?


The Speedy!


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Anyone who disses Avocado's should be banned from this forum, FOREVER!!!


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

mikeylacroix said:


> *how dare u indirectly somehow imply that us rolex owners are the devils' spawn????????*


If Avocado>Rolex and avocado is nasty (obvious factual statement, duh), then not only did I somehow imply you are a devil spawn (I believe it was because I sad the texture is nasty), but also that you have bad taste in watches!

I kid. I love Rolex. Avocado, not so much :-d.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

I love rubbing avocado on my Rolex


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

I propose that this thread get moved to the Cafe and renamed: 'The Avocado Thread'.

That's what happened to the 'Burgers' thread, which ironically also started off as a Rolex thread.


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Ace McLoud said:


> I propose that this thread get moved to the Cafe and renamed: 'The Avocado Thread'.
> 
> That's what happened to the 'Burgers' thread, which ironically also started off as a Rolex thread.


I'm proud of playing a very influential part in turning that thread into a burger thread... Easily my favorites thread.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

So wait...avocado burgers are the best now..??


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

mikeylacroix said:


> So wait...avocado burgers are the best now..??


I can't see anything wrong with that assertion.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

I do lke a bit of avacado on my burgers occasionally. It goes surprisingly well on pizza too.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

Bacon. Avocado. Melted jarlsberg. Balsamic vinegrette. Grassfed beef patty. Caramelized onions. Tomato relish. No bun no greens.


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

Ace McLoud said:


> I do lke a bit of avacado on my burgers occasionally. It goes surprisingly well on pizza too.


I was at a restaurant last night where they included bits of avocado in my Tuna Tar-Tar. Quite nice.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

There was a place in Monterey,Ca., loved the Bacon, Lettuce,Tomato & Avocado sandwiches....:-!
Had a good hot dog too.


----------



## BigEd781 (Aug 3, 2014)

Stellite said:


> I love rubbing avocado on my Rolex


I seriously love checking this thread every ten pages or so. You never know where the conversation will lead.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

BigEd781 said:


> I seriously love checking this thread every ten pages or so. You never know where the conversation will lead.


so a trade of this + cash







for this








aye or nay?


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

mikeylacroix said:


> So wait...avocado burgers are the best now..??


You can't forget the bacon... That makes it perfect.


----------



## dgbaker (Dec 9, 2013)

snakeeyes said:


> GS is 100% hand assembled from start to finish. not 50% hand assembled...not 75% hand assembled....100%. no machines. no robots. all human hands.


the Citizen Skyhawk AT is 100 percent hand assembled as are the Capanola and Signature Series, so are Steinharts and Lum Tec etc. ad nauseum ad infinitum


----------



## dgbaker (Dec 9, 2013)

double post


----------



## WatchNRolla (Feb 4, 2014)

Crunchy peanut butter > Smooth peanut butter > avocado


----------



## Horologic (Apr 26, 2012)

Smooth PB > Crunchy

For iconic design, fabled reliability, je ne sais quoi,
Rolex Submariner or SD > Any GS Diver.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

WatchNRolla said:


> Crunchy peanut butter > Smooth peanut butter > avocado


blend with coconut milk. ice. maple syrup. a banana perhaps?
awesome creamy smoothness


----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

Has Avocado = Rolex

Bacon Avocado = Seiko 

Both pretty tasty but the Has has the brand recognition.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

wristclock said:


> Has Avocado = Rolex
> 
> Bacon Avocado = Seiko
> 
> Both pretty tasty but the Has has the brand recognition.


So you're saying that Seiko is the equivalent of ruining a perfectly good, and healthy, Avocado with the overwhelming (some might say abusive) taste of 'high in salt and bad fat' bacon?


----------



## dgbaker (Dec 9, 2013)

are there any adults on this site?
re: PB or fruits; grow up; you are embarrassing yourselves.
and
are VIOLATING the TOS here, where are the mods to put an end to the childish antics .


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

uh, oh . . . wait, let me go pull up a chair . . .


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

TheWalrus said:


> So you're saying that Seiko is the equivalent of ruining a perfectly good, and healthy, Avocado with the overwhelming (some might say abusive) taste of 'high in salt and bad fat' bacon?


And you call yourself a Canadian! It is the Official Meat of Canada.....Canadian Bacon...:-s


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

dgbaker said:


> are there any adults on this site?
> re: PB or fruits; grow up; you are embarrassing yourselves.
> and
> are VIOLATING the TOS here, where are the mods to put an end to the childish antics .


My apologies, sir. I'll cease all frivolity.


----------



## Arthur M (Nov 9, 2013)

dgbaker said:


> are there any adults on this site?
> re: PB or fruits; grow up; you are embarrassing yourselves.
> and
> are VIOLATING the TOS here, where are the mods to put an end to the childish antics .


Some mods have partaken in "childish antics" like this. Relax, part of being an adult is balancing seriousness with levity.


----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

TheWalrus said:


> So you're saying that Seiko is the equivalent of ruining a perfectly good, and healthy, Avocado with the overwhelming (some might say abusive) taste of 'high in salt and bad fat' bacon?


LOL Im taling about brands, Bacon is a brand of avocado. Has is the avo that every grocery store wants to display because everyone knows the brand. Bacon is a good avo, just dosent fetch the premium.


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

dgbaker said:


> are there any adults on this site?
> re: PB or fruits; grow up; you are embarrassing yourselves.
> and
> are VIOLATING the TOS here, where are the mods to put an end to the childish antics .













TheWalrus said:


> My apologies, sir. I'll cease all frivolity.


For the love of God no!!! I love watch talk and all; but if all we had were dry discussions of watch stats that might just drive me to drink (well, drink more...)


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

Horologic said:


> Smooth PB > Crunchy
> 
> For iconic design, fabled reliability, je ne sais quoi,
> Rolex Submariner or SD > Any GS Diver.


Who the hell is smooth pb and how is he better than me? I take offense at your insult!


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

Crunchy said:


> Who the hell is smooth pb and how is he better than me? I take offense at your insult!


ring up the mob!!!


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

dgbaker said:


> are there any adults on this site?
> re: PB or fruits; grow up; you are embarrassing yourselves.
> and
> are VIOLATING the TOS here, where are the mods to put an end to the childish antics .


If you read and participate in enough of these types of threads you learn that the frivolity is what keeps them from becoming overly heated. A true "adult" knows not to take themselves or others too seriously all the time. It is a watch forum, not a round table working on the cure for cancer.


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> If you read and participate in enough of these types of threads you learn that the frivolity is what keeps them from becoming overly heated. A true "adult" knows not to take themselves or others too seriously all the time. It is a watch forum, not a round table working on the cure for cancer.


dgbaker does not participate in the gray market
nor will he partake in our frivolousness!


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

mikeylacroix said:


> dgbaker does not participate in the gray market


You mean BLACK MARKET!!!!!


----------



## LeopardBear (Aug 7, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> If you read and participate in enough of these types of threads you learn that the frivolity is what keeps them from becoming overly heated. A true "adult" knows not to take themselves or others too seriously all the time. It is a watch forum, not a round table working on the cure for cancer.


Excuse me, but thousand dollar jewelry for men is really really really serious.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

LeopardBear said:


> Excuse me, but thousand dollar jewelry for men is really really really serious.


Damn right it's serious. Watches are the only thing in life worth taking seriously! :-d


----------



## emaja (Mar 6, 2014)

dgbaker said:


> are there any adults on this site?
> re: PB or fruits; grow up; you are embarrassing yourselves.
> and
> are VIOLATING the TOS here, where are the mods to put an end to the childish antics .


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

GlennO said:


> Damn right it's serious. Watches are the only thing in life worth taking seriously! :-d


I told my wife that.

It's hard to get a good night's sleep on the couch.


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

little big feather said:


> And you call yourself a Canadian! It is the Official Meat of Canada.....Canadian Bacon...:-s


We don't call anything "Canadian bacon" up here. There's just "bacon" and "Peameal bacon". I believe the latter is what you refer to as Canadian bacon.

Don't get me started on bacon and avocado sandwiches....deeeeeliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicious.


----------



## tantor67 (Aug 28, 2011)

I am actually shocked that Seiko has not introduced a new line of high end watches that do not use the Seiko name. Like when Toyota and Nissan went upmarket with their Lexus and Infinity lines. That being said I have never lusted after a Seiko and a lot of that has to do with how their line goes from $100 watches to the super expensive Grand Seiko line. Rolex has spent years and millions of dollars crafting their image as an aspirational watch and as a advertising major in college I think they have done an amazing job. How many one million dollar Seiko's do we see at auction? Now to the question of which one is better, they both get the job done and you have to pick which one will make you happy.


----------



## cadeallaw (Jun 5, 2014)

we figure out a winner yet?


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Ace McLoud said:


> I told my wife that.
> 
> It's hard to get a good night's sleep on the couch.


I bought a really comfy couch for the upstairs loving room...


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

cadeallaw said:


> we figure out a winner yet?


Yup, the Haas avacado.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

cedargrove said:


> We don't call anything "Canadian bacon" up here. There's just "bacon" and "Peameal bacon". I believe the latter is what you refer to as Canadian bacon.
> 
> Don't get me started on bacon and avocado sandwiches....deeeeeliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicious.


I've actually never heard of the term peameal bacon before... and I do see the term Canadian Bacon up here as well.

Which side of the country are you on? I'm wondering if this might be an east-west thing, too.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

bu11itt said:


> I bought a really comfy couch for the upstairs loving room...


'Loving room'? Freudian slip or too-much-information?


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

Had nachos last night, got to have guacamole with them. Going to have the leftover guac with huevos racheros this morning. 

#avocado


----------



## movet22 (Jun 12, 2011)

cuchulain said:


> People wear Rolex for the prestige of the watch, like driving a fancy sports car. Some do it to appease their ego, some do it to compensate, and some just do it because it's a panty dropper. It's no mystery a lot of women are drawn to money, no better way to show that then with a Rolex on your wrist.
> 
> At the end of the day watches like Rolex are the apex in conspicuous consumption, it's all about showing you're better than the next guy and keeping up with the joneses.
> 
> I can't see any other reason to pay 10k for a watch that clearly isn't worth that.


I wear Rolex because they were the innovators of a lot of the features in today's dive watches that are often taken for granted in these discussions. I also like the overall design, again as an original-to-them look.

I will say though that commentaries, such as yours, into the motives of those with good taste come off as a thinly veiled foray into a certain Deadly Sin.


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

TheWalrus said:


> I've actually never heard of the term peameal bacon before... and I do see the term Canadian Bacon up here as well.
> 
> Which side of the country are you on? I'm wondering if this might be an east-west thing, too.


Born Vancouver, live in Ontario. Maybe it's a Central thing?


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)

anyways..i have zero shame
i will ask for a discount/better price anywhere
rolex boutiques...tomford...the wet market...
anywhere

i will never pay full price if i can get a better price somehow/somewhere


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

Ace McLoud said:


> 'Loving room'? Freudian slip or too-much-information?


Errrr&#8230; well&#8230; um&#8230; you see&#8230; what had happened was&#8230; Hey look! A Rolex!!


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

TheWalrus said:


> So you're saying that Seiko is the equivalent of ruining a perfectly good, and healthy, Avocado with the overwhelming (some might say abusive) taste of 'high in salt and bad fat' bacon?


How dare you speak of bacon in that way!? Bacon is the greatest thing ever invented!

... Mmmm, bacon...


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

cadeallaw said:


> we figure out a winner yet?


Bacon. It's always bacon.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

Bacon and avocado on spinach rules!!


----------



## Morethan1 (Jul 28, 2012)

I believe we have topic drift.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

If you aren't going to eat bacon straight one must try Millionaire's bacon, plenty of recipes online but if you are in San Francisco you must try it at Sweet Maple on Sutter Street!!! If Homer ever had it he would drool for the rest of his life.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

Morethan1 said:


> I believe we have topic drift.


Who cares. The mods are mocking us. Enjoy.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Who cares. The mods are mocking us. Enjoy.


Beats the heck of of where a topic like this often goes...


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 14, 2013)

ilitig8 said:


> If you aren't going to eat bacon straight one must try Millionaire's bacon, plenty of recipes online but if you are in San Francisco you must try it at Sweet Maple on Sutter Street!!! If Homer ever had it he would drool for the rest of his life.


Damn you!! And I thought Rolex were good!!

http://bacontoday.com/millionaires-bacon-million-dollar-bacon/


----------



## wristclock (Jul 5, 2010)

Creating threads that have legs must include names like seiko, rolex, invicta and..........Avocados


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

It refuses to die.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Damn you!! And I thought Rolex were good!!
> 
> http://bacontoday.com/millionaires-bacon-million-dollar-bacon/


That does look good, though on a side note you guys have a different cut of bacon than we do:

A Guide to Bacon Styles, and How to Make Proper British Rashers | The Paupered Chef


----------



## HapaHapa (May 7, 2013)

Ace McLoud said:


> 'Loving room'? Freudian slip or too-much-information?


I thought he meant for the bedroom......


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

HapaHapa said:


> I thought he meant for the bedroom......


I hoped he didn't mean for the bedroom.....


----------



## sleepyhead123 (Jun 2, 2014)

_And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive, stayin' alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive._


----------



## Watchnut12 (Sep 2, 2013)

little big feather said:


> We only know what you clearly say....The lights do confuse you?


Why was I not invited to this Rolex vs Seiko SHOWDOWN XXVII???? Grand Seiko is hand made 1000000% Then they are nurtured and nested by the individual watchmaker until the SpringDrive movement is hatched. Final inspection goes through rainbow land in the deep mountains of Japan...where's Rolex pieces are created by a Illuminati system!! Evil robots are used!! LMAO. Who cares??! Their watches, peices of jewlery. As much as I love GS, at the end of the day their all just watches....people will choose what strikes them best.

As far as LBF being a troll and and having minimal knowledge on watches... Far from it ...(to the new guy coming in swinging)


----------



## WrnrG (Jan 24, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Damn you!! And I thought Rolex were good!!
> 
> http://bacontoday.com/millionaires-bacon-million-dollar-bacon/


Well, I know who I have a date with Saturday morning.

Bacon = Love


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

Watchnut12 said:


> Why was I not invited to this Rolex vs Seiko SHOWDOWN XXVII???? *Grand Seiko is hand made 1000000% Then they are nurtured and nested by the individual watchmaker until the SpringDrive movement is hatched. Final inspection goes through rainbow land in the deep mountains of Japan...*where's Rolex pieces are created by a Illuminati system!! Evil robots are used!! LMAO. Who cares??! Their watches, peices of jewlery. As much as I love GS, at the end of the day their all just watches....people will choose what strikes them best.
> 
> As far as LBF being a troll and and having minimal knowledge on watches... Far from it ...(to the new guy coming in swinging)


Ahhhh....I see you've been on the factory tour?


----------



## bu11itt (Dec 9, 2013)

HapaHapa said:


> I thought he meant for the bedroom......





Ace McLoud said:


> I hoped he didn't mean for the bedroom.....


<<Raises hand>> Uh guys, I'm right here...


----------



## HapaHapa (May 7, 2013)

Oh, sorry. Didn't see you there. 


Eric


----------



## mikeylacroix (Apr 20, 2013)




----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

Well, I don't know about Seiko dive watches, but you have to be all man to wear a Seiko chronograph!















Now excuse me while I go wrestle a bear.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

rfortson said:


> Well, I don't know about Seiko dive watches, but you have to be all man to wear a Seiko chronograph!
> 
> View attachment 1646236
> View attachment 1646237
> ...


Whoa - those have to take some sort of 'worst ads of all time' cake. Especially the second one.

That said... I kind of want one, now.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

TheWalrus said:


> Whoa - those have to take some sort of 'worst ads of all time' cake. Especially the second one.
> 
> That said... I kind of want one, now.


When I whisper into the ladies' ears "You wanna see my Seiko chronograph?" they do indeed sigh, but not in the way the ad suggests.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

TheWalrus said:


> Whoa - those have to take some sort of 'worst ads of all time' cake. Especially the second one.
> 
> *That said... I kind of want one, now.*


I know exactly what you mean. I have that watch in the second ad, and once I saw the ad, it actually did make me want to wear it more often. All you armchair psychologists, have at me!


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

I've been away for a while. This thread turned out great!!!


----------



## Hl247b (Mar 25, 2013)

This thread shows why we all love WUS. Lmfao.


----------



## Ace McLoud (Jun 28, 2013)

If we keep bumping it like this, somebody is going to come along and flame it up again.

Maybe it's time to let it bow out gracefully before that happens. Goodness knows we don't want some noob ressurecting this in a years time with some anti Rolex/Seiko tirade.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

rfortson said:


> Well, I don't know about Seiko dive watches, but you have to be all man to wear a Seiko chronograph!
> 
> View attachment 1646236
> View attachment 1646237
> ...


I love cushion case watches. Those old Seikos are so cool.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

mikeylacroix said:


> View attachment 1646227


*SHOW OFF!!!!!!:-d*


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

geoffbot said:


> I've been away for a while. This thread turned out great!!!


Especially if you like avocados.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

GlennO said:


> Especially if you like avocados.


I really do! Eat em every day. They came up in another OT thread the other day actually - maybe the burgers one?


----------



## WatchTheTime7 (Feb 20, 2013)

''''''


----------



## Jumpingjalapeno (Sep 22, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> I have a Rolex and had a GRAND Seiko.
> 
> They are said to be on par with each other.
> 
> ...


Please tell us why the GS was disappointing. We only ever hear the positives


----------



## U_Devrim (Mar 24, 2014)

U_Devrim said:


> It already reached 58 pages..


i had not have a look at this thread since page 58.. now i am trying to figure out when it became so delicious with ham & avocado..


----------



## 59yukon01 (Aug 27, 2014)

Having never owned a Rolex, and I REALLY do like their watches, I can only speak from my experience with Seiko. I've worn a SXK173 Diver almost daily for 16 years without ever having it serviced. It's never leaked and kept excellent time until very recently. During this time it had been dropped on a tile floor more than once, being worn while I was swinging a sledge hammer, yard work, swimming, snorkeling, running, going to gym, basically any and all kinds of other abuses. To say it was taken for granted would be an understatement. Considering I paid $135 for this tells me it is one hell of a watch. Is it a Rolex, certainly not, much like you'd say a Ford is not a Lexus. However, in my eyes you would be hard pressed to find a better value with these well respected divers.


----------



## lxxrr (Jul 25, 2013)

I'm ashamed to even admit to reading this thread. And to think there is a serious debate about this


----------



## oak1971 (Aug 19, 2013)

They all suck compared to Invicta. ;-)


----------



## lxxrr (Jul 25, 2013)

Not even close. Now close the thread


----------



## Shockwave (Nov 19, 2013)

59yukon01 said:


> Having never owned a Rolex, and I REALLY do like their watches, I can only speak from my experience with Seiko. I've worn a SXK173 Diver almost daily for 16 years without ever having it serviced. It's never leaked and kept excellent time until very recently. During this time it had been dropped on a tile floor more than once, being worn while I was swinging a sledge hammer, yard work, swimming, snorkeling, running, going to gym, basically any and all kinds of other abuses. To say it was taken for granted would be an understatement. Considering I paid $135 for this tells me it is one hell of a watch. Is it a Rolex, certainly not, much like you'd say a Ford is not a Lexus. However, in my eyes you would be hard pressed to find a better value with these well respected divers.


What kind of strap/bracelet was it on?


----------



## fastfras (Jul 23, 2014)

Look at t this way. 19 years ago I purchased a new Sub, today the watch is worth triple what i paid for it, quality through and through. I own many seiko divers, from 7002's to 300mm's, they are great watches all of them still work and some even look good. however, none of them appreciate like a Rolex, ANY rolex but particularly a stainless steel sport model, like an Explorer 1, GMT, Seadweller, Submariner... I still buy new watches of both brands, a new Explorer and only 2 days ago purchased a SARB 017, why? Because they are both good watches. Limited quantity almost always appreciates over time, If you purchased a new 911SC in 1980 it would be worth more today (assuming you looked after the car) however, buying a new Honda civic in 1980 (also looking after the vehicle) would not have the same value effect. Not beating on Seiko, but most people on this Forum will one day have the opportunity to own a Rolex and then they will understand the difference, it's a quality thing. By the bye, I'm wearing a modded 7002 right now, can see my rolex watch on the counter...


----------



## Shockwave (Nov 19, 2013)

fastfras said:


> Look at t this way. 19 years ago I purchased a new Sub, today the watch is worth triple what i paid for it, quality through and through. I own many seiko divers, from 7002's to 300mm's, they are great watches all of them still work and some even look good. however, none of them appreciate like a Rolex, ANY rolex but particularly a stainless steel sport model, like an Explorer 1, GMT, Seadweller, Submariner... I still buy new watches of both brands, a new Explorer and only 2 days ago purchased a SARB 017, why? Because they are both good watches. Limited quantity almost always appreciates over time, If you purchased a new 911SC in 1980 it would be worth more today (assuming you looked after the car) however, buying a new Honda civic in 1980 (also looking after the vehicle) would not have the same value effect. Not beating on Seiko, but most people on this Forum will one day have the opportunity to own a Rolex and then they will understand the difference, it's a quality thing. By the bye, I'm wearing a modded 7002 right now, can see my rolex watch on the counter...


I'm sure if an skx007 was worn in the next Bond flick prices would go up on the seiko as well. Maybe not Roxelesque but marketing helps.


----------



## Smaug (Jan 8, 2011)

Quality is the same. Materials and design are better in the Rolex, just not commensurate with the price. 


(Sent from Tapatalk!)


----------



## AAMC (May 25, 2011)

Smaug said:


> Quality is the same. Materials and design are better in the Rolex, just not commensurate with the price.
> 
> (Sent from Tapatalk!)


Here we go again...

Carry on guys


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Smaug said:


> Quality is the same. Materials and design are better in the Rolex, just not commensurate with the price.


What is your definition of quality?


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

Smaug said:


> Quality is the same. Materials and design are better in the Rolex, just not commensurate with the price.
> 
> (Sent from Tapatalk!)


My guess is you are comparing GS Divers to Rolex, and I would agree on the first part.

If you actually do mean the basic Seiko monster line or even the mm line, I disagree. Quality is not even close.


----------



## little big feather (Mar 6, 2013)

I died!! Why bring me back to life? Everything that could be said...has been said. Let me die...let me die!


----------



## tylerldurden (Feb 2, 2015)

Just my .02 . My income is north of $500k USD per year. I chose to get a seiko skx173 over rolex for my daily as I just can't justify the expense and the pain should anything happen to it. I can afford a Rolex I just chose not to get one. Plus my Dad brought a Seiko back from Vietnam and I was always fascinated by it as it was the nicest watch I had been exposed to. My SKX173 isn't exactly like his but it's a nice homage and it's new. 

There is a cool book by Thomas Stanley called "Stop Acting Rich." He is the same author as the book "The Millionaire next door." Of the many folks he surveyed most true millionaires wear Seiko or Timex. Now a million isn't what it used to be but it's still alot of money and a worthy goal and an interesting statistic. 

Rolex is beautiful and has cache' Seiko can't rival but I am fine with my Seiko.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

tylerldurden said:


> Just my .02 . My income is north of $500k USD per year. I chose to get a seiko skx173 over rolex for my daily as I just can't justify the expense and the pain should anything happen to it. I can afford a Rolex I just chose not to get one. Plus my Dad brought a Seiko back from Vietnam and I was always fascinated by it as it was the nicest watch I had been exposed to. My SKX173 isn't exactly like his but it's a nice homage and it's new.
> 
> There is a cool book by Thomas Stanley called "Stop Acting Rich." He is the same author as the book "The Millionaire next door." Of the many folks he surveyed most true millionaires wear Seiko or Timex. Now a million isn't what it used to be but it's still alot of money and a worthy goal and an interesting statistic.
> 
> Rolex is beautiful and has cache' Seiko can't rival but I am fine with my Seiko.


Thank you for stopping by WUS just to tell us how you make $500k and you can afford a Rolex but chose to buy a lesser quality watch.:-!


----------



## pockits (Feb 7, 2015)

I think this is a debate of means. 
I buy what I can afford and like. If I can afford a Rolex, and I like it, I`ll buy it.

Lets not confuse things. In terms of reliability I know a seiko will work... and thats why they are famous, because they do the ticking. On the other hand, literally no one in this era buys a rolex to go into a Satdive anymore. There are other options out there. When i bought my SDDS i was fascinated of the over engineer of the watch. I was in deep love with how was made. And call me crazy, I live in Chile, and that very same summer we had one of the biggest earthquakes on written history.. I put all the watches I had in that time in my backpack, and guess what i was wearing when i was going to check my warehouse... There is no need for me to tell you... I was wearing a Rolex.. Call me stupid but i though if the world was going to end... this might be ticking up to the end.


----------



## tylerldurden (Feb 2, 2015)

My point was only that I can afford one but chose not get a Rolex. No judgement here. I have a vintage dress Omega I bought 8 years ago. My only point was that for a dive watch I want a watch I can actually dive/swim or work in.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)




----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

tylerldurden said:


> My point was only that I can afford one but chose not get a Rolex. No judgement here. I have a vintage dress Omega I bought 8 years ago. My only point was that for a dive watch I want a watch I can actually dive/swim or work in.


I get it, but that wasn't really the question. The question was if seiko divers(not GS mind you) are equal to Rolex in quality and the fact is that they are not. Not even in the same dimension.


----------



## yourronny79 (Jan 21, 2009)

lxxrr said:


> Not even close. Now close the thread


Sorry for throwing wood into the fire , some thoughts to share on a wet cold night:-

Why is rolex so expensive:-

A) Well the simple answer is because it's "swiss". There's a premium associated with swissness. Swiss banks, swiss chocolates, swiss gold, swiss watches ...get it? Broadly speaking, no one would think of japan when you think of millionaires(no offense to anyone) - that said, many rich Japanese swarm swiss watch shops during their overseas trips . Ask yourself why!? It's all about perception , emotions and identity!
B) for the more academic minded- I recommend watching a fantastic BBC documentary called "Century of self" on YouTube - eddy bernays, was the one who discovered a link between brands & emotions. "feeling good" after association with something like a rolex is a psychological thing, very cleverly exploited by advertisers & marketers
C) what differentiates a rolex from any other brand except pateks is "holding value". It's like a gold standard in watchmaking. Your grandson will certainly be pleased to inherit a rolex instead of a seiko. Very very few companies manage to "hold" design constant and still retain value.

Now to the flip side :-
A) Rolex is still beating the old drum. Under the name of tradition, it's rising prices to a point it's a bit "outrageous". this is a flawed product strategy in IMO. While it's true for most swiss brands, over expensive watches will pave way for more honest, true and hungry watchmakers to recapitalize. Gimmicks & marketing BS can only go so far.
B) I just got a SBDC027 Sieko today. I can't recommend it higher . I have a 2013 sub as well but God damn the Sieko is "all out". Feature by feature, I'd say seiko Is comparable if not better. Ps:- the material, steel , glass etc is all super quality in this limited edition sieko. Get one now before it vanishes (only 2000 pieces)! If you have both in hand you will definitely question why is rolex $8k compared to it's more humble counterpart (must be the better steel huh? Lol)
C) IMO sieko tasted mud once the quartz boom went bust. The company has licked its wounds & finally regained some sense (after 50 years) and revived their automatic collection. I'd say check out their "local Japanese" collection for some fine display. It's different from the sub $300 crap you find in the west . they produce some of the most beautiful clean automatic watches available [email protected] outstanding prices. It has a HUGE potential for sure but hope they get some European thinking in their close minded Japanese boardroom!
D) Grand Sieko is a MASTER CLASS. Period. It's a piece of art, I predict this collection biting (& spitting out) a lot of swiss brands in the next 3-5 years IF sieko acts smartly. If everything fails it will certainly have a great resale as it'll be a collectors /cult item. Hopefully they do the marketing / brand management required so it catches up , the product itself is fantastic. I'd say a simple insert in the Economist OR TIME Magazine would get the required #eyeballs!?

As closing notes:- I give big a thumbs up to seiko for their come back and honest watchmaking in such a over hyped, over charged market . Same time, a good look-alike actor can never demand the same $$$ as an original actor. So right now Rolex leads for it's consistency & originality in design, craftsmanship, value & concept. While Sieko I hope you bring out better than anyone else has ever imagined or produced in terms of style , price , design & mechanism! Only time will decide the outcome and fate of these two very dissimilar yet historically significant watchmakers...


----------



## Watch Fan in Beijing (Jul 15, 2009)

tylerldurden said:


> Just my .02 . My income is north of $500k USD per year. I chose to get a seiko skx173 over rolex for my daily as I just can't justify the expense and the pain should anything happen to it. I can afford a Rolex I just chose not to get one. Plus my Dad brought a Seiko back from Vietnam and I was always fascinated by it as it was the nicest watch I had been exposed to. My SKX173 isn't exactly like his but it's a nice homage and it's new.
> 
> There is a cool book by Thomas Stanley called "Stop Acting Rich." He is the same author as the book "The Millionaire next door." Of the many folks he surveyed most true millionaires wear Seiko or Timex. Now a million isn't what it used to be but it's still alot of money and a worthy goal and an interesting statistic.
> 
> Rolex is beautiful and has cache' Seiko can't rival but I am fine with my Seiko.


Wow, half a million bucks a year. Why are you even wasting time on this forum?

Don't you have to be at the gym in 26 minutes?


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

yourronny79 said:


> C) IMO sieko tasted mud once the quartz boom went bust. The company has licked its wounds & finally regained some sense (after 50 years) and revived their automatic collection. I'd say check out their "local Japanese" collection for some fine display. It's different from the sub $300 crap you find in the west . they produce some of the most beautiful clean automatic watches available [email protected] outstanding prices. It has a HUGE potential for sure but hope they get some European thinking in their close minded Japanese boardroom!


Seiko didn't have any wounds to lick and there is no bust in what you call the quartz boom. The vast majority of watches sold today are quartz but there is a small niche, first exploited by the Swiss, for retro mechanical watches marketed as luxury items. Seiko has also participated in this with some additional focus on mechanical watches from the early '90's, but they had never stopped making them.

Whilst I wouldn't label their sub $300 models as "crap", I agree that their JDM models are often of a higher standard than their International models, but this is slowly changing with more higher quality models being supplied to Western markets.


----------



## Lelocle (Jan 3, 2015)

MissSummerStorm said:


> I've tried researching Japanese vs. Swiss movements and Rolex vs Seiko threads throughout various forums to understand why a majority of people are interested in high end Swiss movements over Japanese moments and to understand what separates Seiko from Rolex besides movement and price.
> 
> I've read that:
> 
> ...


You look at the process of making a Rolex diver and a Seiko diver. That's the difference.


----------



## bigclive2011 (Mar 17, 2013)

I love Seiko divers and I have 3 that I wear regularily, however I think it is impossible to compare a £5000 watch with a £150 watch.

Look at other comparisons in life and you can always find something at a tenth of the price that does the same sort of thing, my Fiat Panda drives me to work every bit as well as a Ferrari Enzo, but come on what one would you have if you could.

So would I swap my Subby or deep blue sea dweller for a Seiko 007?

Course not, and if you look the quality does not compare.


----------



## yourronny79 (Jan 21, 2009)

GlennO said:


> Seiko didn't have any wounds to lick and there is no bust in what you call the quartz boom. The vast majority of watches sold today are quartz but there is a small niche, first exploited by the Swiss, for retro mechanical watches marketed as luxury items. Seiko has also participated in this with some additional focus on mechanical watches from the early '90's, but they had never stopped making them.
> 
> Whilst I wouldn't label their sub $300 models as "crap", I agree that their JDM models are often of a higher standard than their International models, but this is slowly changing with more higher quality models being supplied to Western markets.


Watch making industry / Japanese brands wouldn't be the same if Quartz had panned out the way it was supposed to.All swiss watch makers were nearly "bust" in 70s,80s - but their comeback with automatics / rebranding is nothing less than a Legendary tale. What they did is like bringing music tape casette into fashion in era of mp3. Also seiko continues to misunderstand the whole market. Their DNA is electronics.. They are "too deep" into quartz & still are struggling with that thinking approach to be honest. All they spent their time and money was to make itheir production scalable & mass oriented to survive. The crafty swiss companies on the other hand were smarter, luckier and thorough with their products and strategy. My two cents...


----------



## yourronny79 (Jan 21, 2009)

For those of you who truly believe rolex sub is worth your hard earned money, check out a sieko SBDC027. Place the 2 watches side by side. Visually inspect every aspect. The answer is common sense. Sadly price of steel remains price of steel. Ps:- oh btw if rolexes were "so" special , no Chinese backyard company would be able to make a $100 replica,LOL what you're buying is marketing & Roger Federers sign on bonus!


----------



## hidden by leaves (Mar 6, 2010)

yourronny79 said:


> For those of you who truly believe rolex sub is worth your hard earned money, check out a sieko SBDC027. Place the 2 watches side by side. Visually inspect every aspect. The answer is common sense. Sadly price of steel remains price of steel. Ps:- oh btw if rolexes were "so" special , no Chinese backyard company would be able to make a $100 replica,LOL what you're buying is marketing & Roger Federers sign on bonus!


<yawn>


----------



## Watch Fan in Beijing (Jul 15, 2009)

yourronny79 said:


> For those of you who truly believe rolex sub is worth your hard earned money, check out a sieko SBDC027. Place the 2 watches side by side. Visually inspect every aspect. The answer is common sense. Sadly price of steel remains price of steel. Ps:- oh btw if rolexes were "so" special , no Chinese backyard company would be able to make a $100 replica,LOL what you're buying is marketing & Roger Federers sign on bonus!


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

yourronny79 said:


> For those of you who truly believe rolex sub is worth your hard earned money, check out a sieko SBDC027. Place the 2 watches side by side. Visually inspect every aspect. The answer is common sense. Sadly price of steel remains price of steel. Ps:- oh btw if rolexes were "so" special , no Chinese backyard company would be able to make a $100 replica,LOL what you're buying is marketing & Roger Federers sign on bonus!


I try to read and understand your post, but all I see is this:



yourronny79 said:


>


:-!:-!


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

Stellite said:


> Thank you for stopping by WUS just to tell us how you make $500k and you can afford a Rolex but chose to buy a lesser quality watch.:-!


LMAO!!!!!!


----------



## yourronny79 (Jan 21, 2009)

Stellite said:


> I try to read and understand your post, but all I see is this:
> 
> :-!:-!


Heres my earlier post, if you can't understand this either then o|

So why is rolex so expensive:-

A) Well the simple answer is because it's "swiss". There's a premium associated with swissness. Swiss banks, swiss chocolates, swiss gold, swiss watches ...get it? Broadly speaking, no one would think of japan when you think of millionaires(no offense to anyone) - that said, many rich Japanese swarm swiss watch shops during their overseas trips . Ask yourself why!? It's all about perception , emotions and identity!
B) for the more academic minded- I recommend watching a fantastic BBC documentary called "Century of self" on YouTube - eddy bernays, was the one who discovered a link between brands & emotions. "feeling good" after association with something like a rolex is a psychological thing, very cleverly exploited by advertisers & marketers
C) what differentiates a rolex from any other brand except pateks is "holding value". It's like a gold standard in watchmaking. Your grandson will certainly be pleased to inherit a rolex instead of a seiko. Very very few companies manage to "hold" design constant and still retain value. 
D) High price is not by any means reflective of the true cost of production.something which they would like you to believe. The retail cost is about sponsoring Wimbledon, roger Federers of the world and recovering high overheads such as expensive boutique costs etc etc. nothing about research or product development per se.

Now to the flip side :-
A) Rolex is still beating the old drum. Under the name of tradition, it's rising prices to a point it's a bit "outrageous". this is a flawed product strategy in IMO. While it's true for most swiss brands, over expensive watches will pave way for more honest, truthful and hungry watchmakers to recapitalize. Gimmicks & marketing BS can only go so far.
B) I just got a SBDC027 Sieko today. I can't recommend it higher . I have a 2013 sub as well but God damn the Sieko is "all out". Feature by feature, I'd say seiko Is comparable if not better. Ps:- the material, steel , glass etc is all super quality in this limited edition sieko. Get one now before it vanishes (only 2000 pieces)! If you have both in hand you will definitely question why is rolex $8k compared to it's more humble counterpart (must be the better steel huh? Lol)
C) IMO sieko tasted mud once the quartz boom went bust. The company has licked its wounds & finally regained some sense (after 50 years) and revived their automatic collection. I'd say check out their "local Japanese" collection for some fine display. It's different from the sub $300 crap you find in the west . they produce some of the most beautiful clean automatic watches available [email protected] outstanding prices. It has a HUGE potential for sure but hope they get some European thinking in their close minded Japanese boardroom!
D) Grand Sieko is a MASTER CLASS. Period. It's a piece of art, I predict this collection biting (& spitting out) a lot of swiss brands in the next 3-5 years IF sieko acts smartly. If everything fails it will certainly have a great resale as it'll be a collectors /cult item. Hopefully they do the marketing / brand management required so it catches up , the product itself is fantastic. I'd say a simple insert in the Economist OR TIME Magazine would get the required #eyeballs!?

As closing notes:- I give big a thumbs up to seiko for their come back and honest watchmaking in such a over hyped, over charged market . Same time, a good look-alike actor can never demand the same $$$ as an original actor. So right now Rolex leads for it's consistency & originality in design, craftsmanship, value & concept. While Sieko I hope you bring out better than anyone else has ever imagined or produced in terms of style , price , design & mechanism! Only time will decide the outcome and fate of these two very dissimilar yet historically significant watchmakers...


----------



## Timemiser (Jan 20, 2011)

If you really want to compare Rolex to Seiko. This is where you have to "start" and go up from here. Rolex does not make an SKX series nor will they.

As for movements, the 8L35 in my MM300 has a very smooth sweep and maintains +3 seconds in 24hrs. Does that make it equal to a Rolex? No, but I'm happy with it.


----------



## Stellite (Aug 3, 2011)

yourronny79 said:


> Heres my earlier post, if you can't understand this either then o|
> 
> So why is rolex so expensive:-
> 
> ...


You made good points, but you missed the title and subject of this thread. I answered your points in red and want to add, that if this thread had been titled GS Diver vs Rolex Diver, then it would have been a good discussion. To even think of comparing non GS divers to Rolex divers in quality is ludicrous.


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

yourronny79 said:


> Watch making industry / Japanese brands wouldn't be the same if Quartz had panned out the way it was supposed to.All swiss watch makers were nearly "bust" in 70s,80s - but their comeback with automatics / rebranding is nothing less than a Legendary tale. What they did is like bringing music tape casette into fashion in era of mp3. Also seiko continues to misunderstand the whole market. Their DNA is electronics.. They are "too deep" into quartz & still are struggling with that thinking approach to be honest. All they spent their time and money was to make itheir production scalable & mass oriented to survive. The crafty swiss companies on the other hand were smarter, luckier and thorough with their products and strategy. My two cents...


What makes you think that the Swiss have been more successful than the Japanese? Quartz has panned out as it was expected to and remains dominant in the industry. You make it sound as though the tables have turned and there is now a 'mechanical crisis' and that is far from the case. It's great that the Swiss and others have created their own niche with mechanical watches enabling some brands to survive (and others to be revived) but they represent less than 10% of watches sold by volume worldwide. None of this suggests that the Swiss are smarter or luckier than the Japanese, who in my view have simply evolved and responded to the market through all of this and have done so successfully without all of the major restructuring that has gone on in Europe.


----------



## Rusty427 (Jan 3, 2009)

A SKX007 is better than a Submariner because if you loose or break it! You will feel better than if you loose or break your Submariner. 
Yet both are really cool watches.


----------



## dart1214 (Dec 19, 2014)

I am a big fan of Seiko divers. I initially got an SKX031 about 10 years ago because I loved the Submariner look. I was able to get a Rolex Submariner ND as a wedding gift recently, and I can definitely feel the difference in quality. No knock against Seiko (I have several and would like to get a Pepsi), but when I unscrew the crown and manual wind the Rolex, there is a certain robustness that I do not find with other automatics I have. Also, the action on the bezel is much better on the Rolex.

I do agree that the Rolex watches are heavily marked up and are not 30-40x better than a Seiko diver.


----------



## yourronny79 (Jan 21, 2009)

sir, I recommend you reading this page for some idea on the actual cost of producing a rolex :- How much does it actually cost Rolex to make a watch? - Quora

if you are still comfortable to buy something which costs ~35% of its MRP to produce under the tag of matchless quality /history /tradition / precision then be my guest.

Ps:- there is no comparison between a rolex sub and GS diver. I think the latter with a spring drive mechanism is way better and more value for money!


----------



## snakeeyes (Jan 23, 2014)

yourronny79 said:


> sir, I recommend you reading this page for some idea on the actual cost of producing a rolex :- How much does it actually cost Rolex to make a watch? - Quora
> 
> if you are still comfortable to buy something which costs 35% of its MRP under the tag of matchless quality /history /tradition / precision then be my guest.
> 
> *Ps:- there is no comparison between a rolex sub and GS diver. I think the latter with a spring drive mechanism is way better and more value for money!*


*
x 2
*

sorry my fellow rolex owners...but i have to agree...the GS diver simply is much more watch than a rolex sub....it just is....


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

yourronny79 said:


> sir, I recommend you reading this page for some idea on the actual cost of producing a rolex :- How much does it actually cost Rolex to make a watch? - Quora
> 
> if you are still comfortable to buy something which costs 35% of its MRP under the tag of matchless quality /history /tradition / precision then be my guest.
> 
> Ps:- there is no comparison between a rolex sub and GS diver. I think the latter with a spring drive mechanism is way better and more value for money!


That "analysis" is literally pure speculation.

It any case, it is absolutely irrelevant how much it costs a manufacturer to produce an item, what is relevant is the price charged by the competition for comparable products. Put another way, if Rolex was much more inefficient in the manner in which they produce their watches, but maintains the quality of the product it offers and charges the same amount as it currently does, the value to you doesn't change one iota.


----------



## Tseg (Mar 29, 2014)

mleok said:


> That "analysis" is literally pure speculation.
> 
> It any case, it is absolutely irrelevant how much it costs a manufacturer to produce an item, what is relevant is the price charged by the competition for comparable products. Put another way, if Rolex was much more inefficient in the manner in which they produce their watches, but maintains the quality of the product it offers and charges the same amount as it currently does, the value to you doesn't change one iota.


Actually, when it comes to luxury goods and flagship products what the competition charges is somewhat irrelevant as well. These higher cost emotionally driven products elicit irrational logic [emotions] within potential buyers. In many cases a brand that charges more with these types of goods is perceived as better... a luxury brand can and will ruin [perceptions of] itself long term by dropping prices and having discount sales. For a watch brand "in a class buy itself" (a status that can only be assigned buy a potential buyer), what 'the competition' charges is [may be] irrelevant, because in their eyes there really is no competition. A gazillion things influence how we perceive a brand... so those brands that invest in themselves have to balance stirring the right emotions of potential buyers with extracting enough value out of their products to pay for all that marketing. What is the right balance is as much art as it is science. Rolex clearly invests a lot... and for as large as Seiko is one could argue they invest too little. Nonetheless, both are quality watches but each likely elicits a different emotional response from both an owner and an impartial observer.


----------



## balzebub (May 30, 2010)

yourronny79 said:


> sir, I recommend you reading this page for some idea on the actual cost of producing a rolex :- How much does it actually cost Rolex to make a watch? - Quora
> 
> if you are still comfortable to buy something which costs ~35% of its MRP to produce under the tag of matchless quality /history /tradition / precision then be my guest.
> 
> Ps:- there is no comparison between a rolex sub and GS diver. I think the latter with a spring drive mechanism is way better and more value for money!


I hope u make every thing u use yourself in your back yard. If a rolex costs 35% of its retail to make, that's actually pretty good. How much do u think some of the common everyday items we use cost to make in terms of percentage to retail? Almost every consumer goods has got huge margins, many much much worse than luxury watches in terms of percentage. So unless I want to become a hermit living on a mountain somewhere and eat/use only what I grow/make, paying huge mark ups over cost of production is the norm, how else are we going to keep the world going?

If you don't like Rolex or think they are over priced pieces of crop and seriously think a LE Sumo is better or on par, by all means stick to your fav brand/watch that you think is good.

So sick of threads like these. Everyone just buy what you like and enjoy your watch. No need to trash anyone or anything because you don't like it. Peace and enjoyment, life is too short.

Oh and I do consider my self a fairly rational consumer and I still chose a rolex subC over a GS diver simply because I LIKE the overall feel, fit and finish of the subC. To even think of comparing a Sumo, SKX or SRP to a SubC and concluding they are better or on par is delusional.

sent using a flying carpet


----------



## yourronny79 (Jan 21, 2009)

balzebub said:


> I hope u make every thing u use yourself in your back yard. If a rolex costs 35% of its retail to make, that's actually pretty good. How much do u think some of the common everyday items we use cost to make in terms of percentage to retail? Almost every consumer goods has got huge margins, many much much worse than luxury watches in terms of percentage. So unless I want to become a hermit living on a mountain somewhere and eat/use only what I grow/make, paying huge mark ups over cost of production is the norm, how else are we going to keep the world going?
> 
> If you don't like Rolex or think they are over priced pieces of crop and seriously think a LE Sumo is better or on par, by all means stick to your fav brand/watch that you think is good.
> 
> ...


 Sick of thread like this? Why read it? Leave the debate to those genuinely interested and "feel good" about that SubC. Well done.


----------



## SatanisReal (Mar 15, 2015)

@ balzebub. Expressing an opinion and trash talking are not the same thing. Everyone is free here to express whatever they want. Coming to my opinion on this.... Is Rolex a great watch ? Yes absolutely legendary but 50 times better than Seiko, No freaking way. 90% Rolex fan boys buy Rolex not because they appreciate the craftsmanship but because it satisfies their huge ego and because they need a glittering jewelry on their hand to show off that they are wealthy whereas in real they neither have a decent bank balance nor a stable job. Seiko on the other hand is for people who care to have a genuinely beautiful time piece for themselves and not for showing off or flirting with random girls at the bar.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

SatanisReal said:


> @ balzebub. Expressing an opinion and trash talking are not the same thing. Everyone is free here to express whatever they want. Coming to my opinion on this.... Is Rolex a great watch ? Yes absolutely legendary but 50 times better than Seiko, No freaking way. 90% Rolex fan boys buy Rolex not because they appreciate the craftsmanship but because it satisfies their huge ego and because they need a glittering jewelry on their hand to show off that they are wealthy whereas in real they neither have a decent bank balance nor a stable job. Seiko on the other hand is for people who care to have a genuinely beautiful time piece for themselves and not for showing off or flirting with random girls at the bar.


I think all these armchair psychologists who feel the need to psychoanalyze the motivations of people they don't know on the Internet need to stop worrying about why other people buy the watches that they do, and focus on the watches themselves. There are few luxury watches that are worth the price premium over a decent budget watch, a Grand Seiko is not 10 times the watch that a Seiko SARB035 is, that's just a reflection of the law of diminishing returns.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

mleok said:


> I think all these armchair psychologists who feel the need to psychoanalyze the motivations of people they don't know on the Internet need to stop worrying about why other people buy the watches that they do, and focus on the watches themselves. There are few luxury watches that are worth the price premium over a decent budget watch, a Grand Seiko is not 10 times the watch that a Seiko SARB035 is, that's just a reflection of the law of diminishing returns.


I dunno....

*SARB035: List price JPY 47,250*
50hrs PR
21,600bph
23 jewels
Flat sapphire crystal
Hardlex display back
Pin and collar bracelet with no half links
Unadjusted -15/+25 sec/day with no guarantee
Stamped escapement, SPRON510 mainspring
No screw down crown
Brushed top plate, proud screws, unfinished baseplate
Assembled by machine
No diashock
Basic case shape
No AR
No lug holes
Magic lever winding
1 Year warranty

*SBGM025: List price JPY 480,000*
72hrs PR
28,800bph
35 jewels
Dual-curved sapphire crystal
Laser engraved sapphire display back
Screwed bracelet with 4 half links
Adjusted (6 pos, 3 temp, over 17 days, timed further 21 days) -3/+5 sec/day with certificate of guarantee
MEMS escapement, SPRON510 mainspring
Screw down crown
Rhodium plated movement
Top plate in Coté de Geneve, countersunk polished screws, baseplate in perlagé (no stamped components)
Assembled by hand
Diashock
AR sapphire
Lug holes
Quieter, more refined automatic winding
Complex case shape with crown guards, crisp surfaces and alternating finishes. 
Quick-set jumping GMT hand (tied to date)
3 years warranty (US purchase + 1 possible year from boutique) or 2 years warranty (Japan purchase)

And that's just the quantifiable differences...


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Domo said:


> I dunno....
> 
> *SARB035: List price JPY 47,250*
> 50hrs PR
> ...


Ten times the watch? We'll have to agree to disagree. It doesn't have a 500 hour power reserve, 216kbph beat rate, -1.5/2.5 sec/day accuracy, 10 year warranty... While it's certainly possible to impose a partial ordering on these two watches, it's difficult to quantify exactly how much better it is objectively, except in the manner I described above, which is of course just silly.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

mleok said:


> Ten times the watch? We'll have to agree to disagree. It doesn't have a 500 hour power reserve, 216kbph beat rate, -1.5/2.5 sec/day accuracy, 10 year warranty... While it's certainly possible to impose a partial ordering on these two watches, it's difficult to quantify exactly how much better it is objectively, except in the manner I described above, which is of course just silly.


I think assuming that each and every feature on a watch needs to be multiplied by ten to qualify a watch as "ten times as good" is taking the phrase to an illogical extreme. I mean, a Grand Seiko will spend over a month in production. I don't know how long a SARB takes to make (and I doubt Seiko will say) but assuming it is made in less than 24 hours (which I consider a veeeeerrrrrry conservative estimate) does that make the SBGM025 over 30 times more difficult to make? If it's made in a few hours (I'd bet it is) then I guess an SBGM025 is 100 times harder to make? :-s


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

Domo said:


> I think assuming that each and every feature on a watch needs to be multiplied by ten to qualify a watch as "ten times as good" is taking the phrase to an illogical extreme. I mean, a Grand Seiko will spend over a month in production. I don't know how long a SARB takes to make (and I doubt Seiko will say) but assuming it is made in less than 24 hours (which I consider a veeeeerrrrrry conservative estimate) does that make the SBGM025 over 30 times more difficult to make? If it's made in a few hours (I'd bet it is) then I guess an SBGM025 is 100 times harder to make? :-s


EDIT: To put it another way - I'd say a spiffy new Lexus IS350 is twice the car as a Toyota Camry 2.5i. It makes over twice the power and has over twice the kit. But should it also be twice as much in gross weight and have 8 wheels?

(This was supposed to be an edit, not a new post!)


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Domo said:


> I think assuming that each and every feature on a watch needs to be multiplied by ten to qualify a watch as "ten times as good" is taking the phrase to an illogical extreme. I mean, a Grand Seiko will spend over a month in production. I don't know how long a SARB takes to make (and I doubt Seiko will say) but assuming it is made in less than 24 hours (which I consider a veeeeerrrrrry conservative estimate) does that make the SBGM025 over 30 times more difficult to make? If it's made in a few hours (I'd bet it is) then I guess an SBGM025 is 100 times harder to make? :-s


I'm simply saying that the entire attempt to quantify by how large a factor a watch is "better" is a hopelessly subjective task. It is possible to do a point by point comparison and say that one aspect of a watch is better, but aside from the accuracy, power reserve, and water resistance, other aspects of the watch do not lend themselves easily to such precise quantification.


----------



## Domo (Sep 20, 2013)

mleok said:


> I'm simply saying that the entire attempt to quantify by how large a factor a watch is "better" is a hopelessly subjective task. It is possible to do a point by point comparison and say that one aspect of a watch is better, but aside from the accuracy, power reserve, and water resistance, other aspects of the watch do not lend themselves easily to such precise quantification.


I would say attempting to apply mathematical rigor to a watch comparison is the hopeless thing. A luxury watch is an ornament of emotional appeal. If someone says they feel ten times better with a Grand Seiko on compared to their SARB, or with a Daytona on compared to their PRC200 I don't think its necessary to try and formulate a proof by induction to say they're wrong.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Domo said:


> *I would say attempting to apply mathematical rigor to a watch comparison is the hopeless thing.* A luxury watch is an ornament of emotional appeal. If someone says they feel ten times better with a Grand Seiko on compared to their SARB, or with a Daytona on compared to their PRC200 I don't think its necessary to try and formulate a proof by induction to say they're wrong.


I agree, but that's why it's meaningless to say that Watch A is X times the watch that Watch B is, since it's an intrinsically subjective exercise. The emotional response that one has to a watch is something else entirely, since it's understood to be a subjective assessment that is specific to the individual.


----------



## wilson_smyth (Aug 4, 2008)

Warches are not all standardized so you can compare and contrast each facet and say for aure tha tone is better than the other.

one person may see quality as being finishes to thr higheat level of detail and how long an actual human soends finishing the watch, in which case even just looking at seikos you have a lot of choice. E.g. You have the 007 at the bottom end. well finished but probably necer sees a human hand before packaging and so when compared to the prospex lineup can look a little rough. The prospex line up is a step above with more polished surfaces and thought to what should be polished. Then you move into grand seiko territory whwre finishing goes up another level, each watch taking many days to hand finish by a craftsman to be perfect.

This is just looking at seiko, were not even contrasting to rollex, and were only looking at finish of the watch.

someone else might value the engineering & real world toughness and ability of a watch to keep ticking, while being affordable over all else, in which case to them the 007 would smoke a rollex or grand seiko (and even here affordability is a subjective term).

someone else may put quality and value into having an in house movement, or in having a luxury brand name as they need the watch as a status symbol.

you can compare one to the other under very specific parameters but in the end it comes down to what te person cnsiders "better value" and how much they are willing to pay foe the percieved increase in value, so unfortunately the original question is unanswerable, or more correctly the answer is different for every person.


----------



## JohnM67 (Jun 16, 2014)

jkpa said:


> I predict 25+ pages.


I predict a riot.


----------



## Zweig (Dec 30, 2014)

Given the instability of euro zone, i don't rule out the possibility of owning several Rolex as pure investment.
So when the euro will collapse, i'll come to the US, sell my Subs, open a pizza joint and get myself a brand new SKX.

So yeah, the Submariner is a better tool watch imo.


----------



## brandon\ (Aug 23, 2010)

Sminkypinky said:


> I predict a riot.



I predict a riot.


----------



## goodtogreat (Apr 27, 2014)

From Ablogtowatch - The stage was set for Grand Seiko to finally take their first place finish in 1968 when the Neuchatel chronometer trials were abruptly abandoned. It is often speculated that this was to avoid declaring Seiko the winner of a Swiss chronometer competition. Regardless of the reason, Grand Seiko, as well as the other watchmakers, were undeterred, and simply went to the equivalent Geneva competition where they were once again competed.This time, Seiko achieved its mission. Grand Seiko received 4th through 10th place, beaten only by a prototype quartz movement which took 1st through 3rd. This made Grand Seiko's movements the most accurate mechanical wristwatch movements in the world. GS had proven that they could compete with anyone.

Personally I'm happy with the fact that my Grand Seiko is understated, I know it is a quality piece so it doesn't matter if no one says "Wow! Love your GS man!" It's just not going to happen is it? And I like that, occasionally you might get the wink from someone who knows their stuff but I know too.

For brash days I wear my orange 9300!


----------



## goodtogreat (Apr 27, 2014)

From Ablogtowatch - The stage was set for Grand Seiko to finally take their first place finish in 1968 when the Neuchatel chronometer trials were abruptly abandoned. It is often speculated that this was to avoid declaring Seiko the winner of a Swiss chronometer competition. Regardless of the reason, Grand Seiko, as well as the other watchmakers, were undeterred, and simply went to the equivalent Geneva competition where they were once again competed.This time, Seiko achieved its mission. Grand Seiko received 4th through 10th place, beaten only by a prototype quartz movement which took 1st through 3rd. This made Grand Seiko's movements the most accurate mechanical wristwatch movements in the world. GS had proven that they could compete with anyone.

Personally I'm happy with the fact that my Grand Seiko is understated, I know it is a quality piece so it doesn't matter if no one says "Wow! Love your GS man!" It's just not going to happen is it? And I like that, occasionally you might get the wink from someone who knows their stuff but I know too.

For brash days I wear my orange 9300!


----------



## brodog49 (Aug 19, 2015)

I am a Seiko junkie...I literally had money out on the table to buy one from Rob in SF out at Topper (they did not have the model on-hand and I really wanted to hold/feel/experience before dropping that kind of dough sight unseen). I ended up going the safe route - Rolex Sub - does anybody have both the Sub and the SBGA029 or 31 that could make an honest comparison here? Thanks, I am debating my final decision internally and about to hit up the trade market. Thanks!


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

brodog49 said:


> I am a Seiko junkie...I literally had money out on the table to buy one from Rob in SF out at Topper (they did not have the model on-hand and I really wanted to hold/feel/experience before dropping that kind of dough sight unseen). I ended up going the safe route - Rolex Sub - does anybody have both the Sub and the SBGA029 or 31 that could make an honest comparison here? Thanks, I am debating my final decision internally and about to hit up the trade market. Thanks!


Given that you've already bought the Rolex Submariner, it probably makes sense for you to wait until you have the opportunity to see the SBGA029 or 31 in the metal, and arrive at your own conclusions.


----------



## starlir (Oct 8, 2010)

brodog49 said:


> I am a Seiko junkie...I literally had money out on the table to buy one from Rob in SF out at Topper (they did not have the model on-hand and I really wanted to hold/feel/experience before dropping that kind of dough sight unseen). I ended up going the safe route - Rolex Sub - does anybody have both the Sub and the SBGA029 or 31 that could make an honest comparison here? Thanks, I am debating my final decision internally and about to hit up the trade market. Thanks!


I have the sub and the SBGA031. Both wear really comfortably on my 8 inch wrist but the GS wins out probably due to the titanium construction. The GS wins hands down on accuracy, mine has consistently been +- 1 sec per month since I bought it in 2010. If you want to turn heads and make a statement then the sub easily wins that battle. I find my particular sub has a very tight screw thread on the crown making it a pain to screw out and hand wind, the GS is much smoother in that respect. Overall the GS is the better watch in my opinion but it's a close run thing and it just depends what elements of a luxury watch that you personally prioritise.


----------



## zaphodbe (May 23, 2016)

I can only really add this,
My father is a retired long haul airline pilot, in the 1960s he flew VC-10s for BOAC, in 1968 he bought a Seiko in Hong Kong. Airliners in those days were often flown using asto navigation which as you will know requires an accurate time peice, so as a result the Seiko was often checked and adjusted to show the correct time, it would loose 2 seconds a day. It will also be of no surprise to find many of his collegues had Rolex watches, commonly GMT masters. none could compete with the Seiko for time keeping. I still have that watch, it still is within 2 seconds a day. It was not even a GS, but a 6106-8100


----------



## paskinner (Dec 27, 2015)

Well, page 76 and still going. So no shortage of opinions. I owned a Submariner 114060 and recently switched to a Grand Seiko SBGX 117, which is a quartz powered diver. I did this because I prefered the look (neater lugs and matt bezel) but also because I think dive watches are a special case; they need to be very dependable in extreme circumstances, and quartz is just more rugged and resistant to shock and knocks.
For what it's worth, I think Rolex lost the plot with the newer maxi-dial watches; they don't havet the subtle elegance of the earlier designs. Sales would indicate most people don't agree with that view....


----------



## dantan (Dec 16, 2014)

I own a Rolex Submariner (114060), a Tudor Heritage Black Bay, and a Seiko SKX007 (as well as its SKX009 sibling). 

Is my Submariner worth 38 times the price of my SKX007? What does 'worth' even mean, when it comes to how it makes someone FEEL?


----------



## guccimanilla (Jul 23, 2016)

Bump.


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

this one looks divisive


----------



## Cobia (Nov 24, 2013)

Bwahahaha at the Rolex owners in this threat triggered that somebody would put seiko in the same breath, priceless, great thread.


----------



## UberDave (Jan 13, 2015)

Cobia said:


> Bwahahaha at the Rolex owners in this threat triggered that somebody would put seiko in the same breath, priceless, great thread.


I have not read the entire thread, but I am certainly not one of the Rolex owners you're referring to.

Both companies make fantastic, honest watches. Seiko obviously has more scale and a more diverse product offering. I've owned a few, before I really got into watches.

But, I try not to judge a watch based on its price tag...


----------



## Bradjhomes (Jun 18, 2011)

guccimanilla said:


> Bump.


Let's just bump a six month old guarantee troll thread and not even pretend to have any contribution.

Great idea.

No thanks.


----------



## oldranger (Jun 21, 2007)

*Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

I saw this closed thread (https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/quality-seiko-divers-vs-rolex-submariner-1072854.html) and just had to get this out of my mind..

I'm a fan of many watches, also had several Rolexes, starting with a couple of 5513 in the 70-ties, followed up with newer items. In between (and currently) I have (had) lots of other makes.
I have been fortunate enough to have owned and tested in real life (harsh conditions) all my watches and the above linked thread urged me to mention some experiences I have had.

Although being an early fan of The Submariners from Rolex and had several, I learned, the hard way, that a name is not enough. My Subs have been very good watches, but all needed service after 7-10 yrs to run properly. My Seikos (3 really old ones so far) have been running for 40 yrs+ without being opened at all and still running with the same consistency.

So what is quality?

Quality, by definition, is the span between the owners expectancy and what he/she feels they get for their money. So a Lada could be as good quality as a Rolls, depending on what you feel you get for your money and expectancies.

What cannot be explained other than production quality is the items (my Seikos) running with no issues for several decades against more prestige goods (my Subs) demanding expensive service frequently.

So, as working with product development and production for decades, I realise that you need to be honest regarding what you expect and want. Sometimes you would like to have a recognised brand (watches, cars, etc.) and sometimes you just need something that works, technically.

Whatever your desire is ok, so in this respect the discussion is somewhat unreal, unnecessary, but shows the natur of how we are. Everything is ok ;-)

At last, from an old WIS, I would love to quote one of one fellow WIS: 
"If you are GOOD, no one cares what you are wearing, if you are not good, people care even less".

Be happy with whatever you choose!

-Oldranger (really old, actually)


----------



## Gunnar_917 (Feb 24, 2015)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

I'm on 'popcorn overload'.


----------



## oldranger (Jun 21, 2007)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

Sorry for boring you


----------



## HerrNano (Apr 29, 2015)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

Wow, you have bought Rolexes that have begun to run poorly after seven years and others that have not made it past ten without problems. That does surprise me. I would have thought they would have done at least as well as inexpensive autos from Seiko. Time for some Jiffy Pop.


----------



## GreatLakesWatch (Aug 12, 2016)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

I think part of your assessment is that most luxury watch owners feel like they NEED to service their watch at the prescribed intervals in order to maintain that accuracy and quality edge, where most Seiko owners just shrug their shoulders and say "eh, if it ain't broke, don't go a'fixin' it". Case in point: I have a 25 year old Explorer that is a few seconds off per day. Should I get it serviced? Probably. Will I? No. But most people with a $10k Submariner will want those few precious seconds back, so they will service their watch every 5-10 years. My 10 year old Seiko SKX being a few seconds off per day? Eh, sell it and go buy a new one for $200.

My point is, sometimes quality is in the mind, not in the watch.


----------



## TwentiethCenturyFox (Mar 8, 2014)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

Well I would have laughed about this comparison recently until I got into vintage seiko diver autos. I think the seiko's are incredibly robust exceptionally well made dive watches, especially the 6105 series and 6309-7049. However, a more complicated movement which the Rolex has, thus the better accuracy is going to require service more regularly than a simple 17 jewel movement like the seiko.


----------



## Picassovegas (Dec 12, 2012)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*

I think you make a very good point and let's be honest. It's something to roll over? a 200 Euro/Pd/ $ watch vs. a 6000 Euro/Pd/$ watch. What can Rolex learn from Seiko is this the same engineering that goes into a Grand Seiko?


----------



## Picassovegas (Dec 12, 2012)

*Re: Quality - Rolex Sub vs Seiko*



HerrNano said:


> Wow, you have bought Rolexes that have begun to run poorly after seven years and others that have not made it past ten without problems. That does surprise me. I would have thought they would have done at least as well as inexpensive autos from Seiko. Time for some Jiffy Pop.


I believe the part that Oldranger stated was he wore the watches under harsh conditions. He wasn't just desk diving but he was using the watch as it was supposed to be worn as a tool piece and not a icon of fashion. I think very few people have the courage to really wear their Rolex as a true daily driver.


----------

