# Sinn 856 plain vs Sinn 856 UTC



## TrailMonkey (Feb 10, 2016)

Which do you think has the higher resale value potentially? I know the movement is different than in the 856 Sellita 300-1 Which is more versatile? The UTC is growing on me but still looks busy. Is it less so in person?


----------



## ten13th (Nov 2, 2013)

I need to track a 2nd time zone so UTC is the one for me. Legibility is top notch on 856 UTC.










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## chris01 (Jan 5, 2011)

I don't really have much use for the 24hr on my UTC, but it is useful whenever I have to restart the watch, to ensure that the hour hand (never more than 1 hour away from UTC for me) is in the correct 12-hour location, so that the date changes at midnight. If you don't wear it very often this avoids some messing around. For this reason alone, I'm happy to have the UTC model. I also think that it adds some interest to the dial.


----------



## Myron (Dec 27, 2009)

The 856 UTC was the first Sinn I ever bought. I'm sure the non-UTC is a great watch, but for me the UTC version IS the 856. If you're thinking non-UTC is the way forward for you I'd consider the 556. Or maybe pick up a used 656.

Can't go wrong with any of those three.

Best,

Myron


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

Is there a quickset date on the 856 UTC? I had an IWC Spitfire UTC some years ago, and while I liked being able to advance the hour hand independently, the lack of quickset date was a real pain when I didn't wear the watch for a while. Just curious if this one works that way.


----------



## chris01 (Jan 5, 2011)

dhtjr said:


> Is there a quickset date on the 856 UTC? I had an IWC Spitfire UTC some years ago, and while I liked being able to advance the hour hand independently, the lack of quickset date was a real pain when I didn't wear the watch for a while. Just curious if this one works that way.


Yes, pull the crown halfway out and turn it one way to advance the date and the other way to advance the UTC. Pull it fully out for normal time setting and seconds hacking. No independent main hour hand, unfortunately.


----------



## rreimer91 (Apr 18, 2017)

I'd go utc - 2nd time zone nice for traveling and I think it looks nice. I know it is different but I have the 757 utc. With chronograph and bezel, even more complicated and maybe cluttered but I like it.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

chris01 said:


> Yes, pull the crown halfway out and turn it one way to advance the date and the other way to advance the UTC. Pull it fully out for normal time setting and seconds hacking. No independent main hour hand, unfortunately.


Thanks. The independent-setting hour hand was a nice feature when traveling; made main time change a snap. But I think I'd prefer a quickset date. I had to spend a few hundred to fix the crown system after only a few years, and I'm convinced it was from putting stress on it from having to move the hour hand around so many times to advance the date after not wearing the watch for a bit. Even so, sometimes I wish I had kept the watch, as it was not a common IWC, and it was my first "real" watch.


----------



## prateeko (Jul 17, 2016)

chris01 said:


> I don't really have much use for the 24hr on my UTC, but it is useful whenever I have to restart the watch, to ensure that the hour hand (never more than 1 hour away from UTC for me) is in the correct 12-hour location, so that the date changes at midnight. If you don't wear it very often this avoids some messing around. For this reason alone, I'm happy to have the UTC model. I also think that it adds some interest to the dial.


This is basically what I use it for most, although I have my 2nd time zone set a couple time zones back and it's not very hard for me to ever know what the time is there, it does have some utility. Most of it, however, is for restarting the watch &#55357;&#56837;


----------



## chris01 (Jan 5, 2011)

prateeko said:


> This is basically what I use it for most, although I have my 2nd time zone set a couple time zones back and it's not very hard for me to ever know what the time is there, it does have some utility. Most of it, however, is for restarting the watch &#55357;&#56837;


I love this watch, but the initial apparent use for the UTC hand - travelling - is just a waste of time. If you want to keep the UTC to your home time, or actual UTC, whenever you cross a time zone, or at DST change, you have to stop the watch, reset the time, rehack the seconds hand, then adjust the UTC. That's why I always travel with an RC quartz watch - pull out the crown, turn it to move the seconds hand (which now indicates time zone), push the crown in, job done with the minutes & seconds unaffected - takes 3 seconds.


----------



## hua_qiu (Jun 12, 2011)

865 UTC is not busy at all in my opinion, instead it strikes the right balance. Non-UTC is a bit too plain in my view. I had 865 UTC for many years, it was always pot on. I only a bit disappointed about the lum on the model being too weak for a tool watch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

chris01 said:


> I love this watch, but the initial apparent use for the UTC hand - travelling - is just a waste of time. If you want to keep the UTC to your home time, or actual UTC, whenever you cross a time zone, or at DST change, you have to stop the watch, reset the time, rehack the seconds hand, then adjust the UTC. That's why I always travel with an RC quartz watch - pull out the crown, turn it to move the seconds hand (which now indicates time zone), push the crown in, job done with the minutes & seconds unaffected - takes 3 seconds.


That is odd. I thought the UTC hand didn't move when changing the main time. If the UTC hand can be set independently anyway, I don't see why it needs to advance with the main time. Even with the lack of quickset date, seems like my old IWC had the better mechanism for traveling: just move the independent jumping hour hand while the watch is running, and the UTC window stayed put as home time.


----------



## chris01 (Jan 5, 2011)

dhtjr said:


> That is odd. I thought the UTC hand didn't move when changing the main time. If the UTC hand can be set independently anyway, I don't see why it needs to advance with the main time. Even with the lack of quickset date, seems like my old IWC had the better mechanism for traveling: just move the independent jumping hour hand while the watch is running, and the UTC window stayed put as home time.


Yes, that's the problem. The UTC moves with the hour hand, so all you can do is fix its offset from the hour hand. Some other, usually much more expensive brands offer a true UTC, where you set the 24-hour UTC/GMT hand with minutes and seconds, and the hour hand runs at a user-variable offset from that. Your IWC, plus various Rolex/Omega/et al. Sinn are largely dependent on ETA-based movements, of which I believe none offers "true UTC".


----------



## Bumnah (Nov 17, 2014)

I was hell bent on an regular 856 and I got an 856S UTC because it was a great deal. I planned to sell it and use the extra money to get the exact 856 I wanted. I never did because the 856S UTC has grown on me so much. I feared the dial would be "too busy", but it's not at all. All 856s (plural not model) are very legible.


----------



## WatchMeWork (Aug 30, 2015)

I always thought the plain 856 was missing something. The UTC adds functionality if you need it and balances the dial, in my opinion.


----------



## TrailMonkey (Feb 10, 2016)

Thanks...


Bumnah said:


> I was hell bent on an regular 856 and I got an 856S UTC because it was a great deal. I planned to sell it and use the extra money to get the exact 856 I wanted. I never did because the 856S UTC has grown on me so much. I feared the dial would be "too busy", but it's not at all. All 856s (plural not model) are very legible.


----------



## TrailMonkey (Feb 10, 2016)

I agree.. there is a lot of dark space on the dial. I think even a red second hand would fix this.



WatchMeWork said:


> I always thought the plain 856 was missing something. The UTC adds functionality if you need it and balances the dial, in my opinion.


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

WatchMeWork said:


> I always thought the plain 856 was missing something. The UTC adds functionality if you need it and balances the dial, in my opinion.


I agree that, despite the somewhat clumsy mechanics of the UTC complication, it is a very handsome watch. And at least it's a real UTC hand, unlike the Diapal models with that extra 12-hour hand.


----------



## Bumnah (Nov 17, 2014)

I believe there was a special edition of the 856 with a red seconds hand. I'm not sure if it was UTC or not but it exists. I'd bet it's a Japanese model. There is a 756S UTC special edition with a red seconds hand that was Japan only. I tried to buy one but I wasn't able to get to an agreeable price.


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

Bumnah said:


> I believe there was a special edition of the 856 with a red seconds hand. I'm not sure if it was UTC or not but it exists. I'd bet it's a Japanese model. There is a 756S UTC special edition with a red seconds hand that was Japan only. I tried to buy one but I wasn't able to get to an agreeable price.


On that subject generally, nearly every Japanese limited edition of a Sinn has been exceptional in my view. I have yet to see anything in the US even remotely as interesting in terms of limited editions; in fact I'm not sure I recall any US market limiteds, but maybe there have been a few. I assume these things come about from collaboration between Japanese buyers/designers and Sinn; nevertheless, kudos to those Japanese watch folks with very good taste. The panda 103 comes to mind, as well as last year's 356 for Isetan with no running seconds or day/date. Very impressive.


----------



## watchmego3000 (Jul 12, 2012)

Let me start by saying the 856 is a brilliant watch, I absolutely love mine, it has totally lived up to my expectations, and then some. You can't go wrong with either choice!

I personally don't see the UTC version as cluttered or busy, it is indisputably legible and, I would say, balanced. The non-UTC is great, too, but the UTC adds useful functionality, a not-insignificant movement upgrade, and a splash of color. Yes, I'm biased!


----------



## TrailMonkey (Feb 10, 2016)

Nice shot! Looks good with a dress shirt. I have an 856 Non-UTC waiting for me at my office. Can't wait to take a look at it.



daschlag said:


> Let me start by saying the 856 is a brilliant watch, I absolutely love mine, it has totally lived up to my expectations, and then some. You can't go wrong with either choice!
> 
> I personally don't see the UTC version as cluttered or busy, it is indisputably legible and, I would say, balanced. The non-UTC is great, too, but the UTC adds useful functionality, a not-insignificant movement upgrade, and a splash of color. Yes, I'm biased!


----------



## watchmego3000 (Jul 12, 2012)

TrailMonkey said:


> Nice shot! Looks good with a dress shirt. I have an 856 Non-UTC waiting for me at my office. Can't wait to take a look at it.


Cool - you know where this is going... pics?!


----------



## TrailMonkey (Feb 10, 2016)




----------



## TrailMonkey (Feb 10, 2016)




----------



## Heffdog116 (Feb 3, 2015)

Anyone else think the hour hand gets lost in the UTC dial? Maybe some pictures make it more pronounced than it really is. Love the added bonus of UTC, but takes away legibility for me


----------



## thomas-david (Apr 6, 2017)

UTC all the way.


----------



## wkw (Feb 12, 2006)

Another vote on the UTC










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Heffdog116 (Feb 3, 2015)

But do you ever feel the hour hand (not the UTC hand) get lost in the inner dial at quick glances?


----------



## Lazlo Hollyfeld (Jun 20, 2016)

As for the 856, I prefer the UTC. For the 857, I prefer the non-UTC. But if either is Black PVD coated, I like them with the UTC. It's obviously all subjective with no wrong answers.


----------



## Lazlo Hollyfeld (Jun 20, 2016)

You may already know this, but you can hide the UTC hand under the hour hand when not in use, such as the picture above. The hour hand looks quite legible in this case.



Heffdog116 said:


> But do you ever feel the hour hand (not the UTC hand) get lost in the inner dial at quick glances?


----------



## nodnar (Oct 7, 2016)

Lazlo Hollyfeld said:


> You may already know this, but you can hide the UTC hand under the hour hand when not in use, such as the picture above. The hour hand looks quite legible in this case.


This is true for Sinn's 12 hour UTC models, but the 24 hour UTC hand move half as fast and won't stay hidden. If I remember correctly.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lazlo Hollyfeld (Jun 20, 2016)

nodnar said:


> This is true for Sinn's 12 hour UTC models, but the 24 hour UTC hand move half as fast and won't stay hidden. If I remember correctly.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Ahhh. Good point. I stand corrected. Thanks.


----------



## Heffdog116 (Feb 3, 2015)

When I give the UTC a quick glance (via pictures), I often get distracted by the white text of the inner dial and the white hour hand. Maybe I’m going crazy but they just seem to blend together. I want to like the UTC for added functionality but for some reason, it just isn’t working for me. I’m sure not having an independent main hour hand would get tiresome as well


----------



## Heffdog116 (Feb 3, 2015)

I want to make sure I understand the UTC correctly. You cannot adjust the main hour hand without adjusting the UTC hand, right? So I’m in EST, and my watch is set to 1pm, with UTC hand mirroring the correct time. I travel to California and want to adjust the main hour hand 3 hours behind, but keep the UTC hand at EST. I move the main hour hand to show 10am. The UTC hand moves with the main hour hand, so I then have to adjust the UTC hand back?

And excuse my ignorance/noob, but for the UTC 24 hour dial, you still have to do simple math to convert the time to 12-hour. Isn’t that the same simple math you would use with a 3-hander? ie California is a 3 hour difference so subtract 3 from current time. Gotta so addition/subtraction either way unless I’m missing something


----------



## Kaito Takaki (May 15, 2018)

Heffdog116 said:


> I want to make sure I understand the UTC correctly. You cannot adjust the main hour hand without adjusting the UTC hand, right? So I'm in EST, and my watch is set to 1pm, with UTC hand mirroring the correct time. I travel to California and want to adjust the main hour hand 3 hours behind, but keep the UTC hand at EST. I move the main hour hand to show 10am. The UTC hand moves with the main hour hand, so I then have to adjust the UTC hand back?
> 
> And excuse my ignorance/noob, but for the UTC 24 hour dial, you still have to do simple math to convert the time to 12-hour. Isn't that the same simple math you would use with a 3-hander? ie California is a 3 hour difference so subtract 3 from current time. Gotta so addition/subtraction either way unless I'm missing something


Since I have just bought a 856 UTC, let me help you.

1. The hour setting is very simple. First, you set the main hand hour. Second, you set the UTC hand. That's all 
2. You have to know the time difference between time zones to set the UTC. The math is indeed simple.


----------



## Scout308 (Dec 22, 2018)

rreimer91 said:


> I'd go utc - 2nd time zone nice for traveling and I think it looks nice. I know it is different but I have the 757 utc. With chronograph and bezel, even more complicated and maybe cluttered but I like it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I love the 856 UTC but agree the 857 UTC is a little cluttered......still one of the nicest workhorses out there


----------



## Scout308 (Dec 22, 2018)

watchmego3000 said:


> Let me start by saying the 856 is a brilliant watch, I absolutely love mine, it has totally lived up to my expectations, and then some. You can't go wrong with either choice!
> 
> I personally don't see the UTC version as cluttered or busy, it is indisputably legible and, I would say, balanced. The non-UTC is great, too, but the UTC adds useful functionality, a not-insignificant movement upgrade, and a splash of color. Yes, I'm biased!


That is my choice too....but I have QD silicone Barton straps in black and blue......wish the bracelet was a hair lighter. Beautiful watch!


----------



## Scout308 (Dec 22, 2018)

wkw said:


> Another vote on the UTC
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How is the black finish holding up?


----------



## wkw (Feb 12, 2006)

Scout308 said:


> How is the black finish holding up?


I have it for 8 years and coating looks almost like new.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

