# A "Winner" watch? (Under 20$ USD)



## Infinis

After my failure with a Herc watch (gifted to a friend who broke it in less than 2 days, the same friend who managed to break a seiko 7009, after that same seiko spent 2 years in my watch rotation) I decided to try again with a Chinese mechanical.

So this experience don't go for a waste, I decided to buy a fairly unknown brand and review it for the forum community.

So I navigated to eBay and typed in "Mechanical" in the search box. After some browsing, a pretty well designed watch catched my eye.

So here it goes: My winner.. for 17.00$ USD shipped

Chinese automatic Movement
Thick acrylic crystal (reflects light a lot...)
Unusual Date display
30m WR
40mm wide
cheap Leather Strap 
No box/pappers

The time precision is pretty good, I didn't time the watch yet, but from the readings it's pretty precise.




















































My regards )


----------



## Beau8

Nice catch for $20~Enjoy it in wellness!


----------



## DSLAM

Looks like a "winner". :-d Yeah it is hard to go wrong with anything for that price.


----------



## Craig M

$20? GREAT score! congrats


----------



## PseikoFan

Cool watch. Anyone have additional information on that movement?


----------



## Chascomm

PseikoFan said:


> Cool watch. Anyone have additional information on that movement?


It's yet another automatic variant of the Chinese Standard Movement. Looks like one of the older designs (not the latest ones from Liaoning, Shanghai or Liaocheng). The _possible_ downside is that it _may_ have been made on older (and therefore more worn) tooling. Hence the price. Most likely the blued screws are painted or chemical-stained.


----------



## DSLAM

Also, it's probably chrome plated low grade "pot metal" instead of stainless steel. Still, it's a "steal". :-d:-d

Check out this thread for more info on a similarly priced Chinese watch:https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=350117


----------



## AlbertaTime

That's a very nice lookin' watch...and for $20???... :-!:-!


----------



## rcs914

I have a couple on the way myself:

https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?p=2740731#post2740731

Chris


----------



## Infinis

Make a review when you get them!

BTW. Takes about 3-4 weeks to get to Canada


----------



## Stone Hill

I have been looking at that very watch for a while! I was hoping someone would buy one. Tell us more as the days come on.


----------



## whysea

Always happy with yours ?

This is my new one : the same in white ;-)


----------



## Cosmic

Infinis said:


> After my failure with a Herc watch (gifted to a friend who broke it in less than 2 days, the same friend who managed to break a seiko 7009, after that same seiko spent 2 years in my watch rotation) I decided to try again with a Chinese mechanical.
> 
> So this experience don't go for a waste, I decided to buy a fairly unknown brand and review it for the forum community.
> 
> So I navigated to eBay and typed in "Mechanical" in the search box. After some browsing, a pretty well designed watch catched my eye.
> 
> So here it goes: My winner.. for 17.00$ USD shipped
> 
> Chinese automatic Movement
> Thick acrylic crystal (reflects light a lot...)
> Unusual Date display
> 30m WR
> 40mm wide
> cheap Leather Strap
> No box/pappers
> 
> The time precision is pretty good, I didn't time the watch yet, but from the readings it's pretty precise.
> 
> My regards )


How many times did you wear it before it broke?

I bought one of the red dial versions with the odd date display along both sides, with sweep and sub second dial. I wore it TWICE. The back was likely installed by machine, because it had been cross-threaded on and the threads were stripped. I didn't know about this initially, of course. The first time I wore it, I didn't have any problems at all. The second time, I loosened the band after a few hours because the stiff leather was irritating my wrist. As I did this, I head a *pop* from the watch, and the back fell on my desk as I took it off, and utterly refused to thread back on properly. It would get slightly snug but would then slip and be loose again. Examination of the threads revealed the damage. I haven't been able to find another case of the proper size for the dial to put it in, and my ire doesn't even end there. I put the watch away in a case, but continued to keep it wound. One day after it had run down, I wound it and attempted to reset the time, finding that it would no longer set. Disassembly of the movement was cause for my dismay (I work with a master watchmaker as a jeweler's assistant, and he has taught me how to do my own work, which I do when time allows). First of all, after removing the hands, I found the dial wasn't attached to the movement with anything but an adhesive dial dot. Secondly, the setting mechanism consists of two wheels separated by a pinion with a lever in between. The clutch engages with the bottom wheel, which is in turn *supposed* to turn the top wheel, engaged with the minute wheel. The top wheel and pinion had actually separated from the bottom wheel (which had remained under the lever), and was floating around under the dial. I also found a random screw floating around in one of the circular holes under the dial. Before you ask; no, it doesn't fit in the pinion to hold those two wheels together. I can't find anywhere else where it might fit either, so I've chalked it up as an extra part that a careless worker accidentally dropped in there. The clutch lever spring was also out of position, which confirmed what I thought the problem was initially. I don't believe the movement is particularly well made. Much of the machine work on the movement is unfinished; there are burrs and sharp edges, and several of the cover plates over the setting parts don't fit quite right (which probably explains the setting lever spring problem and the separated wheel and pinion). Personally, I think you could get a MUCH better watch for 20 bones. I've gotten 30 year old Walthams and Seikos for less that work problem free. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Chascomm

Cosmic said:


> How many times did you wear it before it broke?
> 
> I bought one of the red dial versions with the odd date display along both sides, with sweep and sub second dial. I wore it TWICE. The back was likely installed by machine, because it had been cross-threaded on and the threads were stripped. I didn't know about this initially, of course. The first time I wore it, I didn't have any problems at all. The second time, I loosened the band after a few hours because the stiff leather was irritating my wrist. As I did this, I head a *pop* from the watch, and the back fell on my desk as I took it off, and utterly refused to thread back on properly. It would get slightly snug but would then slip and be loose again. Examination of the threads revealed the damage. I haven't been able to find another case of the proper size for the dial to put it in, and my ire doesn't even end there. I put the watch away in a case, but continued to keep it wound. One day after it had run down, I wound it and attempted to reset the time, finding that it would no longer set. Disassembly of the movement was cause for my dismay (I work with a master watchmaker as a jeweler's assistant, and he has taught me how to do my own work, which I do when time allows). First of all, after removing the hands, I found the dial wasn't attached to the movement with anything but an adhesive dial dot. Secondly, the setting mechanism consists of two wheels separated by a pinion with a lever in between. The clutch engages with the bottom wheel, which is in turn *supposed* to turn the top wheel, engaged with the minute wheel. The top wheel and pinion had actually separated from the bottom wheel (which had remained under the lever), and was floating around under the dial. I also found a random screw floating around in one of the circular holes under the dial. Before you ask; no, it doesn't fit in the pinion to hold those two wheels together. I can't find anywhere else where it might fit either, so I've chalked it up as an extra part that a careless worker accidentally dropped in there. The clutch lever spring was also out of position, which confirmed what I thought the problem was initially. I don't believe the movement is particularly well made. Much of the machine work on the movement is unfinished; there are burrs and sharp edges, and several of the cover plates over the setting parts don't fit quite right (which probably explains the setting lever spring problem and the separated wheel and pinion). Personally, I think you could get a MUCH better watch for 20 bones. I've gotten 30 year old Walthams and Seikos for less that work problem free. Just my 2 cents.


Seems like there is a consistent pattern emerging for the lowest grade of Tongji automatics. Quality on par with the $10 tongji skeleton hand-winders, but with more parts to go wrong.

So what you've found is:
- poor machining (worn tooling?)
- lack of essential finishing in out-of-sight places
- careless assembly

What others have found:
- auto-winding module incapable of doing what is required
- dirt
- lack of lubrication

Summing up, what we are seeing here is poor manufacturing of the movement compounded with the haphazard assembly that is typical of the transient brands.

The sad thing is that examples like these are a poor reflection upon the Chinese watch industry in general and this movement design in particular. In my experience, even those watch repairers who are prepared to distiguish between different Chinese products approach Tongji movements with suspicion. Give them a vintage example of the same and the difference is startling.


----------



## soviet

Chascomm said:


> Seems like there is a consistent pattern emerging for the lowest grade of Tongji automatics. Quality on par with the $10 tongji skeleton hand-winders, but with more parts to go wrong.
> 
> So what you've found is:
> - poor machining (worn tooling?)
> - lack of essential finishing in out-of-sight places
> - careless assembly
> 
> What others have found:
> - auto-winding module incapable of doing what is required
> - dirt
> - lack of lubrication
> 
> Summing up, what we are seeing here is poor manufacturing of the movement compounded with the haphazard assembly that is typical of the transient brands.
> 
> The sad thing is that examples like these are a poor reflection upon the Chinese watch industry in general and this movement design in particular. In my experience, even those watch repairers who are prepared to distiguish between different Chinese products approach Tongji movements with suspicion. Give them a vintage example of the same and the difference is startling.


A few years ago, I bought some NOS 'Shanghai 7120's with the same crudely made caseback 7120-940, but with various brands of Tongji movements. I believe those were made by a village shop with rejected movements, or self-finished movements. I suspect that those kind movements found their way into some fake Vostoks, or other unknown brands. These are very different from Shanghai made Chunlei, or a real 7120 model watches in quality. I will take some images FYI when I got time.


----------



## RuffRydas

Please stop supporting these cheaply made watches that are giving the real Chinese watch manufactuers (Seagull, Shanghai, Beijing...) a bad name. If people keep falling for them, they will continue to be made. Unfortunately, with the majority of Chinese manufactured goods, cheap price = piece of junk...


----------



## Pawl_Buster

RuffRydas said:


> .... Unfortunately, with the majority of Chinese manufactured goods, cheap price = piece of junk...


Fortunately that is not true. Chinese projects are less expensive for various reasons. It is only a small group of opportunists who turn out this kind of pulp.
The majority of Chinese made products stand up very well; in fact, you will be hard put to find many items in any store today that doesn't have some Chinese content.

Painting all the majority of Chinese products as junk is simply ignorant. Sure they make some low quality stuff but so does the rest of the world; just look at Ford, GM and especially Chrysler!

The Swiss have made their share of cheap junk too


----------



## RuffRydas

Pawl_Buster said:


> Fortunately that is not true. Chinese projects are less expensive for various reasons. It is only a small group of opportunists who turn out this kind of pulp.
> The majority of Chinese made products stand up very well; in fact, you will be hard put to find many items in any store today that doesn't have some Chinese content.
> 
> Painting all the majority of Chinese products as junk is simply ignorant. Sure they make some low quality stuff but so does the rest of the world; just look at Ford, GM and especially Chrysler!
> 
> The Swiss have made their share of cheap junk too


Not ALL Chinese products are junk... I am specifically referring to the extreme budget items, hence the cheap price = piece of junk argument. Keeping within the realm of watches, a Seagull double tourbillon is a quality Chinese made product while these cheap $20 watches on ebay are IMO essentially a bad game of Russian roulette. It's these cheap watches that are turning people away from Chinese watches as a whole. Not everyone out there has the luxury of the support network WUS provides. Imagine you are just starting into watches and end up buying a cheap Chinese made watch for $20 and it breaks within days or shows up DOA, what are the chances you'll ever buy another watch made in China? From the perspective of someone who sincerely wants the Chinese watch industry to succeed, these budget/mushroom/"homage" brands are only hurting the real Chinese manufactuer's chances of establishing a market outside of China itself.


----------



## soviet

soviet said:


> A few years ago, I bought some NOS 'Shanghai 7120's with the same crudely made caseback 7120-940, but with various brands of Tongji movements. I believe those were made by a village shop with rejected movements, or self-finished movements. I suspect that those kind movements found their way into some fake Vostoks, or other unknown brands. These are very different from Shanghai made Chunlei, or a real 7120 model watches in quality. I will take some images FYI when I got time.


Here are some quick dirt images of this watch. It is said those watches were made in Zhejiang province, perhaps in Wenzhou when it was still poor.<| The caseback with a number of 7120-808 is a correct one. It cost only $1(8RMB), not $20,to me. I bought them for parts.


----------



## tony1951

Infinis said:


> So here it goes: My winner.. for 17.00$ USD shipped
> 
> Chinese automatic Movement
> Thick acrylic crystal (reflects light a lot...)
> Unusual Date display
> 30m WR
> 40mm wide
> cheap Leather Strap
> No box/pappers
> 
> The time precision is pretty good, I didn't time the watch yet, but from the readings it's pretty precise.
> 
> My regards )


Hello.

I just received one of these from Hong Kong as an Ebay purchase. Mine has a different dial, but is the same watch with the same fake crocodile strap.

My first impression is that it is very good for the money, and reading your account, I suppose I got mine slightly cheaper at £11 delivered. The watch accounted for £5.60 of that price.

So far (three hours) it has kept time exactly and is sitting on my right wrist keeping company with my vintage 1946 Omega Bumper Auto, which is on my left wrist.

I am under no illusion that it will still be running in 67 years time like my grandfather's Omega is, let alone keeping a daily rate of minus five or six seconds a day like the venerable Swiss. I just wanted a mechanical that I can wear every day when I am doing chores and mucking about in a rough fashion and not worry about bashing it or getting it dirty or wet.

I have looked at it with a x10 loupe through the dial and the rear viewing window. I can see a couple of tiny specks of debris on the dial that are not visible to the naked eye, and the rear view of the movement shows nothing like that. To be honest, I won't grieve any if it goes wrong. For that price, I can just about get a really cheap haircut.

I will post more when I have a few days of experience of its performance.

Cheers

Tony


----------



## tony1951

UPDATE:

Well, I think I really do have a winner here. I monitored its time keeping over twenty-four hours and its total variance from the time set was 4.5 seconds and it never went outside that. Mostly, when I was wearing it and going about my day, it stayed within two seconds of the set time. I use the Greenwich Time Signal to keep track of time because I can hear the signal and don't have to scan from one visual clock to the other. 

I know that some people have found their Winner stopped or was badly put together, but this one isn't, although it has tiny flaws. The reference to 'debris' under the crystal in the post above should be revised. I had another look and in fact the tiny marks are in fact chips to the dial made probably when the operator was fitting the pointers. You can see these tiny marks just below and to the left of the calendar window in the rather large photo above, but I can't see them as I check the time unless I really try to find them. It could also be said also that the date does not appear centrally in the window, but I'm not going to complain. I got a fantastic bargain and I say that well aware that I won't be leaving it to anybody in my will.


----------



## tony1951

Here's an update on my Winner watch from ebay.

I think it has the Tongi auto movement and has been sold probably as a second to the watch constructor in Hong Kong. Like most of these I suspect there is a problem with the auto winding. I have found that the watch keeps extremely good time when hand wound and somewhat less good time when the auto wind is relied on. The mechanism operates correctly if you take off the back and rotate the rotor by hand, but in use the rotor only makes small movements. Observation of the mechanism while manually moving the rotator shows that it winds in both directions and responds to very small movements of the rotor, so it could be that it will keep the watch going without my winding the crown.

If I wind the crown twice daily, the watch has a daily rate of -2 seconds.

When I relied on the auto wind mechanism, on the second day the daily rate was -10 seconds which suggests to me that it may not be winding very well on the wrist and is running short of power. I will do further observation of this by not winding with the crown at all for a few days while keeping note of the accuracy.

For a watch at this throw away price to keep time to -2 seconds a day in any circumstances is quite remarkable I think.


I am now being sorely tempted by a Seagul st 177, classic watch which is on sale by truthhonestman at a reasonable price of just on £80. It is smaller and looks delightful. The movement is layed out in a similar way to this one so they may be both designed on the same design.


----------



## tony1951

Well, I've been wearing the £5.60 Winner (£11 delivered) for a month now. I have never had to set the watch in 30 days and it is currently 1 second fast of GMT. It is an amazing bargain, though I can't say that anyone else would get one as good. It loses about 5 seconds during a days wear and I have found that by taking it off at bed time and leaving it on the bedside table face up overnight, it gains them back. That is how I am keeping it more or less in perfect time.

I have done further experiments on the self winding business. The watch keeps on running for four days but it loses more time if run like this. I am winding the watch night and morning so that it is fully wound. This way its accuracy is quite remarkable for such a cheap item.

I have ordered my Seagull M177s from ebay seller truthhonestman (something like that) and it ought to be here in about another two weeks. I suppose then the winner watch will be relegated to the drawer except when I am gardening or doing rough and dirty work. I like the winner a lot. It does its job. I've had far more expensive mechanical watches in the past that were nothing like as good at keeping time.


----------



## ecthelion

I currently have two Jaragar-branded automatics (one of which still works) that use that very same movement (which is known by many names: "China 2650," - which I believe refers specifically to the skeletonized non-automatic variant - "Chinese Standard Movement" - which is what I call it - "Tongji"...all of these terms refer to the same movement or variants thereof). I had two different ones (one Jaragar-branded and the other Fuyate-branded) before, and those two stopped working. After which I took them apart.

All four of these watches, while technically automatics, did not autowind, even while they were otherwise functional and could be wound by hand. This seems to be a consistent characteristic of watches distributed by so-called mushroom brands that use the Chinese Standard Movement. Something about the rotor assembly or the lack of proper rotor weight seems to prevent the rotor from freely rotating to wind the mainspring. I am at best a WIS and am definitely not a watchmaker, so despite having taken many of these movements apart (automatics and handwinders alike) I am unable to identify exactly why the rotor seems to be held more or less in place (as if the gears are not actually round) even when the entire watch itself is moved around or shaken.

That said, I finally came upon a solution with my last functioning automatic Chinese Standard movement. I simply removed the autowinder mechanism, rotor and all (which rotated freely when it was removed), and treated the watch as if it were a handwinder. It works wonderfully. While this leaves a little extra space in the case, I figure that it was better that be the case than to see an autowinding mechanism that didn't work.


----------



## Pawl_Buster

I too removed the auto winding mechanism from my winner. It works perfectly as a hand winder; as it should. The 'tongji' movement is a hand winder and has only had the auto winding mechanism slapped on recently so as to be able to call it autowinding.

When I disassembled the mechanism and looked at it under 10X magnification, it becomes rather apparent why it is so poor at doing it's job.

First of all as has been pointed out; the weight on the rotor simply does not have enough mass to overcome the mainspring and all the friction in the auto winding mechanism.
This system uses dual reverser wheels like the ETA but does not use jewels in them. Adding to the problem is that the reverser rollers themselves appear to be very poorly shaped or finished.

I suspect that if the mechanism used a more massive rotor weight and cleanly machined rollers; it might actually function reasonably well.
At this price point and because I love a good handwinder; I'm not disappointed nor am I down on the actual movement...it's actually quite well made; at least a 3rd or maybe 2nd grade 'standard'


----------



## tony1951

Very interesting stuff there Pawl Buster. I love my cheapo Winner. It actually performs very well, but I do wind it or it seems to run a bit slow. I am not wearing it now since I am in love with my new Seagull, but the Winner works damned well as a hand winder as you say. It actually keeps closer to time than my new Seagull which for a watch costing £5.50 plus something like £4.50 postage is a remarkable bargain. I keep it wound up and check its performance every day.

Sorry - I do know I've been boring on about this but I couldn't believe how good it was for the money.
*
How many winds do you thinkl would fully wind the watch? Being an auto, the thing just keeps on turning. I'm giving it forty winds but that is probably too many.*


----------



## Pawl_Buster

tony1951 said:


> Very interesting stuff there Pawl Buster. I love my cheapo Winner. It actually performs very well, but I do wind it or it seems to run a bit slow. I am not wearing it now since I am in love with my new Seagull, but the Winner works damned well as a hand winder as you say. It actually keeps closer to time than my new Seagull which for a watch costing £5.50 plus something like £4.50 postage is a remarkable bargain. I keep it wound up and check its performance every day.
> 
> Sorry - I do know I've been boring on about this but I couldn't believe how good it was for the money.
> *
> How many winds do you thinkl would fully wind the watch? Being an auto, the thing just keeps on turning. I'm giving it forty winds but that is probably too many.*


Automatic watches usually have a special main spring with a 'bridle' on the end that allows it to slip once the full wind is reached. This prevents it from breaking by being wound to tight.
You can hand wind it forever and you will never reach the end


----------



## stratct

Pawl_Buster said:


> I too removed the auto winding mechanism from my winner. It works perfectly as a hand winder; as it should. The 'tongji' movement is a hand winder and has only had the auto winding mechanism slapped on recently so as to be able to call it autowinding.
> 
> When I disassembled the mechanism and looked at it under 10X magnification, it becomes rather apparent why it is so poor at doing it's job.
> 
> First of all as has been pointed out; the weight on the rotor simply does not have enough mass to overcome the mainspring and all the friction in the auto winding mechanism.
> This system uses dual reverser wheels like the ETA but does not use jewels in them. Adding to the problem is that the reverser rollers themselves appear to be very poorly shaped or finished.
> 
> I suspect that if the mechanism used a more massive rotor weight and cleanly machined rollers; it might actually function reasonably well.
> At this price point and because I love a good handwinder; I'm not disappointed nor am I down on the actual movement...it's actually quite well made; at least a 3rd or maybe 2nd grade 'standard'


Instead of modifying a movement to make it an auto.....why not just pop one of the over abundant DG movements in it?


----------



## Pawl_Buster

stratct said:


> Instead of modifying a movement to make it an auto.....why not just pop one of the over abundant DG movements in it?


By removing the reluctant rotor; I added no cost and end up with a really good working manual winder. I don't wear most watches long enough that the auto feature even matters.


----------



## stratct

Pawl_Buster said:


> By removing the reluctant rotor; I added no cost and end up with a really good working manual winder. I don't wear most watches long enough that the auto feature even matters.


No I meant for the company. Why did they mod a movement instead of using one of the many Chinese auto movements out there?


----------



## ecthelion

It was probably much, much cheaper. For reasons that have been discussed (I also raised a point on another recent thread), those particular Tongji movements that have been modified are frequently flawed (and they all seem to suffer at the very least from using rotors that are insufficient in mass to autowind the movements), but in bulk are probably far cheaper to make than other decent Chinese automatic movements. What's more is that the distinct possibility exists that the Chinese companies already know that many of these modified Tongjis are weak as automatics but since many of these movements were acquired by mushroom brands indirectly (through junk bins, second-hand acquisitions of bulk materials, and the like), the worthlessness (mushroom brand manufacturers may even get them for close to no cost per movement) of these movements would make them prime candidates for insertion into mushroom brand watches.


----------



## tony1951

hh4bt9g6 said:


> Here are some quick dirt images of this watch. It is said those watches were made in Zhejiang province, perhaps in Wenzhou when it was still poor. The caseback with a number of 7120-808 is a correct one. It cost only $1(8RMB), not $20,to me. I bought them for parts.


The pictures don't show here.


----------



## John0body

I purchased a self-winding skeleton model for my son who wore the watch for a day before it stopped. The self-winding weight seems reluctant to move and the main spring appears to be fully wound. If I tap the watch, the balance wheel starts to move as if counting the seconds, but the second hand does not move. 

Because this is an Ebay purchase, I get to send it back. I plan to ask the seller for the hand-wind version of the watch and hope I have better luck with it. If I don't have better luck, I may just perform my first post-mortem on a watch, put it back together and see if it runs.


----------



## tony1951

That's very disappointing for you. I have another Winner on the way. If it is as good as the first one, I will be very pleased. I hope your next one meets your requirements better.


----------



## fliegerchrono

Just ordered my first Winner! New Mens Automatic Mechanical Day Date Display Leather Watch | eBay 
I just thought by myself that if the watch functions correctly and I will switch to a new leather strap the value will more then double!


----------



## pnin22

I wonder how it is possible to produce a mechanical watch for <$20, including strap, shipping, seller's margin? Have any of you any insight into how the manufacturing operates (i.e. are these watches assembled by children chained to a desk in a dark basement?) Any articles, photos of the factories?


----------



## Pawl_Buster

pnin22 said:


> I wonder how it is possible to produce a mechanical watch for <$20, including strap, shipping, seller's margin? Have any of you any insight into how the manufacturing operates (i.e. are these watches assembled by children chained to a desk in a dark basement?) Any articles, photos of the factories?


Wages, cost of materials and a large amount of automation make it perfectly possible to produce a $10 or $20 mechanical watch without infringing on human rights. Certainly we couldn't do it here because of wages, cost of materials and the cost of automation...good example is GM closing down the Camaro plant in Canada because it now costs more to produce the cars here than GM can sell them for.


----------



## chronoman23

Pawl_Buster said:


> Wages, cost of materials and a large amount of automation make it perfectly possible to produce a $10 or $20 mechanical watch without infringing on human rights. Certainly we couldn't do it here because of wages, cost of materials and the cost of automation...good example is GM closing down the Camaro plant in Canada because it now costs more to produce the cars here than GM can sell them for.


Makes one feel all warm and fuzzy, knowing that Canadian tax payers made a charitable donation to GM, partly to keep that plant running.......


----------



## Pawl_Buster

chronoman23 said:


> Makes one feel all warm and fuzzy, knowing that Canadian tax payers made a charitable donation to GM, partly to keep that plant running.......


Much better use of tax dollars to keep Canadians employed than things like $2 million spent on flags ;-)


----------



## mpalmer

Congrats on your Winner!


----------



## fliegerchrono

Yes, my Winner has arrived by airmail, in just *EIGHT *days and that for the immense total sum of..... $14,98 !!!!
Watch looks nice although the lack of AR coating makes for a lot of glare and I have never seen such a cheap (not to mention smelly) strap, but it runs well straight out of the box, I say it's a Winner!


----------



## fliegerchrono

The black "leather" strap was just too ugly so I switched it for a blue crocoprint Rios strap, which btw more then doubled the value of the watch! ;-)
The watch still runs nicely and looks pretty good on the new strap.


----------



## James Haury

DSLAM said:


> Looks like a "winner". :-d Yeah it is hard to go wrong with anything for that price.


It could be a GOER too,


----------



## fliegerchrono

And with some regulating by trial and error I managed to get it to +1 sec a day! Confirmedby the Kello app on my iPhone. Tremendous fun!


----------



## Will3020

Can't wrong with a Winner


----------



## Robocaspar

Dial looks alot like a Hamilton copy. I forget which model, probably one of the Khaki line. Looks neat for a 20$ purchase.


----------



## fliegerchrono

Best value for money..... EVER!


----------



## Peteworrall

I have a handful of Winners now, all have provided excellent value for money 
View attachment 967103

View attachment 967104

View attachment 967105


(Have a couple of others too)

Accurate, reliable and good value for the money. Won't last a lifetime but for £10-15 delivered who cares?


----------



## Noobheure

*Peteworrall : Have a full shot of that last one ? I'm intrigued !*


----------



## Robocaspar

That 2nd Winner picture is straight up Longines copy  even the logo is similar.


----------



## Peteworrall

Noobheure said:


> *Peteworrall : Have a full shot of that last one ? I'm intrigued !*


Here you go, plus my Winner "Carerra".
View attachment 967393

View attachment 967394


View attachment 967395

View attachment 967396


----------



## Peteworrall

Robocaspar said:


> That 2nd Winner picture is straight up Longines copy  even the logo is similar.


Yeah, meaning that it is a great looking watch!


----------



## Noobheure

Nice ! Thanks


----------



## cdhumiston

RuffRydas said:


> Not ALL Chinese products are junk... I am specifically referring to the extreme budget items, hence the cheap price = piece of junk argument. Keeping within the realm of watches, a Seagull double tourbillon is a quality Chinese made product while these cheap $20 watches on ebay are IMO essentially a bad game of Russian roulette. It's these cheap watches that are turning people away from Chinese watches as a whole. Not everyone out there has the luxury of the support network WUS provides. Imagine you are just starting into watches and end up buying a cheap Chinese made watch for $20 and it breaks within days or shows up DOA, what are the chances you'll ever buy another watch made in China? From the perspective of someone who sincerely wants the Chinese watch industry to succeed, these budget/mushroom/"homage" brands are only hurting the real Chinese manufacturer's chances of establishing a market outside of China itself.


I disagree, I think most people who spend $20 on eBay for a watch know exactly what they are getting. Nowdays it only takes a minute with Google to see reviews of various brands of Chinese watches. I was able to determine in a matter of minutes that a Sea-Gull is a well made respected chinese watch company and that the "Winner" I purchased may or may not last, but for $20 I am willing to take that chance.

So far my "Winner" is a winner, keeps great time, looks good and didn't break the bank. I have some nice higher value watches, but I like to have something around that I don't have to worry about damaging during everyday use...Just my .02 YMMV.

Chris


----------

