# Finally a Longines Silver Arrow review!



## GOJIN (Mar 6, 2009)

Hello WUS members!

​






​This review contains my views and opinions on the Longines Silver Arrow. After putting off this review for about 12 months, I thought I'd be more objective about it&#8230;so here it is! :-!​The original Silver Arrow was a manual wind that was made between 1955 and '56. I guess it's only in the name as the one pictured below has obviously gold markers and hands. Where's the "silver arrows"? :-x
Anyway, with the resurgence of vintage-inspired and vintage-reissues pieces on the watch market, it was only a matter of time that Longines would release their own. 







Picture source: Hodinkee​ However, there are a range of stylistic changes, aimed at modernizing the look and feel of the watch, while still attempting to retain a degree of 'old-school' style. I'll go over the details that I thought were well executed, and some of the other ones that could have been just a bit better.






​
The Silver Arrow measures in at 38.5mm in diameter without the crown, and quite thinly at 0.7mm. It has a matte cream dial which, depending on the light source, can look almost white. The dial is viewed through a hesalite crystal, NOT sapphire. It's powered by the ETA 2892-A2, which means it also has a date aperture. The 2892 beats at 28,800 bph and has a power reserve of 42 hours. My SA was supplied with a black alligator strap that measures at 20mm at the lug and tapers down to 16mm at the buckle. I've seen some other ones on a plain looking leather, but given the choice, who wouldn't want the alligator? Superluminova covers the hour markings on the outer rim of the dial, and also on the hour and minute hands.








​The watch is pretty comfy on the wrist, due to the curved lugs. It has a nice look when worn under a cuff and naturally slides under there because it's so thin. I pretty much never wear a suit and most days when I go to uni I'm wearing a t-shirt and jeans. But I still like to wear it! b-) b-) b-)






​
The watch has a look to it that is undoubtedly retro. I really like the use of the hesalite crystal, which is still used for the Omega Speedmaster Pro. The departure from a modern case size, from say, 40mm or 42mm or so; is also appreciated&#8230;although in 1955, 38.5mm would be approaching the larger side. Other retro details such the crown, caseback (mostly flat and containing little decoration), and hour mini-markers are all very well done. The crown, in particular, is tiny (which I like, in watches like this) and signed with a simple 'Longines' and the logo. Another thing I liked was the stubby dauphine hands and slim buckle on the strap. Simply put, it's these details that make it look and feel like a vintage, without actually the age.








I had the markings on the caseback polished off on mine, and I also dyed the inside of the strap black with some Kiwi.








Nice.







​ A couple of little details that I thought were really well executed are the movement decoration and the caseback cover. With all the cost reduction measures associated with mass production, it would be totally understandable that the decoration would have taken a back seat. After all, it's not an exhibition caseback. But it is decorated and it's a nice touch to see the movement after you've popped open the watch. 
As much as I like the watch, there are some things I thought could have been improved on. I would have preferred a no-date option, simply because I think that the date aperture ruins the flow of the dial, if you get what I mean. Another thing I didn't like was the lug size. Since it's a fairly small sized watch, I thought it was better suited to a smaller sized and even possibly thinner strap. If they'd made it an 18mm, it might have looked a lot better. Even so, the fact that the strap tapers to a 16 doesn't make it look too fat compared with the watch. 
The last thing I couldn't stand was the lume. I felt that it could have done without it and maybe the money they saved from NOT putting it on could go towards a cheaper price? (just joking).
All in all, I certainly do recommend this watch to anyone who's already considering it. It's a nice vintage throwback that will interest people who fancy this style. It's definitely all about the little details, ones that become more apparent once you take a closer look at it. But it's not for everyone, particularly younger people but folks enjoy vintage themed watches will not be disappointed.

Thanks for reading!

Bonus non-hairy asian arm wristshot |>






​


----------



## asadtiger (Jun 23, 2008)

thanks a lot for your review Gojin...the watch is absolute class...it is elegance personified ...and it looks right at home on your wrist..a perfect match!


----------



## ohmegah (Dec 16, 2008)

Nice review of a really nice looking watch! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

Best,
Wallace


----------



## rabbitrun (Jan 16, 2011)

Gorgeous watch...thanks for your review! I hope to add one to my collection soon.


----------



## cmeisenzahl (Mar 10, 2006)

Classic, and classy, nice choice.


----------



## Drez (May 17, 2008)

Lovely retro design, I enjoy the script used on the dial
enjoy~


----------



## Barry H (Oct 1, 2008)

Nice review. Thanks for posting. I've been considering the SA since it's launch. I agree with you about the shortcomings and would have preferred non-date and 18mm lug width. The whole balance of the look would've been so much better, IMHO of course! I'd also like to have seen slightly longer and slimmer hands - I prefer the design of the original hands. 

Longines made similar blunders (in my opinion only) with the WWW reissue (ie hands too short, sub-dial not big enough, skinny crown - and a date window!)

Both these watches could have been modern classics and had me scrambling eagerly for my credit card. As they are, I think Longines have missed the boat with both. Shame.


----------



## hollyb (Feb 26, 2011)

I am new to the forum, great review. I was thinking of grabbing one, can you let me know what the measurement is from lug tip to lug tip? Thanks.


----------



## GOJIN (Mar 6, 2009)

Barry H said:


> Nice review. Thanks for posting. I've been considering the SA since it's launch. I agree with you about the shortcomings and would have preferred non-date and 18mm lug width. The whole balance of the look would've been so much better, IMHO of course! I'd also like to have seen slightly longer and slimmer hands - I prefer the design of the original hands.
> 
> Longines made similar blunders (in my opinion only) with the WWW reissue (ie hands too short, sub-dial not big enough, skinny crown - and a date window!)
> 
> Both these watches could have been modern classics and had me scrambling eagerly for my credit card. As they are, I think Longines have missed the boat with both. Shame.


 I'm glad we agree! The date windows, particularly on the WWW, just spoiled it for me... 
They're good watches, but a couple of small details is what separates them from being GREAT watches! I've yet to handle the LLD but that one seems to be a lot more faithful to the original.


hollyb said:


> I am new to the forum, great review. I was thinking of grabbing one, can you let me know what the measurement is from lug tip to lug tip? Thanks.


Tip to tip is 4.5 cm


----------



## jibzz (Dec 21, 2009)

beautiful and classic watch.


----------



## MGtheGreat (Dec 27, 2010)

nice watch  i enjoy clean and classic timepieces as well..but the hesalite is putting me off :/ are scratches on it easy to be buffed off?cheers


----------



## GOJIN (Mar 6, 2009)

^ 
Polywatch is a lifesaver.... although if you're pedantic about scratches then you won't want to look at the crystal through a loupe


----------



## Dianetix (Apr 12, 2011)

Thank you for the detailed review of a lovely classic watch!


----------



## hoser (Feb 26, 2006)

Looks nice. How large are your wrists...looks decent in size. Does it wear larger than 38.5?


----------

