# Decisions, decisions... Citizen vs. Grand Seiko



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Hello all,

After deciding against a Sinn UX as my first HEQ, I've been perusing the HEQs made by Citizen and Seiko.

I've narrowed it down to two...

Citizen CTQ57-1025









Grand Seiko SBGF021









...but I fear there may be one or two I'm missing!

Can anyone help?

I'm looking for a high end quartz with black dial, sapphire crystal, 200m WR and perpetual calendar. I'm also not mad on the '12' and '6' markings on the Citizen, which is what's making me consider the non perpetual calendar Grand Seiko (I'm pretty sure this is the case, though correct me if the 8J56 DOES have perpetual calendar, in which case it's a no-brainer).

There don't appear to be any 9F-based GSs with 200m WR, but perhaps I'm being a little over-cautious on that issue - thoughts?

I'd also appreciate some pics of the Chronomaster bracelet clasp as I can't seem to find any decent ones. It might just be the deciding vote, as I love the Seiko bracelet.

Many thanks!

Jan


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Actually, just found this picture of the Chronomaster bracelet, I'm assuming it's the same one on the CTQ57-1025:










I prefer the bracelet portion of the Seiko I think, but the clasps are level pegging.

Thanks


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

Mr modnaR said:


> ...
> I'm looking for a high end quartz with black dial, sapphire crystal, 200m WR and perpetual calendar. I'm also not mad on the '12' and '6' markings on the Citizen, which is what's making me consider the non perpetual calendar Grand Seiko (I'm pretty sure this is the case, though correct me if the 8J56 DOES have perpetual calendar, in which case it's a no-brainer).
> ...


First time when I studied the problem I was also surprised so probably you might be be too - neither 8J series nor any of the 9F series from Seiko have (at least until now) perpetual calendar.

I believe from Seiko the only HEQ line with a PC is currently 8F - and again I believe I have only seen 8F35 and maybe 8F56 in some diver WR200 models (even there is an 8F58 model which is listed as the real diver version of the 8F56).


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Yes it is rather strange!

I'm after a more dressy-looking watch rather than a diver, but I'll have a look at those, thanks!


----------



## martback (Feb 11, 2006)

On the Seiko side, it is basically a choice between the 8J and the 9F calibers, which is a question of what functionality you value most. Anectodal advice state that the 9F can get better accuracy than the 8J and it is the caliber that ends up at the top of the Seiko quartz range. I would not worry that much about WR rating as all of the GS should be good enough for daily wear. For the Citizen, I do not see any alternatives to the Chronomaster and it is just to choose the right design.

/ martin


----------



## ppaulusz (Feb 11, 2006)

martback said:


> ...Anectodal advice state that the 9F can get better accuracy than the 8J and it is the caliber that ends up at the top of the Seiko quartz range...


The fact is that we do not have any evidence that the 9F is more accurate (by applied technology) than the 8J. I believe they both use similar digital thermocompensation technologies. The 9F if fitted with a digital calibration terminal which is a plus for the purpose of rate adjustment but strictly speaking that feature won't affect its thermocompensation performance.


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks Martin,

Yes, I've looked at the 9F range too, they all seem a little 'shiny' for my liking. The SBGF021 has polished areas, but more brushed areas. I admit that the Chronomaster is fairly shiny, but I could forego this criteria for the increased accuracy, perpetual calendar and independent hour hand mobility.


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Double post.


----------



## martback (Feb 11, 2006)

That is why the sentence starts with "anecdotal". However, I have seen a few statements that 9F is more accurate than the 8J but none to the contrary. It could of course be that 9F owners are more inclined to push the merits of their caliber than 8J owners. I have one of each so I am neutral.

/ martin



ppaulusz said:


> The fact is that we do not have any evidence that the 9F is more accurate (by applied technology) than the 8J. I believe they both use similar digital thermocompensation technologies. The 9F if fitted with a digital calibration terminal which is a plus for the purpose of rate adjustment but strictly speaking that feature won't affect its thermocompensation performance.


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

Mr modnaR said:


> Yes it is rather strange!
> 
> I'm after a more dressy-looking watch rather than a diver, but I'll have a look at those, thanks!


Then you should also look around SBQJ015 - a recent 'darling' of the forum, my own review is at http://caranfil.org/harrison/harrison_legacy.html - however that being said if you have the money the Chronomaster with 10 years of warranty is IMHO a clear (and distant) winner ... (if you do not like the 6 and 12 in the WR200 model you can switch to the WR100; however no model yet has day/date :-( ).


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks Catalin, for me the GMT complication is not desirable, which is unfortunate, as that watch is otherwise very good.

I agree, I think it'll have to be a Chronomaster. I think I prefer the look of the non-lumed 100m WR one.


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

I don't see any advantage to 20 BAR over 10 BAR unless you plan to dive with the watch, and that would surprise me, since the watch is definitely not a diver. I have CTQ57-0955, which comes close to your criteria, with the exception of the WR 200 feature. It's titanium, so very light and does not have the '12' and '6' markers that annoy you. Here's a good look at one from an old ad from the sales forum on WUS:
________________________________________

Some features:

- Titanium case and bracelet with Duratech coating
- Sapphire crystal (Non-Reflective Coating)
- WR 10 BAR: 100 meter Water Resistant
- Time Correction Function (change the hour without changing the seconds)
- Perpetual Calendar
- Accuracy: ±5 seconds per year
- Diameter: 38 x 38mm
- Case Thickness: 10.3mm
- Weight: 81g
- Comes with original CITIZEN box and Japanese manual
- Product Manual in English by CITIZEN JAPAN 
- Warranty: 10 year full Japan warranty 
























__________________


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks, I think if I were to go for a 100m WR Chronomaster, the CTQ57-1202 would slightly edge it over that one, as it has a better bracelet IMHO and white on black date wheel, which I prefer. The 0955 does have lume and, to me, a better clasp though. Grr, why do they make things so difficult!










Thanks for all these suggestions guys, you're definitely enabling me to hone my decision.


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

Mr modnaR said:


> Thanks, I think if I were to go for a 100m WR Chronomaster, the CTQ57-1202 would slightly edge it over that one, as it has a better bracelet IMHO and white on black date wheel, which I prefer. The 0955 does have lume and, to me, a better clasp though. Grr, why do they make things so difficult!
> ...


While you will find me and _South Pender_ often in fervent debates, our preferences are actually very similar - CTQ57-0955 and CTQ57-1025 are titanium models while CTQ57-1202 is the steel model (but I am also partial to the first two since I often like lume; I also consider as a personal preference even more dressier the CTQ57-0972, but being white gold that is more far more expensive).

The white on black date wheel also was one of my previous desires, but the black writing on white background one might actually be easier to read in some conditions ...


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks, yes I like the heft of a steel watch, but having never had a titanium one, I can't compare, so I don't think the metal would be in the equation. My current watch has white day and date wheels, and I regret not getting one with black ones!


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

Mr modnaR said:


> Thanks, I think if I were to go for a 100m WR Chronomaster, the CTQ57-1202 would slightly edge it over that one, as it has a better bracelet IMHO and white on black date wheel, which I prefer. The 0955 does have lume and, to me, a better clasp though. Grr, why do they make things so difficult!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You know, that's something I've never considered before--or even noticed (the white on black vs. black on white date wheel)! Now that you mention it, I think that I too prefer the white on black. Anything for an excuse to pick up another watch! ;-)


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

Mr modnaR said:


> Thanks, yes I like the heft of a steel watch, but having never had a titanium one, I can't compare, so I don't think the metal would be in the equation. My current watch has white day and date wheels, and I regret not getting one with black ones!


Is that the Sinn UX ? How would you rate that one ? Any accuracy tests ?


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

No, it's an SKX007 diver. I decided against the UX because of the hassle of sending it back to Germany for a battery change.

@south pender: yes, I know I'm being picky, but this will be my one watch I will keep for a long time, so I want to make sure that there's nothing on it I dislike!


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

Mr modnaR said:


> @south pender: yes, I know I'm being picky, but this will be my one watch I will keep for a long time, so I want to make sure that there's nothing on it I dislike!


Oh, absolutely! Definitely be picky about this, and don't be 'Random.' You are choosing a top-end watch and dropping some serious coin.


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

There are quite a number of The Citizen models that don't have the numbers on the dial. The CTQ57-0955 has a black dial and is made of titanium, case and bracelet both. I've got a GS (SD, not quartz) and an 0955 and I agree that I slightly prefer the Seiko bracelet, though there's really very little in it. The only difference I can see in the clasps is the lettering. 
I think the case on the 0955 is nicer than 1025 myself, though the odds are that the 9F Seikos probably have a little more presence than either of them. 
I think the non-perp-cal 9F is a dealbreaker for me and I'm not mad about the cases on the GS models that have the independently adjustable hour hand. The bezel cone is too flat, I think. 
All in all, I'd choose the CTQ 0955.... in fact, I did!
You asked for opinions, but you're the one who's going to wear it, so I'm sure you'll make your own choice and I hope you enjoy wearing it as much as you have agonizing about which to buy!



Mr modnaR said:


> Hello all,
> 
> After deciding against a Sinn UX as my first HEQ, I've been perusing the HEQs made by Citizen and Seiko.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks artec, yes I realise it's me that has to make the decision, I just wondered if there were any other HEQs that I'd missed that other people might know about.

Strangely, considering my dislike of the '12' and '6' on the CTQ57-1025, I love the A660 Campanola, but the rarity of them (especially with bracelet) means they'll most probably be out of my price range.










Something else I like about the SBGF021 is the textured/patterned dial, but I fear the black on white date wheel and non perpetual calendar are pushing me away. I've looked at all the 8f Seiko models, and none I've seen really grab me, plus I think I'd rather a TC movement.


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Another point of interest to anyone else who may read this thread is that the CTQ57-1202 has a domed sapphire crystal whereas the CTQ57-0955 and (I think) CTQ57-1025 have a flat sapphire crystal.

If anyone knows different, let me know, so I can correct this 'Infonugget™', thanks!


----------



## Blueeyedninja (Apr 30, 2008)

i went with that GS. Hasn't lost a second in 6 months (well, maybe i just didn't see it).


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks for the picture!

If the GS had a black date wheel and perpetual calendar, it'd most probably be the one I'd go for.


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

I think this is true, correct me if I'm wrong: the CTQ57-1202 has a domed crystal, where the 0955 does not?

I think I'm foregoing lume and 200m WR and falling for the CTQ57-1202, it has a nice shaped case, and the bracelet looks better to me. Just one thing though, is 100m WR ok to swim in? I'd really like this to be my one watch that I don't have to remove for anything (except saving the girl), and I still think I'd prefer the peace of mind of a screw down crown and 200m WR.

Of course: this will all be for nothing if Seiko releases a 200m WR, perpetual calendar, TC Grand Seiko with white-on-black date wheel in the next few years!


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

The 0955 is flat (to my naked eye).

I'd rather not bring a dress watch swimming. The chlorine does bad things to rubber over time. 

I'd say Sinn UX or Breitling. Better yet, wear a cheapie g-shock/dive watch and you're all set to go. There is no one-watch for all occasions I'm aware of.

Btw, the SBGT and SBGX 9F GS are better finished than the SBGF. More complex case work, dial, hands, bracelets. The SBGT in particular, are rather unique. They're currently the only day-date HEQ I'm aware of.


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

RPF said:


> ...
> Btw, the SBGT and SBGX 9F GS are better finished than the SBGF. More complex case work, dial, hands, bracelets. The SBGT in particular, are rather unique. They're currently the only day-date HEQ I'm aware of.


Those are the top-level, but 8F33 also has perpetual calendar - even if the only 2 models still in production in JP don't really impress me a lot :-(

The older SBQL001 can no longer be found and the same for one previous higher-end 8F33 that was a Dolce SACN001:


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

Mr modnaR said:


> I think this is true, correct me if I'm wrong: the CTQ57-1202 has a domed crystal, where the 0955 does not?
> 
> I think I'm foregoing lume and 200m WR and falling for the CTQ57-1202, it has a nice shaped case, and the bracelet looks better to me. Just one thing though, is 100m WR ok to swim in? I'd really like this to be my one watch that I don't have to remove for anything (except saving the girl), and I still think I'd prefer the peace of mind of a screw down crown and 200m WR.
> 
> Of course: this will all be for nothing if Seiko releases a 200m WR, perpetual calendar, TC Grand Seiko with white-on-black date wheel in the next few years!


For what it's worth, let me tell you what the Instruction Manual for The Citizen says about water-resistance. For 10 BAR WR, the watch is OK for: (a) "when water is simply splashed onto the watch (washing your face or in rain), (b) "swimming and general washing work (kitchen work/swimming, etc.)", and (c) "water sports and skin diving (without air tank)". It is NOT OK for (d) "scuba diving (with air tank)" and (e) "operate the crown or button when the watch is wet." This is the literal text. Interestingly, the exact-same is noted for 20 BAR.

As for screw-down crown, my two 10 BAR Chronomasters do _not_ have one. Thus, I'd assume that CTQ57-1202, also 10 BAR, won't have this feature either. CTQ57-1025, however, does have the screw-down crown (and is 20 BAR). CTQ57-1202 does have a slightly-domed crystal, and the hands are slightly curved downwards at the end to conform to the crystal. CTQ57-1025 has a flat crystal. One difference that you've noticed, I think, is the bracelet quality between CTQ57-1202 and the titanium models, CTQ57-0955 and -1025--nicer on the latter. Also, I'm told that the fit and finish of the titanium models is slightly better than on the stainless models, although I can't confirm this by personal observation.

If you do some comparison shopping, I believe you'll find that you can probably get 1202 new for something on the order of $2000. I'd guess maybe $2250 for 0955, and perhaps $2500 for 1025. There are lots of Japanese websites with all of these models, but your best bet for price/service would, I believe, be Higuchi.

Good luck!


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

Maybe TC HEQ would have been more accurate.  

The kind of watches Mr. Modnar is looking at precludes the 8Fxx series, in terms of price band, and more importantly, finishing.


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000003472 StartFragment:0000002073 EndFragment:0000003436

The 0954 (blue face) and 0955 (black face), both titanium, both have the flat crystal and are both titanium.

I don't remember the model number of the SS one I had but the case was very similar in shape to the 0954 and 955. Here is a shot showing the SS bracelet and another showing the two Ti ones with the SS.



















I don't normally take my watch off for baths or showers and both these Citizens have accompanied me in multiple showers with no problems.



South Pender said:


> For what it's worth, let me tell you what the Instruction Manual for The Citizen says about water-resistance. For 10 BAR WR, the watch is OK for: (a) "when water is simply splashed onto the watch (washing your face or in rain), (b) "swimming and general washing work (kitchen work/swimming, etc.)", and (c) "water sports and skin diving (without air tank)". It is NOT OK for (d) "scuba diving (with air tank)" and (e) "operate the crown or button when the watch is wet." This is the literal text. Interestingly, the exact-same is noted for 20 BAR.
> 
> As for screw-down crown, my two 10 BAR Chronomasters do _not_ have one. Thus, I'd assume that CTQ57-1202, also 10 BAR, won't have this feature either. CTQ57-1025, however, does have the screw-down crown (and is 20 BAR). CTQ57-1202 does have a slightly-domed crystal, and the hands are slightly curved downwards at the end to conform to the crystal. CTQ57-1025 has a flat crystal. One difference that you've noticed, I think, is the bracelet quality between CTQ57-1202 and the titanium models, CTQ57-0955 and -1025--nicer on the latter. Also, I'm told that the fit and finish of the titanium models is slightly better than on the stainless models, although I can't confirm this by personal observation.
> 
> ...


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

artec said:


> Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000003472 StartFragment:0000002073 EndFragment:0000003436
> 
> The 0954 (blue face) and 0955 (black face), both titanium, both have the flat crystal and are both titanium.
> 
> ...


Let me ask a question I've asked before: You now have Chronomasters and Grand Seikos. Do you see any difference in quality of (a) fit and finish and (b) design contours (and any other aesthetic variable you choose to include) between the Chronomasters as a group and the GSs as a group? I guess it would probably be better to exclude your GS SDs from the comparison unless they seem to you to manifest the same quality as the pure quartz models. I've expressed my thoughts on this in the past, and, I believe, so has RPF. What are yours?


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

South Pender said:


> Let me ask a question I've asked before: You now have Chronomasters and Grand Seikos. Do you see any difference in quality of (a) fit and finish and (b) design contours (and any other aesthetic variable you choose to include) between the Chronomasters as a group and the GSs as a group? I guess it would probably be better to exclude your GS SDs from the comparison unless they seem to you to manifest the same quality as the pure quartz models. I've expressed my thoughts on this in the past, and, I believe, so has RPF. What are yours?


Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000004636 StartFragment:0000002077 EndFragment:0000004600

I hope this isn't repetitive, but here goes.

An interesting question, not easy to answer, though. And though I know it's obvious, I think it still needs to be said that everything that follows is entirely subjective.

 I don't have any GS now except the two SD GMTs, SBGE 001 and 011. The last quartz GS I had was a black-faced SBGF 021, using the 8J56 movement. Here's a shot comparing an earlier quartz GS (with the 9F movement) with The Citizen. I really don't think there's anything in it. The Citizen has the lume, but isn't part of the issue at the moment, any more that the other functional attributes of The Citizen.










Here are comparisons between The Citizen and the SD 011 and then the 001. Until you get to the SDs, I think the Citizen is every bit the equal of the GS, but when you do get there, theSDs seem to have something the Citizen can't quite match. I'd hate to think it had anything to do with size, and actually, on reflection, I don't, because I think the smaller SBGE 011 has an appeal the 001 doesn't have. It has that understated completeness shared with the Citizen, but just a bit more oomph, to use a technical term. On its own, the SBGE 001 is great, but compared with either the 011 or the Citizen, it seems just a bit overdone.



















Your question started about finish and, strictly on that score, I honestly don't think there's anything in it. Similarly with fit. So for aesthetics, it must come down to the actual design&#8230;. the shapes and proportions. For me, The Citizens beat the quartz Seikos but the SBGE 011 (the only GS SD that is really comparable to The Citizens), gets the Gold.

I don't know if any of this helps or provokes, I hope it does but I don't know what else to say!


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

Great analysis, Artec. The pictures sure help a lot. In the past I've opined that the Citizen Chronomaster is every bit as well-designed and -finished as the GS. I thought that when I picked up my first GS (a SD, although the dial of the SD was very special) and have continued to think this with my latest GS (a pure quartz). On the other hand, others have felt that the fit/finish of the quartz GSs might be just slightly better than that of the Chronomaster.

You know, now that I see that blue-dial 0954, I'm warming up to it--a lot! I had thought that the new blue-dial GS quartz might be my next watch, but now I think the Chronomaster is a little nicer! I'll look for a bargain somewhere!


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks for all these pictures guys! Most informative!

Regarding WR: I'd not be swimming in a swimming pool necessarily, more likely the sea, and even that would not be very often, but it comes down to the peace of mind thing again.

Could someone confirm which of the Chronomaster series has applied metal minute markers? This is something I've only just noticed, and seems to be a big plus in terms of quality against painted on minute markers. It appears to me that the 0955 does have them, but the 1202 and 1025 do not. Seems odd to me. I understand, that the 1202 is one of the cheapest Chronomasters, and therefore is less likely to have applied markers, but the 1025 is more expensive than the 0955, and I don't think the 200m WR would make that kind of a difference??



South Pender said:


> One difference that you've noticed, I think, is the bracelet quality between CTQ57-1202 and the titanium models, CTQ57-0955 and -1025--nicer on the latter. Also, I'm told that the fit and finish of the titanium models is slightly better than on the stainless models, although I can't confirm this by personal observation.


I actually meant that the SS bracelet on the 1202 was nicer. I just don't like the flat strips of polished titanium on the 1025 & 0955, I'd prefer they were bevelled.

As I mentioned before, I don't have a preference for either metal, though I'm not sure how I'd get on with the light-weightiness of the titanium, I like the concept of titanium - lighter than steel, and stronger - but I'm not sure my instincts would be at ease with it, if you get my meaning?

If, however, there are differences in quality between Chronomasters in the two metals, that would definitely play a part.


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

South Pender said:


> Great analysis, Artec. The pictures sure help a lot. In the past I've opined that the Citizen Chronomaster is every bit as well-designed and -finished as the GS. I thought that when I picked up my first GS (a SD, although the dial of the SD was very special) and have continued to think this with my latest GS (a pure quartz). On the other hand, others have felt that the fit/finish of the quartz GSs might be just slightly better than that of the Chronomaster.
> 
> You know, now that I see that blue-dial 0954, I'm warming up to it--a lot! I had thought that the new blue-dial GS quartz might be my next watch, but now I think the Chronomaster is a little nicer! I'll look for a bargain somewhere!


Thank you South Pender.

The blue 0955 was my first The Citizen and remains my favorite. It lives in a special niche, separate from all the others I've had or have. Whatever else may ultimately leave or get given to a descendant, it will always stay.

The blue GS is one of the SBGF series with the 8J movement (for some reason I seem to feel that this movement is "GS lite") and, personally, I don't like the case nearly as much as the Citizen one, either Ti or SS. The frustrated cone of the bezel is too flat and just looks wrong to my eye. When I had them both (0ne black and one blue, so in that sense not comparable) at the same time, The Citizen got much more time and before long, the GS was on the block.

In answer to Mr ModnaR's strictures on the Citizen's Ti bracelet, in the flesh it certainly doesn't come across as "flat strips" of anything! The outer links are beveled on their outer edges and have the narrow, polished panel on the inside, while the central link is beveled on both sides. I can't tell you what to like, of course, but I can assure you that the 0955 and 0954 bracelets are and look very high quality. They ain't cheap, either! I lost the spare links for mine (I had the links for both Citizens "somewhere safe" together) and ordered some more links from Higuchi but wound up buying a whole new bracelet.

I think The Citizen you have been looking at is a much later model than the 0955 and 0954, and I can't tell from the only photos I've seen of that range whether the markers are printed or applied. Frankly, I'd be surprised if they were printed because those on the much cheaper (but nearly as accurate) Exceed are applied.

Again, it's subjective, of course, but I don't find the weight difference between steel and Ti a factor either way. I never notice the weight of even much heavier watches, like the big fat SBGE 001, once it's on. I like the idea of the lighter, stronger material, but it isn't a factor in practice.

The multi-link bracelet of the SS The Citizen models that were contemporaries of my Ti ones is not as attractive or as "quality" to my eye as the Ti bracelets, but again, that's strictly a matter of taste.

Good luck with your choice and I'm sure you'll enjoy either, or, better still, both!


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

artec said:


> ...
> I think The Citizen you have been looking at is a much later model than the 0955 and 0954, and I can't tell from the only photos I've seen of that range whether the markers are printed or applied. Frankly, I'd be surprised if they were printed because those on the much cheaper (but nearly as accurate) Exceed are applied.
> ...


I think he does not mean the 12 big hour markers but instead the other 48 much smaller minutes-only markers - which I am pretty convinced that on my Exceeds are printed ;-) (but I would be glad to be wrong).


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

artec said:


> The blue GS is one of the SBGF series with the 8J movement (for some reason I seem to feel that this movement is "GS lite") and, personally, I don't like the case nearly as much as the Citizen one, either Ti or SS. The frustrated cone of the bezel is too flat and just looks wrong to my eye. When I had them both (0ne black and one blue, so in that sense not comparable) at the same time, The Citizen got much more time and before long, the GS was on the block.


Actually, I was referring to the new 9F62-movement GS, SBGX065:



Just out of curiosity, what does a complete replacement bracelet cost for a Chronomaster? I too bought a couple of links from Katsu-san, and was a little floored at the cost.


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

Well artec, now you've thrown the cat amongst the high end quartzes!!

After seeing your picture of the SBGT021, I toddled off to grandseiko.net to have a look, and oh my, what a stunner!









Beautiful case shape, beautiful bracelet, in fact I'm seriously re-thinking the need for a perpetual calendar because of this watch! The SBGT061 is almost there, but doesn't appear to have applied minute markers like the 021, which is a shame, because the lack of the day indcator works in it's favour IMHO.

I prefer what the A660 can do, but prefer the look (and apparent quality of manufacture) of the 9f83. I think I'm going to have to wait and see if Seiko brings out a PC HEQ movement in the next couple of years, before I make the final decision, thank you all for your information, pictures and help, it's much appreciated!

Regards

Jan


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

This issue about applied vs. printed minute markers got me to thinking and looking more closely at my watches. One thing I've found is that it is just extremely difficult to tell from pictures, unless you get a very large one of the watch tilted on its side a little (like the one above of SBGT021), so that you can pick up the glint of the edge or end of the minute marker. I'm away from Vancouver for a couple of weeks and don't have access at the moment to my CTQ57-0955, but my pretty firm recollection is that it had applied minute markers, and, Artec, I think you'll be able to confirm that with your 0954 (in all respects other than dial color identical to 0955).

I do have my Spring Drive with me and looked at it closely. At almost all angles it was impossible to tell whether the minute markers were applied or printed, but once I got it under very bright light and tilted it until almost flat I could just barely pick up the glinting ends of the (applied) markers while staring through a magnifying glass. Given all of this, I'm wondering whether we should consider it much of an issue either way. Incidentally, my 9F83 SBGT033, which I also have with me, does _not_ appear to have applied markers, but, again, it's just very hard to tell.


----------



## Mr modnaR (Dec 12, 2009)

I agree, it is very difficult to tell from pictures. From the pictures I've seen on 012.co.jp the CTQ57-1202 appears to have painted markers, but the 1203 has applied ones. Quite why this could be so, I'm not sure, though, as you say, it could just be the pictures.

Of course it doesn't matter whether a watch has these things, but it's case of lots of small things adding up to make one bigger thing!


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

Mr modnaR said:


> I agree, it is very difficult to tell from pictures. From the pictures I've seen on 012.co.jp the CTQ57-1202 appears to have painted markers, but the 1203 has applied ones. Quite why this could be so, I'm not sure, though, as you say, it could just be the pictures.
> 
> Of course it doesn't matter whether a watch has these things, but it's case of lots of small things adding up to make one bigger thing!


Yes...you're looking at the pictures at the online Inoue Watch Shop (at the address you gave), and I think their pics are the best I've seen, with some angled shots of some models. I think if you go back and stare hard at 1201, you'll see something of a 3-dimensional effect to the minute markers on it too (and 1203 is more clearly that way), and this would make it pretty strange if 1202 didn't also have applied minute markers. I've found that it's easier to make out the difference against a white or cream dial background than against a black one.

You mentioned SBGT021 above. It is a stainless steel model, like almost all of the GS quartz models. It's titanium brother is SBGT031--at quite a bit more money. I believe that, at present, SBGT029 and SBGT031 are the two top 9F83 models short of the gold or gold-bezel models.

I believe that it was RPF (who knows a thing or three about Chronomasters, top-end Seikos, and watches in general) who commented a while back that, with GS, there is a pretty substantial correlation between the quality of the watch and its price--i.e., the higher the price, the higher the quality within the range. He was talking about fineness of finish, small details, etc. This would strongly suggest that SBGT031 might be just a little more finely done than SBGT021, but that would need some confirmation. One last thing: there's a rumor that Seiko will be coming out with three anniversary-model GSs later this year in recognition of 50 years of Grand Seikos (the series was begun in 1960). The rumor has it that one will be mechanical, one Spring Drive, and one quartz. Could it possibly be that the quartz one will have a perpetual calendar? I doubt it, but hope springs eternal!


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

South Pender said:


> Yes...you're looking at the pictures at the online Inoue Watch Shop (at the address you gave), and I think their pics are the best I've seen, with some angled shots of some models. I think if you go back and stare hard at 1201, you'll see something of a 3-dimensional effect to the minute markers on it too (and 1203 is more clearly that way), and this would make it pretty strange if 1202 didn't also have applied minute markers. I've found that it's easier to make out the difference against a white or cream dial background than against a black one.
> 
> You mentioned SBGT021 above. It is a stainless steel model, like almost all of the GS quartz models. It's titanium brother is SBGT031--at quite a bit more money. I believe that, at present, SBGT029 and SBGT031 are the two top 9F83 models short of the gold or gold-bezel models.
> 
> I believe that it was RPF (who knows a thing or three about Chronomasters, top-end Seikos, and watches in general) who commented a while back that, with GS, there is a pretty substantial correlation between the quality of the watch and its price--i.e., the higher the price, the higher the quality within the range. He was talking about fineness of finish, small details, etc. This would strongly suggest that SBGT031 might be just a little more finely done than SBGT021, but that would need some confirmation. One last thing: there's a rumor that Seiko will be coming out with three anniversary-model GSs later this year in recognition of 50 years of Grand Seikos (the series was begun in 1960). The rumor has it that one will be mechanical, one Spring Drive, and one quartz. Could it possibly be that the quartz one will have a perpetual calendar? I doubt it, but hope springs eternal!


You're quite right South Pender, both the 0954 and 0955 have applied markers and it's easy to see that they are. I'm also quite sure that all the GS and all The Citizens I've had have had applied markers and certainly the two GS SD I've got now have very obviously applied markers.

Although I've been wrong (and therefore surprised!) before, I'd be surprised if any of either Seiko's or Citizens "top of the line" models used printed markers. It seems that applied markers are almost an indicator that a watch with them is well towards the top of the food chain, while those without are almost acknowledging that they aren't.

I don't doubt that RPF knows a lot about Seikos, Citizens and watches in general and I don't know whether his dictum about prices and quality applies to fairly small (ha, small at these prices!) differences, but there some differences and similarities among SD GS models that I find very odd. For example, the list price of the SBGE 001 and the SBGE 013 is 550,000 yen, while the SBGE 011's is 500,000. All three SBGE are GMT, and have the same movement. The 001 is bigger, has the sapphire bezel, which I would have expected to be more expensive than the 013, which may have an exhibition back, I don't know. The 011 does have an exhibition back but is less expensive. The SBGA 041 isn't a GMT but it's 550,000 yen, more expensive than the SBGE 011. I'm sure there's pattern, but I can't see it.

Didn't Seiko already come out with a 40 year celebratory limited edition? I thought I saw that they had; in fact I seem to remember e-mailing Katsu-san to ask about the Perp cal and he said No. They've had so many opportunities to add the perp cal, and none of their top end models have it, mechanical, hand-wind, quartz, SD, even day-date. Bringing out the GS SD would have been an opportunity, and so would the Ananta, which is so damned big you could fit a laptop in there to keep the date straight! I don't think they ever will but I'd love to be wrong, too.


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

artec said:


> Didn't Seiko already come out with a 40 year celebratory limited edition? I thought I saw that they had; in fact I seem to remember e-mailing Katsu-san to ask about the Perp cal and he said No.


Yes, that was the 40th anniversary of Seiko's introduction (first in the world in 1969) of a commercial quartz watch. The model you were interested in is SBGT033, which appeared in December, 1969 (and one of which I bought from Katsu-san)--and, incidentally, the one that, as far as I can tell, does not have applied minute markers--although I'm still staring at it at various times to try to be sure about that. The minute markers are a gold color (like the writing "Quartz" under Grand Seiko, and it might be something like a very thin gold leaf substance.

The rumor I heard was about a model celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Grand Seiko line--started in 1960--which should mean later this year. One of the three (so goes the rumor) is to be a quartz model (the other two being mechanical and Spring Drive).


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

artec said:


> You're quite right South Pender, both the 0954 and 0955 have applied markers and it's easy to see that they are. I'm also quite sure that all the GS and all The Citizens I've had have had applied markers and certainly the two GS SD I've got now have very obviously applied markers.
> 
> Although I've been wrong (and therefore surprised!) before, I'd be surprised if any of either Seiko's or Citizens "top of the line" models used printed markers. It seems that applied markers are almost an indicator that a watch with them is well towards the top of the food chain, while those without are almost acknowledging that they aren't.
> 
> I don't doubt that RPF knows a lot about Seikos, Citizens and watches in general and I don't know whether his dictum about prices and quality applies to fairly small (ha, small at these prices!) differences, but there some differences and similarities among SD GS models that I find very odd. For example, the list price of the SBGE 001 and the SBGE 013 is 550,000 yen, while the SBGE 011's is 500,000. All three SBGE are GMT, and have the same movement. The 001 is bigger, has the sapphire bezel, which I would have expected to be more expensive than the 013, which may have an exhibition back, I don't know. The 011 does have an exhibition back but is less expensive. The SBGA 041 isn't a GMT but it's 550,000 yen, more expensive than the SBGE 011. I'm sure there's pattern, but I can't see it.


Re: minute markers. It's rare for applied small minute markers to appear on watches under $1-2k. To get the level of finishing on the GS (which is some of the finest dial work I've seen under a loupe for any watch under $10k) is just phenomenal. Aesthetically, the 9F GS trounce the chronomasters, under a loupe.

Re: Pricing. I neglect to mention some pricing oddities is a result of model age mismatch. Having watched the catalogue prices for the past 5 years or so, I've noticed a general upward push in pricing in Seiko's stables. Trouble is, it's more difficult to ramp up prices of existing models than to introduce new models at a pre-determined price point. Some models therefore appear to be relative bargains temporarily. For example, the SBGE001 have been around for a very long time. It (to my mind) was conceived as a point of pride, similar to the MM (i.e. loss making or thin margins, a show of "can-do-itsm"). It originally sold in the $3-4k bracket, and was massively underpriced given its features and build quality. Seiko historically has been reluctant to increase prices substantially on existing models. At current prices, I still believe this is probably the most underpriced GS model around. And it's a mastershop model too. I've compared it side-by-side with the Fifty Fathoms (which also has a sapphire bezel) and the GS holds its own in terms of finishing, materials, and build quality.

However, in my experience, Seiko does offer improvements/details to new models that replace the old ones. In that regard, the pricing is fair (you get a better watch, e.g. Brightz Ti instead of steel, a better clasp/deployant, crown guards, complex cases etc). The question that remains personal is whether the watch geek's wallet think its fair, too.


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

RPF said:


> Re: minute markers. It's rare for applied small minute markers to appear on watches under $1-2k. To get the level of finishing on the GS (which is some of the finest dial work I've seen under a loupe for any watch under $10k) is just phenomenal. Aesthetically, the 9F GS trounce the chronomasters, under a loupe.


My observations have all been with the naked eye, and this may be the reason I haven't noticed any real difference in quality between the Chronomaster and GS. I think a loupe would be an excellent addition to my small arsenal of watch-related stuff. There are tons of them on eBay for just a few bucks. What magnification do you recommend? Also, what other features have you found to be important--and what recommendations can you make--with respect to getting the best clarity, precision, etc., from a loupe?


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

There's a good selection of very affordable loupes at dealextreme.com. The LED illuminated one in particular, is a favorite of mine. Image quality and field of view isn't the greatest but the light source makes it very versatile, especially indoors. The site has been very reliable (though shipping can be a little slow due to their inventory control) in the 2-3 years I've been a customer. Be forewarned the site can be very addictive. It's geek heaven.

As for quality, Bausch & Lomb is recommended by many, but personally, I find the 10x Belomo equally as good, if not better. Another recommended goes out to the Edmund Optics 7x triplet, which is a good compromise between the more common 5x and 10x loupes. 

Manification wise, 5x is good for general use in most light conditions, 10x and above to catch certain details/finishing. The higher the magnification, the better the lighting and the firmer hand required. Otherwise the image may appear too dark/shaky to be of much use. 

Like most things in life, there's no one size fits all when it comes to loupes but imho, 5x is the most useful when it comes to casual watch appreciation. It's up to the individual whether he wants to start with a cheap, so-so loupe or buy the best from the get-go.

Have fun!


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

RPF said:


> There's a good selection of very affordable loupes at dealextreme.com. The LED illuminated one in particular, is a favorite of mine. Image quality and field of view isn't the greatest but the light source makes it very versatile, especially indoors. The site has been very reliable (though shipping can be a little slow due to their inventory control) in the 2-3 years I've been a customer. Be forewarned the site can be very addictive. It's geek heaven.
> 
> As for quality, Bausch & Lomb is recommended by many, but personally, I find the 10x Belomo equally as good, if not better. Another recommended goes out to the Edmund Optics 7x triplet, which is a good compromise between the more common 5x and 10x loupes.
> 
> ...


Can I pick your brains for a moment, RPF?

I haven't got a quartz GS at the moment but I've got two SD GS, an SBGE 001 and an 011 (both GMTs), and two The Citizens, a CT57-0954 and an 0955. I've just been staring at the dials, markers, hands and circumferential minute marks on all four through a 10X "Optivisor" loupe and, honestly, even after I stick my eyes back in their sockets, I can't see that the Seikos are any better than The Citizens.

I don't doubt that you're right and I'm not arguing with you, I'm asking what I should be looking for, in what respect are the Seikos better than the Citizens? They both look wonderful to me!

As I've already said in an earlier post, to my eye there's an overall something about these Seikos that bumps them up above anything else I've got, but I can't put my finger on exactly what it is except to call it by that nebulous and undefinable word "presence", often used when the writer can't figure out what characteristic is making the difference. I don't even know if it's in the case, the size, the dial or even if it has to do with the size....... maybe two or more or all of the above. It's irritating, especially to an engineer, to feel pretty sure of an opinion but not to be able to analyze why one holds it.


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

artec said:


> Can I pick your brains for a moment, RPF?
> 
> I haven't got a quartz GS at the moment but I've got two SD GS, an SBGE 001 and an 011 (both GMTs), and two The Citizens, a CT57-0954 and an 0955. I've just been staring at the dials, markers, hands and circumferential minute marks on all four through a 10X "Optivisor" loupe and, honestly, even after I stick my eyes back in their sockets, I can't see that the Seikos are any better than The Citizens.
> 
> ...


Yes, excellent question. I too don't really know exactly what to focus on when evaluating relative aesthetic quality. In your case, Artec, though, keep in mind that Seiko may be injecting just a little more "presence" into their SDs (given the company's great pride and financial investment in the latter) than they do with their quartz GSs.


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

South Pender said:


> Yes, excellent question. I too don't really know exactly what to focus on when evaluating relative aesthetic quality. In your case, Artec, though, keep in mind that Seiko may be injecting just a little more "presence" into their SDs (given the company's great pride and financial investment in the latter) than they do with their quartz GSs.


A good point and I think you're probably right. But I still don't know what the components of that "presence" are and I hate not knowing!

So now we are looking for suggestions as to what to look for in defining the quality of dials, markers and hands as well as what makes up that so far undefined "presence", and I'm looking forward to suggestions from those who are wiser than I.... not all at once, please!


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

I'd say the SD's are definitely top dogs when it comes to finishing, better than the quartz ones. But then again, they cost more. 

However, a discussion like this is only possible with good macros or the watches at hand. I have some of the watches, but I don't have a good enough camera currently. 

Perhaps you'd like to observe the brushing/polish of the hands, date windows, markers, under magnification, especially the second hand. Also, note the case shape and finish, especially near complex curves like the lugs. Knowledge of how a CNC machine works gives you an idea how many processes are necessary to obtain the form. Most GS cases are very organic, and I remember being awed by Seiko's mastery of case work. (That's one reason why Seiko divers are modders' favorite. They have excellent cases.)

Try this late into the evening, when there is just enough light indoors to make out the furniture. Get someone to wear various watches and walk across you, with their watch arm facing and swinging slightly. That simulates many indoor social events, e.g. a party, a concert, a theatre play). Notice the sparkle coming from the watches. A sub $1k watch will appear substantially different from a Rolex, GS or The Citizen. It's difficult to describe what to look out for but roughly, it's a rainbow-like glint reflecting from the markers. With the SBGT021, even the small minutes contribute to the effect, very surprising given their size. This is the primary reason why black dials are so popular, because they accentuate this effect. Determine for yourself if there's a difference between the SBGEs and the CTQs. 

I will say the GSes sparkle more than the Chronomasters, by virtue of their finishing. That's probably one part of "presence". 

Oh one more thing. Compare the applied "Citizen" and "Seiko" on the dial. Describe the differences, if you'd like.


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

RPF said:


> I'd say the SD's are definitely top dogs when it comes to finishing, better than the quartz ones. But then again, they cost more.
> 
> However, a discussion like this is only possible with good macros or the watches at hand. I have some of the watches, but I don't have a good enough camera currently.
> 
> ...


Great information, RPF. I can see that I've been missing many of the fine points. I'll be ordering a couple of loupes shortly (thanks for the leads), and will start doing aesthetic analysis the way it should be when they arrive. In the past (all pretty much with the naked eye, but occasionally with a regular magnifying glass, which falls far short of a good loupe, I'm sure), I've looked at the case curvature, including the sweep into the lugs, smoothness, evenness, and shine of the case finish, the hour batons, clarity of the dial, and sort of overall gleam, but I'm looking forward to doing this again with the proper equipment!


----------



## petew (Apr 6, 2006)

RPF gave a good overview of how to objectively evaluate finishing. A great source also is in the TZ Horologium series of articles. In one, Walt Odets wrote an excellent article about movement finishing, and some of those concepts can also be applied to case and hands finishing as well.

As RPF said, a loupe is invaluable. You'd often be surprised to see how watches fail to hold up after you start looking close. I also like to look inside the watch to get clues...open up the case, see if the manufacturer put any effort into the parts that you don't see....that tells you a lot. Heck, take the bracelets off and look between the lugs...you'll get feedback from doing that too. It all adds up and allows you to start differentiating quality between various models.


----------



## South Pender (Jul 2, 2008)

petew said:


> RPF gave a good overview of how to objectively evaluate finishing. A great source also is in the TZ Horologium series of articles. In one, Walt Odets wrote an excellent article about movement finishing, and some of those concepts can also be applied to case and hands finishing as well.
> 
> As RPF said, a loupe is invaluable. You'd often be surprised to see how watches fail to hold up after you start looking close. I also like to look inside the watch to get clues...open up the case, see if the manufacturer put any effort into the parts that you don't see....that tells you a lot. Heck, take the bracelets off and look between the lugs...you'll get feedback from doing that too. It all adds up and allows you to start differentiating quality between various models.


I'm really glad you've joined this discussion, petew. As a real expert, what is your opinion of differences in aesthetic quality between the Citizen Chronomaster, on the one hand, and the Grand Seiko quartz models, on the other?


----------



## petew (Apr 6, 2006)

I wish I could make a valid comment on comparing the two, but believe it or not, I've never had a "The Citizen" model in my hand so I can't, and I never would judge a watch on pictures alone. That said, I've come close to buying one many times. I really do respect those watches.


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

RPF said:


> I'd say the SD's are definitely top dogs when it comes to finishing, better than the quartz ones. But then again, they cost more.
> 
> However, a discussion like this is only possible with good macros or the watches at hand. I have some of the watches, but I don't have a good enough camera currently.
> 
> ...


Thank you RPF for your helpful and educational suggestions. I haven't had a chance to dig in as deeply as I want to but I have a couple of points, if I may. I've had a good look at the applied Citizen on the 0954 and 0955 and the Seiko on both my SDs. Aside from the facts that the Citizen has longitudinal striations and the Seiko is smooth, and the Citizen is a bit shinier, I really can't see any difference. They both appear to be the same thickness (depth from the dial surface), they are both crisply cut, I think the edges of the Seiko letters are polished while those on the Citizen are the color of the dial, blue and black.

I think one reason for the greater sparkle on the Seiko (and I agree it's a factor) is the flatter angle of the conical bezel, another is the polished case chamfer just below the bezel on the Seiko, while the Citizen's polished case surface is more nearly at right angles to the dial plane. These factors offer more reflection, it would appear. In reverse, however, is the fact that the surface of the hour and minute hands on the Seiko is brushed, while that part of the Citizen's hands that isn't luminous paint is polished.

And while I agree that the shininess, the sparkle, the reflections is or are a factor in the Seiko's extra je ne sais quoi, there's more, and my impression is that it's not so much in the details, though I'm sure they play a part, but something in the overall impression.

What does anyone else think?


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

I'll post my thoughts on the lettering in another post. 

As for the "presence" bit, I totally agree. It's not just the sparkle (otherwise we can just add diamonds) but the entire watch. For example, the overall fit and finish (we're not talking millimeters here, but probably tens of microns) between the parts, how the crown feels, the jiggle of the bracelet bits, the comfort of the deployant (rounded/shaped edges, absence of protrusions), the "flow" between lugs, case and end-pieces, the sound the clasp makes snapped closed (which incidentally, is analogous to the way one tells an average Asian family sedan from an up-market continental example--the sound of the door closing), the action of the pushers, the surface brushing (a very fine hand-finished micro-graining that's between polished and brushed, that my 20+ year experience watchmaker says he cannot restore), the hardened steel used on the caseback to resist wear, the design of the screw-in caseback (and the gap between case and back, and how several of the cases actually bulge over the joint for added protection and strength), the flush between crystal and bezel (and their manner of construction), the AR coating, the pigment used for the dial (black isn't really just, black), bracelet design (part count, articulation, no. of adjustable links, comfort) etc. 

But this exercise rapidly becomes obsessive and you begin wondering, I'm spending all this $$$ on a watch and now I'm doing all this hard work trying to decipher the secret of it's "presence"?

How does that work out? That's one reason why I kept stopping myself typing the previous paragraphs. No reason to kick the OCDness of fellow geeks into overdrive!

Watch up and enjoy it as a hobby that provides respite from the daily rigeurs of life.


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

Duplicate post. Crummy internet.


----------



## CLEANS-HIGH (Feb 26, 2009)

I realize that many people shower in their watches but unless it is specifically for diving it does not go in the water, I pay to much money to take that chance


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

CLEANS-HIGH said:


> I realize that many people shower in their watches but unless it is specifically for diving it does not go in the water, I pay to much money to take that chance


In principle I agree. Mine only take a shower with me when I forget to take them off. I see no point in taking the chance and anyway, I clean my watches without soap or water. A polishing cloth after some denatured alcohol and paper towel does the job.


----------



## lornranger (Jan 20, 2007)

Why is perpetual calendar such a big factor in purchasing a high end watch? Have you factored in the fact that the calendar would be useless after 2100, which means your children cannot pass the watch down to their children?


----------



## artec (Oct 31, 2006)

lornranger said:


> Why is perpetual calendar such a big factor in purchasing a high end watch? Have you factored in the fact that the calendar would be useless after 2100, which means your children cannot pass the watch down to their children?


The lack of a perpetual calendar renders largely pointless a watch of extreme accuracy if it has to be reset five or seven times a year to deal with months with less than 31 days.

Actually, although the perp cal is the best solution, simply having an independently adjustable hour hand (the poor man's perp cal) is, in at least one way, even better, because it will continue to be adjustable for generation after generation.

And the fact that the calendar will be useless after 2100 is of absolutely no importance to me. My grandchildren are very unlikely to survive that long anyway.

And yes, I know you're pulling my leg! But I don't think it will come off, so pulling it won't do you a lot of good.

Take care!


----------



## Catalin (Jan 2, 2009)

lornranger said:


> Why is perpetual calendar such a big factor in purchasing a high end watch? Have you factored in the fact that the calendar would be useless after 2100, which means your children cannot pass the watch down to their children?


I can tell you are not an engineer, and most likely also not a lawyer (since that profession would pay HUGE attention to the precise wording) :-d

The perpetual calendar will NOT be useless after 2100 (and the precise wording usually is something around 'needs no correction until 2100') - in 2100 on March 1 you will have to correct the watch manually (it will show Feb 29 and you will have to advance the HOUR hand 24 hours - still will not disturb the time on calibers A660, E510, many swiss models and 8F56) and then it will be 'good' until March 1 in 2200 ;-)


----------

