New Grand Seiko Quartz Diver: Your Thoughts?

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

That's understandable. How do you feel about entry-level luxury Swiss watches (e.g., Tudor) that are around the same price (4k) and use generic ETA movements?

much much better!! ETA's aren't generic IMHO, but they are ubiquitous!

[gougy]

"Originally Posted by Fleetlord
Plus anytime a brand needs to add "Grand" / "Elite" / "Reserve" to their existing name to denote a higher level.....I'm not interested."

How about Rolex and "SUPERLATIVE" is that OK? :) :) :)

[threemonkeys]

I love the GS line. These particular watches don't particularly sing to me, however.

I prefer their more understated models.

[Alfredo.]

I think it looks good; However, It would look a whole lot better if the price tag said $1000.

Way too expensive IMO. For that price I´d get a Black Bay or a Pelagos. (Just noticed Wes suggested this as well)

[MP5]

Originally Posted by threemonkeys

I love the GS line. These particular watches don't particularly sing to me, however.

I prefer their more understated models.

Yup, That is a ringer of a watch!

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

much much better!! ETA's aren't generic IMHO, but they are ubiquitous!

They are generic in the sense that they can be found in many different watches. The ETA 2824 is used in many different watches (including Tudor). Of course, each company will modify the movement (and some won't), but the base movement is still the same. Personally, this doesn't bother me at all, but it is worth noting.

If you look at all aspects of a high-end quartz movement such as the GS 9F or the Rolex 5035, you cannot compare them to a cheap $5 Chinese quartz movement. Similarly, you cannot compare a generic ETA movement to something from Audemars Piguet or Patek Philippe.

There will always be those who do not find quartz watches worthy, I get it. I just hope that those people feel the same way about generic or very rudimentary automatic movements, too.

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

They are generic in the sense that they can be found in many different watches. The ETA 2824 is used in many different watches (including Tudor). Of course, each company will modify the movement (and some won't), but the base movement is still the same. Personally, this doesn't bother me at all, but it is worth noting.

If you look at all aspects of a high-end quartz movement such as the GS 9F or the Rolex 5035, you cannot compare them to a cheap $5 Chinese quartz movement. Similarly, you cannot compare a generic ETA movement to something from Audemars Piguet or Patek Philippe.

There will always be those who do not find quartz watches worthy, I get it. I just hope that those people feel the same way about generic or very rudimentary automatic movements, too.

Yeah Wes, we'll have to agree to disagree!

Comparing the Chinese quartz to GS quartz and equating the difference to that of an ETA (non-generic ) to Patek Philippe does not work for me, JMHO

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

ETA's aren't generic IMHO, but they are ubiquitous!

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

They are generic in the sense that they can be found in many different watches.

History of ETA

Sorry, Wes, generic is simply not the word you're looking for, at least as it applies to ETA. There are a lot of generic movements that are ETA clones, but ETA movements are the products of a company whose history dates back to 1856 and whose products are far from being generic, by the very fact that they have brand names.

ge·ner·ic
adjective \jə-ˈner-ik, -ˈne-rik\

: of or relating to a whole group or class

: not sold or made under a particular brand name

biology : of or relating to a genus

Full Definition of GENERIC
1
a : relating to or characteristic of a whole group or class : general
b : being or having a nonproprietary name <generic drugs>
c : having no particularly distinctive quality or application <generic restaurants>
2
: relating to or having the rank of a biological genus

[emphasis mine]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/generic

Also, while ETA might make some movements that aren't especially appealing to the more aesthetically inclined among us, some grades of ETA movements are more than capable of chronometer quality timekeeping.

ETA simply doesn't get the credit they deserve and part of the reason is that their products have been very popular among watch brands that have existed for more than a century and many that have bitten the dust.

They are essentially victims of their own success.

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

Yeah Wes, we'll have to agree to disagree!

Comparing the Chinese quartz to GS quartz and equating the difference to that of an ETA (non-generic ) to Patek Philippe does not work for me, JMHO

No worries, Marc. Maybe I'm nuts.

[MaxCargo]

love it! the white is cool.I need a seiko diver, SBGX115 vs mm300

[MaxCargo]

OMG Need to start saving for the white

[jack1024]

Simply beautiful.. both of them.

I'm not in any way opposed to quartz- and I think that one of these will go nicely next to my Tudor.

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

I don't care how robust a movement it is or if Hodinkee says its unicorn-poop, not paying almost 4K for a quartz. JMHO

I hope you share the same feelings for Omega's Spacemaster Z-33 with $5900 and Breitling B50 Colt with $7200 price tags. And yeah both are Quartz!

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

History of ETA

Sorry, Wes, generic is simply not the word you're looking for, at least as it applies to ETA.

I was using the term loosely. I thought my message was clear, but if there was any confusion, I apologize. In a literal sense, ETA is not generic. You're right. I think common is a better word. Like I said, I have nothing against ETA or other common (even generic) automatic movements. I think every watch and movement has its place.

What I find interesting is how some people cannot justify a high-end quartz watch. The 9F, for example, cannot be compared to a cheap quartz movement. Likewise, a generic or common automatic movement cannot be compared to a high-end one. Sure, they do the same thing and work similarly, but there is a lot more that goes into a movement than just that.

Given the option between a high-end quartz watch (GS, for example) and a watch with a common automatic movement (assuming the price was similar), I would take a lot of things into consideration. I simply would not choose the automatic just because it is an automatic.

I guess my overall point is that one type of movement is not inherently better than another. Movements should be judged on a case-by-case basis. Personally, I think some quartz movements are worth just as much, if not more, than some automatic movements.

Is that fair? Am I nuts?

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

I guess my overall point is that one type of movement is not inherently better than another. Movements should be judged on a case-by-case basis. Personally, I think some quartz movements are worth just as much, if not more, than some automatic movements.

Is that fair? Am I nuts?

No, you are not. To put it simply, Seiko 5 is fairly good automatic watch and you can get it under $50. SKX007 is very good watch and yet you can get it under $150. Seiko Monster is awesome watch and yet you can get it under $200.

Yet, if Seiko is making a quartz and charging $4k, it is for the work on the Grand Seiko for its handmade, Zaratsu polishing and 9F thermo compensated quartz movement, its not that they can't make an automatic in similar price range. 9F quartz is certainly notches above any of its Seiko's own automatic watches(no need to compare with other brands).

[sierra11b]

I've never thought their Zaratsu polishing was any better than Rolex having owned GS. You can only polish steel to a mirror polish so much.

GS's 9F quartz are pretty remarkable when you look at the R&D and technology behind them. 50 years before it needs servicing (not including battery changes) is pretty cool and typically more accurate than their +/- 10 seconds a year rating suggests. I would say that if you can get past the whole sweeping hand vs non sweeping then to me the 9F is more special than your ETA 2824 (for example). I believe some of their hand picked 9F crystals reserved for LE watches claim to run +/- 5 seconds a year.

The idea of a grab and go watch has its appeal for me but I'm guessing it would still need to fly over the pond for a battery swap and seal/pressure check.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

I think common is a better word.

You're not nuts and the better word would be "common."

Actually, "common" is listed as a synonym for "generic," but in the case at hand, generic is disqualified from applying to ETA movements because they don't meet the specific criteria in the definition.

Also, there's no need to apologize, even jokingly.

It certainly wasn't the worst word you could have chosen and the only reason I wanted to clarify my position in the matter is because I think ETA takes an unfair beating among some of us WISes.

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by sierra11b

I've never thought their Zaratsu polishing was any better than Rolex having owned GS. You can only polish steel to a mirror polish so much.

Did you happen to checkout this 44GS review by James 'Rolex expert' Dowling?

[eeh100773]

If it sings to you, well, then......YES! Awesome post on another great model by Seiko. Love those Seikos. My nephew just received a quartz chrono for his graduation and it is a cool watch.

[sierra11b]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Did you happen to checkout this 44GS review by James 'Rolex expert' Dowling?

I did actually...

Look, I'm a huge GS fan but as an amateur knife maker who's hand polished hardened steel to mirror polish and owner of nihonto, I must say there's no comparison. It's just perfectly polished stainless and no different from the 116400 I just pulled the stickers off.

I plan to give GS another chance because I love the brand. My wife and in laws are full 1st and 2nd gen Japanese. But to me its state of polish is just clever marketing unless they're actually practicing togi. True sword polish has an almost layered iced cake look to it which a GS is not. When you're polishing SS the end result is that positively no scratches are revealed from the previous grit and the finish is mirror-like. I see no distinguishable difference between GS and Rolex state of polish.

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by sierra11b

I did actually...

Look, I'm a huge GS fan but as an amateur knife maker who's hand polished hardened steel to mirror polish and owner of nihonto, I must say there's no comparison. It's just perfectly polished stainless and no different from the 116400 I just pulled the stickers off.

I plan to give GS another chance because I love the brand. My wife and in laws are full 1st and 2nd gen Japanese. But to me its state of polish is just clever marketing unless they're actually practicing togi. True sword polish has an almost layered iced cake look to it which a GS is not. When you're polishing SS the end result is that positively no scratches are revealed from the previous grit and the finish is mirror-like. I see no distinguishable difference between GS and Rolex state of polish.

Good to know. Actually thats a compliment to Rolex. Inspite polishing by machines, it comes across as good as hand polishing of GS but 99% of critics out there will always prefer specialized high quality hand polishing over machine polishing for any watch and kinda generally accepted fact especially when highly regarded type of polishing is involved.

[yonsson]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Good to know. Actually thats a compliment to Rolex. Inspite polishing by machines, it comes across as good as hand polishing of GS but 99% of critics out there will always prefer specialized high quality hand polishing over machine polishing for any watch and kinda generally accepted fact especially when highly regarded type of polishing is involved.

Polishing isn't all. It's also about how the steel is prepared. Both Rolex, Patek and GS use forged steel instead of casted steel which is a big part of why the are able to achieve such a high level of gloss finish. This is not common practice. Rolex also uses a higher level of nickel than usual for the same reason. Another fun fact is that SEIKO owns their own forgery to make sure they have quality control all the way from the forging of the steel to finished product.

[sierra11b]

Originally Posted by yonsson

Polishing isn't all. It's also about how the steel is prepared. Both Rolex, Patek and GS use forged steel instead of casted steel which is a big part of why the are able to achieve such a high level of gloss finish. This is not common practice. Rolex also uses a higher level of nickel than usual for the same reason. Another fun fact is that SEIKO owns their own forgery to make sure they have quality control all the way from the forging of the steel to finished product.

Polishing has very little to do with 'forged steel' and much more to do with the molecular structure of the steel.

Plus 'forged steel' is often loosely used... Yes, steels come from a forge but there's a difference in getting a blank sheet of steel to the desired thickness for a particular watch model, machines stamping it out and rough finishing, heat treating the steel for final hardness, then final finishing VS. finding an old piece of carbon steel in a scrap yard, actually forging with a hammer and anvil to exact shape and quenching via air, oil, or water depending on its structure.

Basically, all watch manufacturers use a method of stock removal. I wouldn't be surprised if some used investment casting which is a good (and often expensive) method for strong steel used mainly by the gun industry.

[soundserious]

I love Seiko but trend toward the vintage ones.

[bdex75]

Want to start a heated debate on the Rolex forum? Say Grand Seiko.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bobernet]

That font looks like comic sans. No way could I do that.

There are about 500 quartz divers that look better without paying $3700 or whatever it is after discount. Pass.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by bobernet

That font looks like comic sans. No way could I do that.

There are about 500 quartz divers that look better without paying $3700 or whatever it is after discount. Pass.

Wow, what a useful and informed opinion. They must be really stupid in Seiko to create a watch that is so obviously doomed and that will never sell.

[sierra11b]

The thing is we've seen the change in taste movie many times before... The warming up period people go through once the watch is released and especially after a favorable review is done with live pictures.

Now it may not be popular here on TRF but I guarantee a change in opinion on the seiko forums and HAQ fanboys.

[peter-g]

I'm a big fan of the vintage Grand Seiko auto so I prefer the SBGR059.

[SLRdude]

I have no problem with paying that for a high end Quartz, as I believe there is room for a HAQ in any collection.

Personally, while I am a HUGE Grand Seiko fan, I just couldn't do those models, for reasons that others might not share with me.

One... I absolutely can't do a ticking second hand. It drives me nuts lol. For that reason, I bought a Breitling Aerospace to scratch my HAQ itch.

Two... I've seen those and I tried them on. I live 4 miles from a GS AD, so I'm there quite often. I just cannot agree with the bezel. The font is just wrong to my eyes and regardless of the angle I looked it it, it just wasn't right.

In summary, i would pay 3700 or even more for a HAQ Grand Seiko, but not for this one. if I did, it would be the gorgeous Self Dater homage.





Too bad I can't get over the second hand.


Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk