Incoming King Seiko

[mongrelnomoad]

Originally Posted by _speedmaster_

Forgot to mention the auto winding rotor adding to thickness. You are definitely right there. The rotor is likely the biggest contributor to the weight difference as well (it feels weighty when it spins).
Good thing about KS is they seem to still be relatively unknown to the larger audience, so it should be more competitively priced.

Agreed, though in the latter models (for instance the 45s, when they were being produced at the same factory), I do think I noted a slight difference in quality between KS and GS, with the GS just feeling a tiny bit better built.

That may be perception, though. My 44KS and 52KS are exceptional...

[_speedmaster_]

Originally Posted by mongrelnomoad

Agreed, though in the latter models (for instance the 45s, when they were being produced at the same factory), I do think I noted a slight difference in quality between KS and GS, with the GS just feeling a tiny bit better built.

That may be perception, though. My 44KS and 52KS are exceptional...

Interesting. Would be cool to have the GS 4522-7000 to compare to the KS45. GS won the war, so it might be safe to say they made a slightly better product.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by _speedmaster_

Interesting. Would be cool to have the GS 4522-7000 to compare to the KS45. GS won the war, so it might be safe to say they made a slightly better product.

GS won the war in the sense that it was reintroduced in 1988, but both GS and KS were pulled about the same time (1975) due to the overwhelming popularity of quartz in Japan

[_speedmaster_]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

GS won the war in the sense that it was reintroduced in 1988, but both GS and KS were pulled about the same time (1975) due to the overwhelming popularity of quartz in Japan

Curious though. Was GS chosen to be revived over KS for any specific reason? For instance, was the GS name in slightly better standing amongst the public? Either way, it would have certainly been an interesting board room discussion to be a part of when the decision was made.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by _speedmaster_

Curious though. Was GS chosen to be revived over KS for any specific reason? For instance, was the GS name in slightly better standing amongst the public? Either way, it would have certainly been an interesting board room discussion to be a part of when the decision was made.

If you look in the old catalogs, KS were always priced slightly lower than their GS counterparts, and GS was always presented as the more premium brand, although the quality in general was often indistinguishable, IMO.

Seiko did offer one KS heritage piece about 20 years ago, the SCVN001, which can still be found in full sets in Japan if you look around.

[mongrelnomoad]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

If you look in the old catalogs, KS were always priced slightly lower than their GS counterparts, and GS was always presented as the more premium brand, although the quality in general was often indistinguishable, IMO.

Seiko did offer one KS heritage piece about 20 years ago, the SCVN001, which can still be found in full sets in Japan if you look around.

Ive been looking but I’ve never seen one in as-new condition.

Do you know the thickness? Modern Seikos suffer from great expanded waistlines.

[_speedmaster_]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

If you look in the old catalogs, KS were always priced slightly lower than their GS counterparts, and GS was always presented as the more premium brand, although the quality in general was often indistinguishable, IMO.

Seiko did offer one KS heritage piece about 20 years ago, the SCVN001, which can still be found in full sets in Japan if you look around.

Thanks for the info Adam.

Would be cool if they reintroduced KS as a new line (with classic styling and proportions of course).