Reply With QuoteInteresting, thanks for sharing.
For me, there's a lot going on there design wise. I think the size will be an issue for many too.
Just got an email about this watch. Seems to have their own movement in it.
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
For me, there's a lot going on there design wise. I think the size will be an issue for many too.
I am liking that. A bit different to the rest of the O1's, and very similar to the Raven sub homage.
The new movement looks alot like a 2824-2 with some bespoke changes (well, looking at the arrangement of bits in the back of my Oris TT1 they are the same just different colours).
I'd be interested certainly, especially if they could have an optional display back...
Thanks for sharing, btw.
I bet it's not made by ETA, though. This probably at least partially answers what they are going to do as ETA movements become harder and harder to find.Originally Posted by apm101
Love that, cracking watch. £400, so it's about £75 more than the Ocean Ones...
Its tempting. The size however 42 diam, 16 tall takes away from the 'vintage-ness' of it
Stupid choice with the size considering the vintage theme. Also the size combined with the fact that it says "vintage" on the dial makes it feel quintessentially faux-vintage.
Needs a date window and at the most 40mm diameter.
Naff
.
Gray
The watch doesn't appeal but it's interesting what they're doing with the movement.
Would look nicer with some crown guards
boom,
exactly, I was looking at it and wondering what was wrong with it, and couldn't work it out, I know crown guards wouldn't fit with the 'vintage' look, but some small ones would balance that case and winder
i like that quite a lot!
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
Spot on! I too was looking at this thinking "hmmm, not quite right". Reckon you've nailed it, Sir!
SGR
^^^ This. What are/were they thinking? Also, would've preferred it without the aged lume. So, a thumbs down from me.
I want to like this watch, however...
I'm very keen on vintage Subs, but there's something about the brand that I'm still not sure on. I think, in my head, it brings back those dark days when I had one of those Marina Militare PAM homages, only this costs about 8 times as much...!
I think they've done a really good job of making it look like a vintage Sub, so much so that they've crossed a line to fakity fake fake.
That's right, I said fakity fake fake.
I'm with you on the faux-vintage... I want to like it but there's so much wrong with it.
it sorta works... but the red crown tube... too black bay, trying to hard... its a OVM really with a different movement and dial and a €100 more
Of course somewhat a blended story, but I like!
The quasi-in house movement is a definite plus, but I agree that the size is all wrong. I was really hoping they'd scale it back to 40mm, given that it's a new case. This feels like a missed opportunity for me.
It looks a bit frankenwatch, but I think it could grow on me. The "new" movement is an interesting proposition.
I don't think it is a new case, it's just the regular Ocean One with drilled lugs?
A bit harsh, as there's no Rolex branding. It's a very very close homage though...
I like the look of the watch, got definite appeal for me however as said already, 40mm would hand been better IMO.
New movement is interesting too
I was unclear. It's the attempt to make it look old that feels fake to me, not the attempt to make it look Rolex.
The lug profile seems slimmer on the Vintage, to my eye, and it doesn't have crown guards.
What is it a fakity fakey fake of though? It looks to me like a hotch potch of the Rolex/Tudor parts bin but not a specific model.
I've found myself thinking about this watch rather a lot today. I really like the thick crystal. As others have said, putting 'vintage' on the dial is an unfortunate misstep though.
Agreed.
A watch is either vintage because it's old or 'vintage' because it's been made to look old, not because it says so on the dial.
I'm too much of a philistine to know what boundaries are being crossed here. Essentially I think it's a nice looking watch - but isn't it rather tall?
Looking at it afresh, I think the main problem is that the dial is too big. If they wanted a retro look and modern size, they should have made the bezel a bit wider and reduced the dial size correspondingly.
To play devil's advocate I wonder if it might be argued that it's a modern everyday watch at a reasonable price which nods towards previous classics.....much the same way as the current Mini or Beetle does.
That being sold I won't be buying one!
We have two different meanings of "fake" in play, and I'm guilty of misusing it in a watch context. I don't see this as a "fake Rolex," but an homage to a vintage Sub, and I'm okay with that. What I find disingenuous, to use a different word, is the way they've made the dial look old when it isn't.
But really, it's not a big deal. Not my taste to have a new watch made to look old, but there are more important things to get exercised about. It's actually very handsome and Steinhart have done a good job of doing what they intended (other than the size).
I actually quite like it.
And I'd rather cut my cock off than buy a modern Mini or Beetle.
Although I do quite like the Fiat 500, particularly the Abarth.
Quite like it.
Modern watch with a vintage feel.
Man size (almost).
Reasonably priced. Good looking.
If you just want ALL vintage elements, just buy vintage!
I like the look and updated size.
Someone in the comments section of worn&wound is saying that the new Steinhart auto movement is a Hangzhou 6300 with a Swiss manufactured (base?) plate,
Anyone here know anything about that?
Hi,
in German Watch - forums they believe it is an ETA2824 Modified with an electric graving.
Best Regards,
Peter
Last edited by Rockabilly; 8th December 2013 at 17:09.
Given that the general consensus on steinhart is positive, I think this is a lovely watch. The price is good and it will look great on a - dare I say- vintage strap!
I know nothing about it other than that sounds very plausible as a way to maintain supply.
I can't believe that any of its parts would come from ETA as this would be contrary to what Steinhart needs to do to maintain availability of supply. It might originally have been an ETA design but I don't believe that ETA would have any part in the supply chain.
I can not make my mind up on this one, I have been waiting a few months to see it as it's the type of watch that im looking for, I'll keep a eye out for more info and photos over xmas and make my mind up in the new year to see if im going to get it or not.
I'd be interested to hear about the exact origins of the movement. The watch itself doesn't especially appeal to me though.
I suspect that the movement is as Swiss as the Claro-Semag CL-888. At this price point it can't be done any other way with the current price of ETA movements..
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Things are getting worse at Steinhart.
Chinese case, Chinese bracelet, now a Chinese movement.. never mind, it says Swiss on the dial.
Exactly. Another watch I will never purchase...
There really is not the slightest reason to think that Steinharts are not perfectly legally and properly made in Switzerland, just as they claim.Things are getting worse at Steinhart.
Chinese case, Chinese bracelet, now a Chinese movement.. never mind, it says Swiss on the dial.
Sure, it is very likely indeed that the cases originate as blanks from China or the bracelets are made in China, but that is increasingly normal for legally Swiss made watches. And the same applies to major movement parts (and will increasingly apply as ETA movements become still harder to get).
But to say "Chinese case, Chinese bracelet, now a Chinese movement" as if Steinhart are committing a fraud by describing their watches as Swiss made is a gross over-simplification -- it's just not that simple in the watch market as things stand.
You can always ask "what constitutes made in country X?" and it can never be fully clear nowadays. Manufacturing is so international. All you can do is decide, in a semi-arbitrary fashion, what will constitute "made in". Is it the last major manufacturing operation or should it be location of value input, or what? Well, Swiss made watches (Steinhart included, unless they've changed their claims) work with the value input rule, and that seems pretty fair to me. The use of parts that came from or originated in China does not invalidate that rule or justify an over-simplification to "Chinese".
Last edited by markrlondon; 12th December 2013 at 20:11.
Actually, this ain't a gross over-simplification, this is the truth. I know very well the ridiculous regulation, nevertheless, to me, the new Steinhart Ocean Vintage is Swiss made in China, but if you are comfortable to consider it not Chinese, if you like to see it under a different perspective, than be it.
But, I would be curious to know how happy you'd be if one day for example Rolex or Omega would start to use Chinese movements and then labelling them as being "Swiss", how would you consider such movements? C'mon...
I think the problem that many people have is that huge disparities in labour costs allow companies to take liberties with 'value input'.
Speaking personally, I'm fine with the outsourcing of manufacturing; the Chinese guy knocking out your Steinhart bracelet is probably just as qualified as his Swiss counterpart. In 10 years time he definitely will be. As long as Asian production is accompanied by a proper level of quality control (and avoids infringing on any copyrights) there is no problem in my eyes. I just don't like being told my watch was made in the Swiss alps by an artisan watchmaker if that is the case.
It will be interesting to see what Steinhart (and other manufacturers) says about the origins of their movements and components in the next few years.
If it is marked "Swiss Made" in compliance with the Swiss regulations on the use of the phrase "Swiss Made" on watches then one can be sure it is "Swiss made in Switzerland", and not "Swiss made in China", even if it uses Chinese parts or case blanks which have valued added in Switzerland, i.e. are machined and assembled in Switzerland. Or are you alleging that Steinhart is using the "Swiss Made" trademark illegally?
Since I don't think that Steinhart or their Swiss OEM are using the trademark illegally, I certainly am happy to know that the majority of the value in the movement and in the watch as a whole is of Swiss input. That, to me, doesn't seem like a "ridiculous regulation" at all -- it seems quite reasonable and sensible, taking into account the reality of manufacturing as it currently stands in the world.
But how do you know they don't already? We know, for example, that Omega source bracelets from a Chinese third party (a picture of the receipt that should not have made it to the end user customer was posted here on this forum) and I am fairly sure than an Omega representative 'admitted' that they use Chinese-made bracelets in a magazine article (sorry, can't find it, so could be misremembering).
The key point is that as long as the movement and watch comply with the "Swiss Made" trademark regulations which (and this is of fundamental importance to me) are actually quite reasonable and sensible to my mind (i.e. the majority of value in both movement and watch as a whole must be added in Switzerland) then it seems perfectly acceptable and appropriate to me for a watch made of parts that originated in other countries (whether China or anywhere else) to be genuinely labelled Swiss Made.
Remember that the steel from which the bulk of the watch is made will almost certainly have originated outside Switzerland, no matter where the watch was assembled. There is truly no such thing as purely national manufacturing.
Do you consider Timefactors watches to be Chinese made? Eddie's watches are generally thought of as being made in Germany. I would certainly say that they are genuinely made in Germany, exactly as Steinharts are genuinely made in Switzerland. But it is nevertheless very likely that Roland Kemmner sources bracelets made in China and has case blanks made up in China (which are then machined in Germany) (see http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...=1#post2827376). In other words, what Roland Kemmner probably does in Germany is, very, very likely, no different to what Steinhart's Swiss OEM is doing.
Posting Permissions
