Be ok as a beater like my Invicta auto.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I've always wanted the batman BLNR. Price is just too high for me though. I do own several watches in the circa £2k range but have also owned several Steinharts and for what you pay they sure take some beating it must be said. While browsing Facebook yesterday I saw this.... so maybe the itch can sort of be scratched for a fraction of the price. Sure it won't BE a BLNR, but it's an option.... I know this will bring out the anti Steinhart brigade but thought it was an interesting release....or will be I should say. I also heard it's likely to be 39/40 instead if their normal 42. I imagine it will be a hugely popular watch. What you guys think? I know Parnis did one and Davosa also had a fair go at one, but for whatever reason I think I'll be more likely to pop for a Stein than either of those.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Be ok as a beater like my Invicta auto.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
It won't satisfy you and you will get bored of it in a matter of weeks. Save hard and buy the one you want, nothing else will do I'm afraid in my experience
Steinhart make a great watch, but personally I just don't get this level of mimicry.
Obviously there's a market for it though.
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
Davosa are pretty decent quality imo. Nice watch :)
There's homage and there's ridiculousness. That said, look at the crown on that thing, it's a shame they didn't make it bigger!
I would assert that about half of steinhart's range are that close to cloning.
Copying a classic design, building it very decently and selling for a fraction of the price is a commercial goldmine in all markets. The appeal should be very obvious.
Individual objections are understandable and fully entitled but for anyone not to see the market attraction of such a product is puzzling.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
If you want the blue-black diver thing, then go for something original in design like the Turtle or the upcoming Samurai rather than these fakes.
I think there is room for all of it and I don't have an issue with homages, of which many "watch companies" produce with credibility and quality. Lastly, having worn the 42mm GMT which was too large for me, not one person gave two hoots or commented on it in any shape or form. However, the quality was awesome, the movement was fab, smooth crown, great timing and 28BPH. The bracelet and flat lugs/case were the week link.
I very much wouldn't doubt they will be much lower quality. Samurais - even though they only came out are already known to have following issues - an uneven crown (it doesn't sit in the centre between crown guards), misaligned date in the date window, misaligned chapter ring - that's standard for Seiko these days, and horrible bezel action.
I like some of the original design Steinhart watches such as the titanium diver. Also I have no issues with the Milsub hommage because you cannot get a current Rolex Sub with sword hands. Steinhart cases, while similar, are also quite different to Rolex, namely the straight lugs.
However the green bezel subalike, and this blue black gmt are just blattant attempts to surf on a current desirable Rolex models. I would also prefer to buy an original design Seiko than this copy, even if Steinhart quality is exemplary.
Well the post is really about steinharts version which isn't out yet so isn't available for scrutiny. I take it you mean the Davosa that I posted as a current example that's avail. Still I guess you could pay £7000 more for a smaller crown 🤣
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Personally if I couldn't afford product A I would never settle for product that looks like product A. I'd be a waste of money since I'd struggle to fool myself into thinking that this is what I really like and want (when what I want and like is product A). I'd rather find ways to obtain funds to get product A or buy something else that doesn't pretend to be something it isn't.
I can't afford one. Also I think your wrong. I owned several steinharts which DID quench my sub thirst. I have sold most now but thoroughly enjoyed them for a long time. At no point during did I feel soiled for wearing a marketing success, sorry I mean "imposter"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hear you. There's another post about the BLNR on watch talk where the owner is terrified of going on holiday with the thing. If I'm gonna spend 8 grand or whatever on a watch I'd want to wear the damn thing! Life is FULL of products which are homages. You could argue fake fur homages real fur, cubic zirconia homages diamonds and so on. People seem to think the steinhart OVM that homages the milsub is acceptable simply because the milsub is 100k or something but for me there's not much difference to saying 8k is unattainable for many. I do own one steinhart still and I own one Rolex. I'd have no issue increasing it to two of each.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmm - if it was a bog standard Sub clone then maybe, but this is a bit too much for my taste.
Like others have said, go for something original in your price range instead
I pine for an Aston Martin too, but I still gotta drive so I make do. I live within my means, and if I can't afford the item I desire then to me it's Human nature to strive for as close as I can to the aesthetic that originally appealed to my eyes. I guess I'm just not a watch snob. I own Breitling Tudor Omega Rolex, but also Steinhart Debaufre Bulova and Rotary . I like them all.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No granted I wouldn't. But by the same token, having owned several steinharts I can assure you they are not skodas. I take your point though. The thing is it's easy to say "just save for it" but watches are a hobby for me, and wAiting several yrs between purchases just defeats the purpose for me
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem with Steinhart is that it crosses the line between homage and desperate rip off. I'm sorry. I'm sure they make nice quality watches but I'd rather get a slightly more expensive original like Omega SMPc or Tudor BB or an Oris which will be original, quality and robust.
What you think of them is one thing but to just say "buy the real thing" is slightly insensitive. I'd hazard a gues that the OP would buy a Rolex if he was in a position to do so?
I actually wouldn't mind them producing a vintage GMT homage. Along the lines of the ocean one vintage.
I agree with what someone else says, I kind of feel more comfortable with their homages to older watches rather than current ones.
Hmm. I think this is a bad analogy. My steinhart is sapphire glass, wr300, screw down crown, runs to +2 a day and has done since bought. So it's performance in all things is at least comparable. Finish of course is not going to be as good (although it is quite good!) and internally there will be some attention to detail etc. But all the above for less than the price of having a Rolex serviced represents good value. I own a Rolex so I don't hate the brand at all. Quite the opposite. But I don't have the means to own more than one just now. Seems many people just hate Steinhart and that's fine. I just don't get why.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I suppose the same could be said of my recent Purchase (Ginault Ocean Rover, Blue/Gold Bezel) Very much styled(OK, virtually identical) on a Sub, Obviously not the same build quality but non the less a very impressive watch for not much money- I bought it simply because I liked it, not because it was a Sub Clone-
Well, at least the lugs don't look quite so fat and bloated. Steinhart have had the sense not to mimic this aspect of the current Rolex design.
They have a Ceramic Tropical GMT which is a less blatant copy and a better alternative, IMO.
There is no question about the quality of Steinhart which is perfectly acceptable at their price point but some are uncomfortably close to original. It bothers some but not all.
No point litigating again and again.
Last edited by RustyBin5; 24th June 2017 at 15:25.
Around and around goes this subject.
The only thing that matters in a capitalist market economy is, is it legal?
If it is legal then market demand will be filled. If there is market demand for something that looks like a Rolex but at a lower price point then someone will fill it. Rolex could fill it themselves and take the profit from that segment of the market if they wanted to. They don't want to though, as they feel, quite rightly, that it would get people to question and reduce demand in the higher segment of the market they currently target.
I don't really get this, 'someone originated the design or tech and therefore all other makers who produce similar items are somehow to be looked down on'.
There are loads of similar situations. Philips invented and developed the Compact Cassette and brought it to market. In the 1960s I bought the Philips EL3302 then and it was very nice.
Philips did not prevent other companies 'copying' their tech and design. Does that mean every subsequent buyer of a non-Philips PCC player was to be disparaged as they were buying copied design and tech instead of remaining 'pure' with Philips? Does anyone make this argument? I don't think so and I see little difference just because something might be a different product.
Is it legal, is the only question that need to be asked in a market economy, is it homaging, copying a more 'pure' product is pretty irrelevant really. Individuals will buy what they feel best meets their mix of priorities. If someone wants 'purity' even at greater expense they will buy accordingly as will someone who is not bothered.
Both legal and acceptable choices.
Mitch