I've been on watch fora since they started on the 'net and every year we hear from GS fans that, "next year is going to be the big push and GS will eclipse Rolex etc."
I'm a massive vintage Seiko fan.... but I'm still waiting.
Seiko themselves shut down Grand Seiko when they thought the future was quartz. That was when they gave up the high quality mechanical watch for Rolex (pretty much alone) to carry the torch for.
When GS belatedly came back to mechanicals they had fallen completely out of the public eye and had to start afresh.
I don't think they will ever catch up now in the public eye.
Cheers,
Neil.
You're perfectly right that they are 2/3rd links not half links. I've just checked what spare links were with the watch when i bought it (used), typically I only have the full sized ones. Doing what you said would probably give me the fit I want. Later I'll have do do a search and see if its possible to get a 2/3rd link. Need to buy the right tools too.Originally Posted by Itsguy
The weird thing it that my 60s GS self-dater is beautifully thin, as is my more modest 60s Seiko Skyliner. Both are still very accurate after 50 years. As with many other brands, it seems they used to know how to make thin movements that lasted, but lost the knack at some point. Omega had the same issue and have only started to fix this problem very recently. I guess thin watches were out of fashion for a while, if anything they were bulking them up. Glad that trend is over.
Grand Seiko pioneered high-end quartz when Rolex fled the scene after just a few years.
Over the next decade, the internet will probably dominate luxury watch sales. And that could prove a highly disruptive process. Anyone who thinks they can know the result must be very confident.
And btw....for everyone who prefers a thin watch, there;s another buyer who likes a thicker one. Such matters will make little difference...with plenty of companies able to make quality watches, it will be down to who has the best marketing and distribution.
Adidas and Nike don't dominate because they make higher quality stuff (in Vietnam).
Last edited by paskinner; 16th March 2018 at 17:24.
IMO this isn't really about preferring thick or thin cases, the issue is the back of the watch sticking out, 'below the water line' so to speak. It's clearly not how the design is intended to work, in an ideal world. You can tell how they were intended to wear by looking at the vintage GS models that inspired them, and can also see how the quartz equivalents of some automatic models wear far better due to being thinner (eg SBGV207, 10.5mm). How noticeable this is may depend on the shape and size of your wrist, but for me it's a problem that's more than subjective. Omega had the same issue with their top heavy automatic AT's and have slimmed them down for a reason, and leaving aside the other changes, it's an improvement. Personally I'd sacrifice a display back for a watch that wears well, which has always worked just fine over at Rolex. 'Ultra-thin' style watches is another thing entirely, and is certainly a matter of taste. But this is something else.
It's interesting how different people see these issues. I only get bothered when you get to something pretty silly, like a Deepsea. Certainly I was happy enough with the GS 117 quartz diver, which is quite chunky, and equally content with a 37mm quartz, which feels and looks slim to me. Currently wearing a manual wind 253, which is 38mm and 11mm.
Seems neat enough to me, the 11mm depth is only because of the gold central medallion sticking out, although it's very comfy to wear.
Last edited by paskinner; 16th March 2018 at 21:15.
Looks good, I need to get a mechanical GS at some point.It's interesting how different people see these issues. I only get bothered when you get to something pretty silly, like a Deepsea. Certainly I was happy enough with the GS 117 quartz diver, which is quite chunky, and equally content with a 37mm quartz, which feels and looks slim to me. Currently wearing a manual wind 253, which is 38mm and 11mm.
Seems neat enough to me, the 11mm depth is only because of the gold central medallion sticking out, although it's very comfy to wear.
And a Spring Drive to complete the set!
Oh yes, you can see I'n a convert.
It's interesting how different people see these issues. I only get bothered when you get to something pretty silly, like a Deepsea. Certainly I was happy enough with the GS 117 quartz diver, which is quite chunky, and equally content with a 37mm quartz, which feels and looks slim to me. Currently wearing a manual wind 253, which is 38mm and 11mm.
Seems neat enough to me, the 11mm depth is only because of the gold central medallion sticking out, although it's very comfy to wear.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Here's the Longines VHP, 41mm and maybe 14mm thick. Chunkier than a GS quartz, and a slightly 'bulky' watch on the wrist. Not quite as well-finished either. But it's a nice watch at a third of the price, with even greater precision and a perpetual calendar.
This new ETA quartz module will probably appear on a number of Swatch group watches. It shows how quickly GS need to update their technology .
Last edited by paskinner; 16th March 2018 at 21:52.
That’s a wonderful watch, and definitely an exception.
Looks nice but to big for me. Not long put on my Tudor BB 36, I really love the case on it.Here's the Longines VHP, 41mm and maybe 14mm thick. Chunkier than a GS quartz, and a slightly 'bulky' watch on the wrist. Not quite as well-finished either. But it's a nice watch at a third of the price, with even greater precision and a perpetual calendar.
This new ETA quartz module will probably appear on a number of Swatch group watches. It shows how quickly GS need to update their technology .
Last edited by PhilipJI; 16th March 2018 at 23:05.
I like that.Here's the Longines VHP, 41mm and maybe 14mm thick. Chunkier than a GS quartz, and a slightly 'bulky' watch on the wrist. Not quite as well-finished either. But it's a nice watch at a third of the price, with even greater precision and a perpetual calendar.
This new ETA quartz module will probably appear on a number of Swatch group watches. It shows how quickly GS need to update their technology .
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Rolex marketing and distribution is already miles ahead of Seiko. But you forget the most important part in building up longtime brand value and faith, and thats the after sales service. Rolex aim to have a watchmaker available at or very near every single outlet, for the best possible customer service. No watches are to be sent by post anywhere unless necessary (like skydwellers at the moment). I dont hear of Seiko inviting watchmakers from all over the world to 3 week training courses in Tokyo with all expenses paid... But maybe they will at some point (doubtful).
Indeed, and that's the challenge. However, I thought Rolex ADs send watches for service through the post all the time. But , either way, they are certainly ahead of the competition.
My point is that things can, and do, change.
Incidentally, Rolex make more than 160 watches a year for every employee. None of their rivals seem to approach this.
The Rolex genius is to make mass-produced watches seem really special.
Last edited by paskinner; 17th March 2018 at 10:22.
Noone but Rolex knows how many watches they make. Sure it's a lot but the "mass produced" jib is getting a bit tired.... The quality is still so much higher than the competition, which is strange if "mass production" is such a bad thing... They must've perfected it.
Things can change but I see zero reason why Seiko is the brand to do it.... Its not like there's anything special about their watches, from what I've seen.
I certainly don’t expect to see them seriously competing with Rolex. Nonetheless, there is something special about many of their watches. While I’ve already pointed out my reservations and areas where they can improve, they do have some beautifully executed designs that are pleasantly different. What can be hard to grasp is that some people simply don’t want to wear a modern Rolex, to be associated with its current brand image, all-pervading marketing, and the direction of travel of the designs. It’s a hugely successful and popular brand, but also a polarising one to some extent. But if a few people choose a GS to stand out from the crowd, it’s not going to cut into the sales of Rolex, it will only harm their competitors.
Last edited by Itsguy; 17th March 2018 at 12:49.
A few weeks ago I was in my local Rolex AD looking at watch straps, I wanted one for my Tudor BB 36. Luckily they had exactly what I wanted. While it was being changed I tried on an Rolex oyster perpetual, nice I thought. When they brought my Tudor out with the new strap I placed it by the Rolex and looked at them both side by side. Visually the quality of the Rolex was no better than the Tudor, the case and dial. I know the Rolex has an in house movement and the Tudor is a modified ETA, But I'm just talking about how they look. Now I'm looking at my GS, the quality of the dial is far superior to both the Rolex and Tudor.
Are the index and hands solid 18ct gold on all Seikos too?
If you were doing a dodgy business deal would you offer the local corrupt politician a Rolex or a Grand Seiko as a bribe ?
A Patek, every time.
Exactly how I discovered GS in 2014.
Often felt uncomfortable wearing my Rolex and needed something as good to go under radar with. It was March and Seiko had just announced the anniversary self-dater at Basel. Sold the Explorer in a heart beat.
Last edited by Toshk; 17th March 2018 at 21:26.
I'm sure they are not.
IIRC Mr Skinner on here sold a GS that had some plating loss on the indices.
Cheers,
Neil.
Definitely agree with that. The Credor brand is practically unknown and yet produces wonderful pieces. It would be an ideal brand to market the higher end pieces through.
That's correct, and the chap who bought it , (very cheap, for obvious reasons) had a new dial and hands fitted. Somehow, water-vapour had apparently got into the watch, although rhodium-plating should not have corroded, in my opinion. Both myself and the TZer who sold me the watch...without knowing of the issue....shared the cost of the loss, without any bitterness or rancour.
Anyway, after a year or so I bought another GS manual wind, must be a sucker for punishment, because I felt Grand Seiko's response to the problem was indifference. Other GS models I owned had all been problem-free. Very odd incident , because no-one could work out what had actually happened.
Anyway, Rolex hands are superior in quality of material in my opinion. GS don't use gold, plated rhodium more like it.
Last edited by paskinner; 18th March 2018 at 10:15.
They still can push Credor, but in the end GS owes its design language to the original 60s GS watches, and the brand story relies on that history, and the regular reissues of those pieces - which are lovely and very desirable. So in the end they have to stick with gradually winning over an audience with the quality of the watches and any marketing they do, and for that audience the logo starts to mean something else. They have also been getting plenty of positive press, and have won over some very influential writers online. While it may hold them back to some extent, it’s not more difficult than trying to launch a high end brand that comes out of nowhere. In the end it’s probably a reasonable compromise if it benefits the rest of the Seiko range by showing that they can do high end work too.
I've got to admit that I know very little about them.Definitely agree with that. The Credor brand is practically unknown and yet produces wonderful pieces. It would be an ideal brand to market the higher end pieces through.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
