San Martin vs Rolex

[carlt69]

Anyone else seen this video on the tube? I was quite shocked by the quality of the Rolex and if it was mine I’d have gone back to Rolex tbh

I’d still prefer to own the Rolex mind. lol

https://youtu.be/CQSDHu8sVGk?si=hdgLcbuBq2J4Ip7O


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Urban_Gent]

I hadn't seen this video but after seeing your post I have now lol.

It's surprisingly shocking and as you say if it was mine don't think it would have been a keeper.

That said these YouTube comparison videos are getting boring now, they tend to compare watches that are simply two worlds apart.
Most everyday Rolex owners wouldn't know what a San Martin is and most San Martin owners wouldn't warrant dropping 10K on a Rolex.

I actually prefer the microbrand comparisons against these low priced SM's

Sent from my SM-A217F using Tapatalk

[blackal]

Indeed.................... LOL

[wildheart]

This is no surprise to me, the quality of these Chinese homage watches is so good these days. I bought a Pagani Design Hulk homage off Ali Express for £60, went to the Dentist, my Dentist though it was a Rolex, I took it off for him to look at he was so impressed at the quality. I think in the next decade Chinese watch will surpass Swiss watches. The time keeping on my Pagani Design with its Seiko movement is as good as my Omega. Amazing for £60! Good post.

[Fullbreakfast]

A lot of what he says is quite subjective, and one could suggest that he ignores some things that would go in favour of the Rolex. Even so, it should give anyone pause that these watches are fairly evenly matched in terms of finish when one costs 30x to 40x as much as the other.

[Dave+63]

I was going to comment on the timekeeping, after all that is the primary function of the watch. I love the design and finish of my Seiko SPB143 and 297 but the timekeeping annoys me. My 16710 is well within COSC specs and I don’t have to keep adjusting it on a weekly basis.

If the San Martin can keep time that well then maybe the guy has a point.

[Urban_Gent]

If San Martin focused on their Original Designs at the price they're currently retailing for its great for people to try a great watch for silly money without it being a direct Clomage

Sent from my SM-A217F using Tapatalk

[Fullbreakfast]

If the San Martin can keep time that well then maybe the guy has a point.

It's probably not going to. I've got two San Martins, one with an NH35 which in daily use runs about +9 seconds and one with a YN55 which is about +4 seconds. So the latter is just about to COSC standard. I've only had these for a fairly short time, so it remains to be seen what will happen to accuracy over the longer term.

That said, the guy in the video was just talking about finishing, I don't think he was trying to make an argument that a San Martin is "as good as" a Rolex, which would be a bit daft. But from a user's perspective if the differences in finishing are negligible, and the difference in timekeeping is a couple of seconds a day, the price differential does highlight how much work the Rolex brand is doing.

[Fullbreakfast]

If San Martin focused on their Original Designs at the price they're currently retailing for its great for people to try a great watch for silly money without it being a direct Clomage

They do have quite a few original designs now - some more original than others, it must be said. I got my wife their Year of the Dragon 2024 watch as a small present as she likes Chinese astrology, and it's quite striking and different from anything else I've seen. Some might say it's horrible, but at least it shows they are not JUST clone merchants.

[Dave+63]

the price differential does highlight how much work the Rolex brand is doing.

Whilst undoubtedly true, the eye watering difference in production costs in Switzerland compared to China no doubt are a contributing factor too.

[davidj54]

Yeah I saw it, he was hyping the video all week with posts on YouTube. He makes some valid points, and there’s no question that Rolex is overpriced and San Martin is good value for money. But the YouTuber in question is very much a Rolex critic and San Martin fanboy, he seemingly has connections at the company, they send him watches to review etc - he reviews so many SM watches you’d think he was their one-man social media department, so it was always gonna be a partisan video.

[xellos99]

I have two San Martins and they do a very good job of fooling your eye that they are almost luxury watches but look very closely and you can see they are only clever replicas trying hard to appear as luxury.

[Ruggertech]

Whilst undoubtedly true, the eye watering difference in production costs in Switzerland compared to China no doubt are a contributing factor too.

True Dave, but only a small contributing factor. It doesn't make £9900 difference on a mass produced watch.

[Urban_Gent]

They do have quite a few original designs now - some more original than others, it must be said. I got my wife their Year of the Dragon 2024 watch as a small present as she likes Chinese astrology, and it's quite striking and different from anything else I've seen. Some might say it's horrible, but at least it shows they are not JUST clone merchants.

No I totally agree, I really like the Original stuff they're producing and hope they put more focus into that. That said I'm assuming there main market is people that want Direct Homages,

The year of the dragon looks really good, as you say somewhat niche. If they dulled the tone of the Bezel Insert slightly I'd be all over that!

Sent from my SM-A217F using Tapatalk

[Dave+63]

True Dave, but only a small contributing factor. It doesn't make £9900 difference on a mass produced watch.

I agree, I was just pointing out that it’s not all marketing and any product is going to cost a lot more to produce in Switzerland than China.

[Ruggertech]

I agree, I was just pointing out that it’s not all marketing and any product is going to cost a lot more to produce in Switzerland than China.

And I agree with that Dave. I'll go further and say that San Martin probably employs more people per watch than Rolex on the production lines.

[monogroover]

As one who owns examples of both I have to say I've often had the thought - you couldn't tell just from handling them or looking at them which is the cheap one. In my case, pun not intended, it's only the smooth, firm feel of the the winding / setting action that sets the Rolex apart. That and the sound and feel of changing the date. It's just more substantial.

[chrisparker]

True Dave, but only a small contributing factor. It doesn't make £9900 difference on a mass produced watch.

It's pointless trying to compare the prices, VAT alone on a £10k watch makes up £1666 of the final price, the dealer margin will be a larger chunk, etc..

The retail price of a luxury product doesn't have anything to do with it's manufacturing cost, for example the Titanium Rolex Yachtmaster will have just about the same manufacturing cost of Tudor's Ti Pelagos, manufactured in the same location, same distribution, same dealer network, vastly different RRP.

[Ruggertech]

The retail price of a luxury product doesn't have anything to do with it's manufacturing cost,...

True, and if it were rolex would be broke.

[barneygumble]

I was going to comment on the timekeeping, after all that is the primary function of the watch. I love the design and finish of my Seiko SPB143 and 297 but the timekeeping annoys me. My 16710 is well within COSC specs and I don’t have to keep adjusting it on a weekly basis.

If the San Martin can keep time that well then maybe the guy has a point.

Honestly, time keeping is (at this point) one of the least important roles for a watch for most folks, as everyone has a phone.

[Dave+63]

Honestly, time keeping is (at this point) one of the least important roles for a watch for most folks, as everyone has a phone.

You could be right, but not for me; poor time keeping bugs the hell out of me and I only use my phone as a bedside clock. I don’t use it for the time during the day although I do wear an Apple Watch most days.

[futon river crossing]

£10,000 buys you great marketing

£300 buys you great finishing

You pay your money and take your choice ;)

Only partially joking !!!

[Daddelvirks]

Fact is, as long as there are rich people enough in the world the luxury brands will sell. Lots of people still think status is something you can buy and not something you have to earn.

[manicmunnday]

I tend to steer clear of homage watches, so haven't been too interested in San Martin as a result.

After seeing the build quality in the video though, I'll definitely have a look at some of their original designs! Amazing value for the money compared to Rolex.

Sent from my SM-M325FV using Tapatalk

[Dave+63]

Amazing value for the money compared to Rolex.

It depends on your definition of value for money. Long term, Rolex watches are much better vfm than most because they tend to increase in value.

Spend £300 on a San Martin and that’s £300 lost over the next few years but spend £10k on a Rolex and expect to lose nothing over the next five to ten years. It is possible that Rolex will start to depreciate in the same manner as cheaper watches, but that is unlikely in the long term.

[sweets]

It depends on your definition of value for money. Long term, Rolex watches are much better vfm than most because they tend to increase in value.

Spend £300 on a San Martin and that’s £300 lost over the next few years but spend £10k on a Rolex and expect to lose nothing over the next five to ten years. It is possible that Rolex will start to depreciate in the same manner as cheaper watches, but that is unlikely in the long term.

Hmm, that is a bit of a gamble.

Especially given that the Batman (the subject of the above video) seems to have lost (according to Chrono24s graphs, which are calculated on the same basis over time) £5k since the market peak in March 22......

Spending £17k on one back then and having it worth £12k now is a pretty poor gamble.

No such thing as a sure bet in this game, there is always a chance that falls happen.

[carlt69]

I tend to steer clear of homage watches, so haven't been too interested in San Martin as a result.

After seeing the build quality in the video though, I'll definitely have a look at some of their original designs! Amazing value for the money compared to Rolex.

Sent from my SM-M325FV using Tapatalk

I had the same thoughts, but after seeing this video it made me want to try a San Martin to see


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mouse]

The big 'problem' with all of these replicas, imo, is the weight. Same goes for Steinhart models. From what I can tell, they all tend to be at least 25 gms heavier than the Rolex model they're imitating. I've no idea where the added weight comes from, but that alone puts me off ever wanting to own one.

[manicmunnday]

It depends on your definition of value for money. Long term, Rolex watches are much better vfm than most because they tend to increase in value.

Spend £300 on a San Martin and that’s £300 lost over the next few years but spend £10k on a Rolex and expect to lose nothing over the next five to ten years. It is possible that Rolex will start to depreciate in the same manner as cheaper watches, but that is unlikely in the long term.

Yeah, I take your point, but I meant more in terms of what you get for your money rather than investment/depreciation considerations.

Sent from my SM-M325FV using Tapatalk

[barneygumble]

The big 'problem' with all of these replicas, imo, is the weight. Same goes for Steinhart models. From what I can tell, they all tend to be at least 25 gms heavier than the Rolex model they're imitating. I've no idea where the added weight comes from, but that alone puts me off ever wanting to own one.

It's 25 grams of extra quality ;-)

I think these are great watches personally, and great as a 'try before you buy' before you shell out 10k on something they are copying. My main objection is the side-profie, and the thickness - they are always a bit slab-sided and usually a bit thicker than other watches as the NH35 they are all built around is quite a thick movement.

[monogroover]

The big 'problem' with all of these replicas, imo, is the weight. Same goes for Steinhart models. From what I can tell, they all tend to be at least 25 gms heavier than the Rolex model they're imitating. I've no idea where the added weight comes from, but that alone puts me off ever wanting to own one.

I'd never thought of that, but their target market is people who will most likely never know what the real ones feel like on their wrist.

[Wallasey Runner]

A lot of homage watches tend to be bigger. Most Steinhart until recent years were all 42mm, so much bigger than Rolex. Their 39mm models are a lot lighter and probably more in line with Rolex weight.

[Griswold]

I'd never thought of that, but their target market is people who will most likely never know what the real ones feel like on their wrist.

Nor will they likely care.

[Holyzeus]

I have a San Martin and one thing to be aware of is the potential for a sticky rough crown.
Mine is very rough, quite common at one point going by the posts on the FB San Martin group.

[Ruggertech]

Hmm, that is a bit of a gamble.

Especially given that the Batman (the subject of the above video) seems to have lost (according to Chrono24s graphs, which are calculated on the same basis over time) £5k since the market peak in March 22......

Spending £17k on one back then and having it worth £12k now is a pretty poor gamble.

No such thing as a sure bet in this game, there is always a chance that falls happen.

And that's not including servicing costs.

[Dave+63]

Hmm, that is a bit of a gamble.

Especially given that the Batman (the subject of the above video) seems to have lost (according to Chrono24s graphs, which are calculated on the same basis over time) £5k since the market peak in March 22......

Spending £17k on one back then and having it worth £12k now is a pretty poor gamble.

No such thing as a sure bet in this game, there is always a chance that falls happen.

Indeed, but I wasn’t really thinking about the madness of the last four years or so.

Now it seems that relatively normal service is being resumed, buying most models at or around retail should see little or no depreciation over the next five to ten years, making the ownership of the watch almost free.

As I said earlier though, whilst this has been the case for many years (the last few excepted), there is no guarantee that it will be the case in the future.

[Ruggertech]

...making the ownership of the watch almost free.

Good bit of man maths there Dave, but my ISA 'currently' pays 4.8% (of course, like the Rolex that can go down as well as up, and more likely than the Rolex probably will go down). So thats £480 the example £10k Rolex would have cost me over the last year.
I fully realise I'm being pedantic here, so don't take my comment too seriously as many members will of course have the money in the ISA plus other investments aswell as enjoying a Rolex on the wrist.

[Passenger]

Good bit of man maths there Dave, but my ISA 'currently' pays 4.8% (of course, like the Rolex that can go down as well as up, and more likely than the Rolex probably will go down). So thats £480 the example £10k Rolex would have cost me over the last year.
I fully realise I'm being pedantic here, so don't take my comment too seriously as many members will of course have the money in the ISA plus other investments aswell as enjoying a Rolex on the wrist.

Yup I think there´s a fair bit of assumption- hopium even in Dave´s prognosis- forecast AND the past is not necessarily an accurate guide to the future...Come to that, those halcyon days, not so long ago, when glimpsing a Rolex under 10k on SC was a rarity, now there´s several at a fair bit less, just languishing.

[Dave+63]

Good bit of man maths there Dave, but my ISA 'currently' pays 4.8% (of course, like the Rolex that can go down as well as up, and more likely than the Rolex probably will go down). So thats £480 the example £10k Rolex would have cost me over the last year.
I fully realise I'm being pedantic here, so don't take my comment too seriously as many members will of course have the money in the ISA plus other investments aswell as enjoying a Rolex on the wrist.

I certainly not suggesting that Rolex watches be used for investment purposes, just that they can be a low cost ownership proposal again. They certainly have been in the past.

And I also agree with Passenger’s comment, I stated such in the last paragraph of my previous post. Having said that, I’m hardly hoping that it will be the case in future, I couldn’t care less. I paid £3.5k each for my 16710 and Polar 16570 so I’m sitting pretty value wise. I’ve no intention of buying another one any time soon or selling the two I have so it’s a moot point.

I’m actually happy that values are dropping as I feel more comfortable wearing them than when the values were higher.

[Ruggertech]

I certainly not suggesting that Rolex watches be used for investment purposes, just that they can be a low cost ownership proposal again. They certainly have been in the past.

No, I know you're not Dave, and I'm not suggesting you are. Low cost yes (at least in the rarefied world of TZ), almost free certainly not unless they continue to rise.

[Passenger]

That business about the 3200 movement is another factor of concern with the new´uns. Additionally a macro economic issue which might get ´´interesting´´ for Rolex sales over the next couple of years, China, it is economically tanking...though I suppose Rolex could just slow down the production lines and manage supply...though arent they´supposedly bringing additional production facilities on line soon?

[Dave+63]

No, I know you're not Dave, and I'm not suggesting you are. Low cost yes (at least in the rarefied world of TZ), almost free certainly not unless they continue to rise.

Whilst we are currently seeing a correction from the past few years of madness, I think they’ll always continue to rise (albeit at a much more realistic rate) as I can’t see Rolex either reducing RRPs or ADs discounting any time soon.

When I bought my 16710, GMTs were around £5.5k, they are now £9350 if you can get one. As they continue to rise, the used market will almost certainly follow suit. So if you buy wisely and keep the watch for a number of years, the selling price will probably be higher than your original purchase price thus making the watch a no cost ownership proposition.

You’ll definitely not get your money back selling a San Martin so the Rolex will ultimately be cheaper to own than the San Martin.

[Ruggertech]

Whilst we are currently seeing a correction from the past few years of madness, I think they’ll always continue to rise (albeit at a much more realistic rate) as I can’t see Rolex either reducing RRPs or ADs discounting any time soon.

When I bought my 16710, GMTs were around £5.5k, they are now £9350 if you can get one. As they continue to rise, the used market will almost certainly follow suit. So if you buy wisely and keep the watch for a number of years, the selling price will probably be higher than your original purchase price thus making the watch a no cost ownership proposition.

You’ll definitely not get your money back selling a San Martin so the Rolex will ultimately be cheaper to own than the San Martin.

A bit like houses I suppose Dave, rises and falls but overall upwards.
The service required on the Rolex if you want to get your money back will be a number of times the cost of the San Martin but I take your point.

[Passenger]

A bit like houses I suppose Dave, rises and falls but overall upwards.
The service required on the Rolex if you want to get your money back will be a number of times the cost of the San Martin but I take your point.

Also factor in the cost of the safe to keep the Rolex in, maybe additional contents insurance too!

[Ruggertech]

Also factor in the cost of the safe to keep the Rolex in, maybe additional contents insurance too!

You are mischievous P.

[sweets]

Indeed, but I wasn’t really thinking about the madness of the last four years or so.

Now it seems that relatively normal service is being resumed, buying most models at or around retail should see little or no depreciation over the next five to ten years, making the ownership of the watch almost free.

As I said earlier though, whilst this has been the case for many years (the last few excepted), there is no guarantee that it will be the case in the future.

One should ague that the insane bit is not the last 4 years of correction, but the preceeding 4, which saw the ludicrous and unsustainable rise, doubling the price and more.
So that is at least 8 years of madness out of the last 8. You're sure you know which way it is going next?

We might well still be seeing a correction to a quite low rate of price growth, but it wouldn't take much say, escalation in the middle east, or a Trump election win, to precipitate an even more severe correction.

And when you're paying £10k for it, it only takes a 3% drop in price for you to have already afforded the alternative.

My point is that you need a crystal ball to "know" that the Rolex is good value.
You don't need that to see that the San Martin presents an excellent value proposition, given the level of finishing on show.

[Dave+63]

My point is that you need a crystal ball to "know" that the Rolex is good value.
You don't need that to see that the San Martin presents an excellent value proposition, given the level of finishing on show.

I Can’t disagree with any of that.

My initial point about good timekeeping is still an important factor for me though and however good the level of finishing is, if the timekeeping is poor then I wouldn’t consider any Watch good value.

This thread is making me think that the watch I really need is either a GS Quartz or a solar atomic G Shock!

[Wallasey Runner]

The timekeeping on any automatic watch is going to be subjective to some degree, how many hours worn, how active the individuals are etc. A G Shock that is regulated several times a day must be the logical way to go for anyone who requires 100% accuracy.

[Ruggertech]

I haven't owned a San Martin but have owned several nh35 powered Chinese watches (from companies half or even a third of the price of San Martin) and the timekeeping on all of them has been within a couple of seconds a day. Far better than a typical Seiko. Either these companies regulate the movements carefully, which seems unlikely or Seiko send out their unbranded nh movements better set up than the branded ones they put in their own watches.

[Passenger]

The timekeeping on any automatic watch is going to be subjective to some degree, how many hours worn, how active the individuals are etc. A G Shock that is regulated several times a day must be the logical way to go for anyone who requires 100% accuracy.

Good points...I'm currently over the moon with my humble miyota powered Baltic Hermetique...new 2 weeks ago, worn daily, it appears to have neither lost nor gained a second! It'll be interesting to see how long this kind of performance endures. The perfect daily wearer for me, forget I'm wearing it only to catch a glimpse of the dial and need a longer look, can't see myself ever selling it, it's so satisfying. The inset crown is a touch, never get a crown poking in the back of your hand when doing press ups, result...All subjective as you note obvs.