Reply With QuoteGotta be the Seamster here. Much more coherent design.
Back in 2007 I had to choose which watch to buy from the two you see below. Of course there were plenty of other choices but I had whittled the abundance on offer down to these two finalists.
So which would you have chosen and why? I'll let you know if I made the right choice once I find out from you lot (my peers) which one I should have bought.
Gotta be the Seamster here. Much more coherent design.
Personally I would have chosen the “splitty”
Probably the best value rstrappante going and one I would be happy to have in my meagre collection.
Cheers,
Ben
..... for I have become the Jedi of flippers
" an extravagance is anything you buy that is of no earthly use to your wife "
Seamaster.
I’d guess the Seamaster will get the most votes but I’ve always like that particular Speedmaster so it gets my vote
Seamaster for me. I am not a fan of that Speedmaster. Although the movement is rather special
I’d of gone for the seamaster,I’ve never seen that other model .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think looking at the pictures you went for the Speedmaster.(Would have been my choice )
I’ve owned both, much preferred the Seamaster Chrono for looks and durability, as I recall that Speedy was only 50m WR, the Seamaster is built like a tank and it really was a watch for all occasions.
Speedy for me. Not a fan of a chrono on a diver.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
I would have picked the Speedmaster.
What happens if you made the "wrong" choice. Is this going to precipitate an existential, horological crisis?
Diver chrono doesn’t make sense but I think I prefer it.
This is something many on here dont understand.
The right choice is the one you liked best, not what you think other people like best.
Very true.Originally Posted by xellos99
Wow I didn't know this speedy!
Speedmaster for me, you can't go wrong with a black faced chrono paired with a steel tachymeter bezel. Nice sets of hands as well.
The seamaster has its appeal in the simpler diver version but I can't feel anything for the seamaster chrono and the chopped indices
Neither.
Personally they are probably my two most disliked mainstream chrono's of the period.
The Speedy's a mess and I always disliked the horrible little sub dials on the Seamaster.
Marry that to the usual awful layout of the 775x style and you have a style farrago IMO.
Which one did you buy?
Cheers,
Neil.
Splitmaster please. Bezel's clumsy, but it's still by far the nicer watch; the Seamaster looks like a cheap quartz "tribute".
Never seen that Speedmaster before so I’d go for that on the basis it is something different.
Out of those two I would take the Speedmaster in a heartbeat.
Simon
Speedmaster, more special.
100% the Seamaster, the Speedmaster has way too much going on, too busy for me.
Not sure about the cheap quartz tribute comment ? A tribute to what the original big blue 120m? Chuck Maddox will be spinning in his grave .
I did own a Sinn 103 and in my clumsy hands the Sinn was soft as butter compared to the Chrono diver.
However horses for courses . For a damn decent watch it’d be the Chrono Diver . For a clever acquisition which may show increase in value it’d be the Speedie . For me it’s the Seamaster
Last edited by Mark lowman; 1st June 2021 at 20:44.
Ideally neither - sorry.
Agreed, neither is for me. If I had to absolutely choose one, I’d go Speedmaster for looks alone.
It's just a matter of time...
I’d be happy with either of them but the speedmaster is a bit special.
As I can’t bear tachymetre bezels, without real world use and rather visually dominating, not the Speedmaster.
I like the normal Seamasters of that generation, but not diver chronos.
Bit cold on both, sorry.
D
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by helidoc; 1st June 2021 at 23:09.
Well I think the Speedy pipped the Seamaster by 12 to 8 so looks like I made the wrong choice.
I liked the Speedy's carbon fibre dial and the split second chrono was neat but ultimately I choose the Seamaster because it was blue (didn't have a blue watch at the time) and properly water resistant not just rain resistant.
Did I make the wrong choice? I think I did. The Seamaster hasn't had a lot of wrist time over the years and it's never had it's water resistance put to the test - one of the main reasons I choose it. I can't say the Speedy would have had any more wear but I suspect it would be worth more in resale value today.
As a curioso - the rapantante speedy - which has the case shape of the X-33 of the same era except it is steel and has a single pusher on LHS. Can’t get on with the Seamaster Chronos. PO yes please though.
“ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG
But it is 2007, I think TZ is guilty of thinking that every watch needs to be timeless. It’s also ok to buy a watch that’s cool in the moment but will look hideous in years to come (possibly Hublot and Royal Oak Offshore?)
That what Chrono24 is for, flip one for the other then you'll truly know if you made a balls up :)
Posting Permissions
