GS vs SM - cat amongst pigeons?

Thirdfox

I saw this interesting (to me) thread up on WUS - a San Martin $400 homage of a $5000 Grand Seiko:
https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/san-martin-spring-drive-grand-diver.5317247/

In some ways the machine finishing on the SM appeals visually than the GS (personally) - on the case end etc. Now these are promo photos so who knows if the actual watch looks like this - I didn't go through the thread to see if any posters actually bought one and reported on it.

No loupes taken to the watch to see 10x finishing - but it's a shot to GS I think if Chinese manufacturers like SM can get very close to GS finishing (machine vs hand finished of course) at 1/10th the price.

Photos:









Equally - with this kind of finishing available to SM - why don't they just go their own way and make their own designs (well the answer to me is that they wouldn't be able to sell it at $400 since it's seen as "just" a Chinese watch, not a watch that has pretty cool finishing and (unique) internal design.)

Fitz II

Are they pictures of the watch or renders, lighting looks rendered

Lorddrakul

That is a great comparison, but in fairness, is the GS design really that original?

The dial in particular seems to be channeling some of the design classics of the genre.

As such, SM doing a really good job on it isn't so much pushing the limit of homage as just doing he same thing as GS in terms of direction.

To be honest, I love the fact that I can get a really good homage of certain design classics for a couple of hundred euros as it means you can have the utility experience of a design classic, without necessarily having to buy into the name.

As I have mentioned ad nauseam, Rolex, as a brand, means nowt to me. However, a classic Sub is a lovely watch and rightly a design classic. I would never stretch to buy a Rolex Sub, but a nice Steinhart to me is a perfect alternative - a good quality version of a very distinctive design.

Thirdfox

Fitz II wrote: »

Are they pictures of the watch or renders, lighting looks rendered

Got no energy left to go through 12 pages on WUS to see if anyone actually bought one to see quality in hand. Professional photos can look like renders when light beautifully...and some HDR is often used in date windows etc. to touch up dark spots.

Lorddrakul wrote: »

That is a great comparison, but in fairness, is the GS design really that original?

The dial in particular seems to be channeling some of the design classics of the genre.

As such, SM doing a really good job on it isn't so much pushing the limit of homage as just doing he same thing as GS in terms of direction.

To be honest, I love the fact that I can get a really good homage of certain design classics for a couple of hundred euros as it means you can have the utility experience of a design classic, without necessarily having to buy into the name.

As I have mentioned ad nauseam, Rolex, as a brand, means nowt to me. However, a classic Sub is a lovely watch and rightly a design classic. I would never stretch to buy a Rolex Sub, but a nice Steinhart to me is a perfect alternative - a good quality version of a very distinctive design.

Choice and competition is good - as long as it's on the right sight of legal the consumer benefits - no one is buying a SM thinking they are getting a GS. I got a Borealis Seahawk before ultimately getting the Pelagos (though the two designs are a bit more different than the SM/GS here).

Yes - and a Steinhart isn't purporting to be a Rolex - and classic designs are more "public domain" than perhaps(?) if say Zenith released their pantone el primero and then the day after San Martin releases an exact/99% homage of it - classic designs like a Cartier tank, JLC reverso, sub, etc. etc. vs homaging just released designs might cross some sort of internal line with me...

The Borealis Seahawk was in blue and released before the Pelagos blue version - so who ended up homaging whom? :D

Fitz II

Looking on their website the other shots are less flattering. And some photoshop done in places.

https://sanmartinwatches.com/wp/product/sn009-g/

Cienciano

Looks wise, the SM wins because it doesn't have that stupid spring drive power indicator on the dial.

Would love to see a video review of it, very nice watch

Cienciano

Fitz II wrote: »

Looking on their website the other shots are less flattering. And some photoshop done in places.

Yeah, machining on the notches on the bezel doesn't look great either.

Fitz II

Suppose it comes down to if you want to listen to the cover band or the original musicians. With CAD CAM, metrology and machining being cheaper and cheaper to do, getting a nice finish and an acceptable product is not "pat on the back" worthy as it once was (just like its easy now produce hi fidelity music in your bedroom).

The real value in watches is the designs of the products and the purchasing and ownership experiance. I have issues with the design of GS watches in general anyway (latest ones are an improvement) the obsession of GS owners with the macro finish of the watches was something I find unimpressive.

The Ginault Ocean Rover was an almost perfect replica for a Submariner and the reasons for this were another reason not to be that proud of owning one.

Cyclingtourist

Penneys Vs Prada

893bet

Cyclingtourist wrote: »

Penneys Vs Prada

Pretty much.

That’s a weekend in centre parc (not bad in its own right).

But when compared to two weeks in Disney land......

Cienciano

It's almost like a cheap watch vs a really expensive one :pac: