nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Post pics of your watches Part II

Wibbs

And we're onto a new thread... Here's to the next 10,000. My first post in the last thread featured this watch I'm wearing today as it happens so seemed appropriate.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

redlead

Congrats, that's a beautiful piece. GS really are the king of dials!

Fitz II

That blue dial on the snokflake is lovely, what size is the watch? No denying that that is a high class watch wear well.

banie01

Well wear on the Snowflake, that is stunning!

SeaFields

Beauty. Am really considering a GS to mark something recently. Spending more time browsing in chrono than talking to the Mrs!

Wibbs

The quality of Grand Seiko finishing is off the scale. As good as anything at the top end of what the Swiss offer. The Spring Drive is a very clever piece of kit too and one of the true innovations of horology. That's a very nice piece of kit CP. Well wear.

Cyclingtourist

CarProblem wrote: »

Delighted with it so far - my photography skills and phone camera wont do it justice

[/IMG]

Nice watch.

When taking photos it helps if you remove the stickers like in the last couple of shots.

somebody_else

And now something different, last one for they year (at least for me).

Ryath

The finishing and attention to detail on them really is something special. Well wear.

Click on pic for full res.

redlead

Thats actually amazing how superior the finishing is on the GS to those two, especially to the Omega. You hear about it, but cool to see the macro shots .

[Deleted User]

Fitz II wrote: »

what size is the watch?

40.2mm I think - not sure what it is lug to lug. I do not have big wrists however!

Cyclingtourist wrote: »

When taking photos it helps if you remove the stickers like in the last couple of shots.

I was just taking snaps before and after I removed and set the date. Uploaded the lot :P

redlead wrote: »

Thats actually amazing how superior the finishing is on the GS to those two, especially to the Omega. You hear about it, but cool to see the macro shots .

This guy makes nice videos, not the first time Rolex finishing has been poor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsPZURSJEDQ

Skyflake

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAkVqRio3IA

Original Snowflake

micks_address

Do you mind if I ask price for the gs?

unkel

CarProblem wrote: »

This guy makes nice videos, not the first time Rolex finishing has been poor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsPZURSJEDQ

Very interesting video. For the first 6 or so minutes, he shows the watch and gives details about the specs. It's the entry level Rolex watch, yet it looks great. The whole package is class, from the proportions to the bracelet

Then he shows macro pictures that reveal awful blemishes. Scratches, dents, the lot. Appalling is right.

Or is it? He mentions at least 4 times that none of these blemishes can be seen with the naked eye. So how exactly is it relevant then? I've always loved Seiko and always will and only this year have I bought a few Rolex watches

That said, with my modest, untrained, naked eye, that entry level Rolex looks far, far more money than a top of the range Grand Seiko costing roughly the same

Wibbs

unkel wrote: »

That said, with my modest, untrained, naked eye, that entry level Rolex looks far, far more money than a top of the range Grand Seiko costing roughly the same

IMHO not even close and I'd bet the farm you'd say the same if they both had Casio on the dial.

unkel

Wibbs wrote: »

IMHO not even close and I'd bet the farm you'd say the same if they both had Casio on the dial.

Not sure what you mean there, Wibbs?

I guess you prefer the Grand Seiko because you know and appreciate they have a far superior finish / polish. And because of the innovative spring drive they keep far better time than any watch Rolex has ever made?

Is it a bit like preferring the quieter, more reliable, better built Lexus LS over say a BMW 7-series or Mercedes S-class?

redlead

unkel wrote: »

That said, with my modest, untrained, naked eye, that entry level Rolex looks far, far more money than a top of the range Grand Seiko costing roughly the same

I would say the exact opposite. A GS snowflake looks double the money it costs. An OP looks half the watch it costs.

unkel

Let me be the first to mention this though. I have never seen a GS in the flesh, never mind owned one. Just going by these videos. Hopefully at some stage I will have a snowflake on my wrist and I can make a better judgement then.

scwazrh

I’ve been watching that YouTuber for a while now and really like him.The video quality is second to none and is a very comprehensive review of each part of the watch.
That Rolex is disgraceful though and you would have to hope that he just happened to have a particularly bad one.

njburke

unkel wrote: »

Let me be the first to mention this though. I have never seen a GS in the flesh, never mind owned one.

Neither had I till today, so I took a small bit of punt to see how much is hype and how much is real.

I'll post a few pics once I get it sized and a look over with my 40 year old nikkor macro lens.

scwazrh

redlead wrote: »

I would say the exact opposite. A GS snowflake looks double the money it costs. An OP looks half the watch it costs.

As the owner of the older model OP I can safely say it is not near the same quality as my Panerai or Breitling and does not justify its price . The finish and feel of my OP is on a par with my AquaRacer which is good but the AquaRacer is a 1/3 of the price of the Rolex.

I know my Rolex is an entry level model but it’s still Rolex and you would expect a similar level of quality from all the Rolex range .
That said I’m aiming for a sub next year so I’m still a sucker for Rolex despite knowing I’m paying mainly for the brand.That’s the power of the Rolex brand I suppose

unkel

njburke wrote: »

Neither had I till today, so I took a small bit of punt to see how much is hype and how much is real.

Good stuff, well wear! I'd like to see a GS in the flesh myself too.

njburke wrote: »

I'll post a few pics once I get it sized and a look over with my 40 year old nikkor macro lens.

What's the point of the macro lens though? What's the relevance? Serious question. Just to prove to yourself or others that the watch is really well made / polished (although no one can see the difference)? A bit like testing out if a watch can really survive its 12,800 feet depth rating :pac:

Cienciano

If you're going to go down the "what's the point?" road I think we could use it for 99% of watches on this forum.

GS looks amazing looking forward to seeing more photos. Probably the only high end watch that would convince me to part with my cash

dinorebel

Cienciano wrote: »

If you're going to go down the "what's the point?" road I think we could use it for 99% of watches on this forum.

GS looks amazing looking forward to seeing more photos. Probably the only high end watch that would convince me to part with my cash

Totally agree it's such a subjective hobby what works for you may not work for me love the look of most Rolex's but cant get past the Mercedes hands for me a Breitling Super Ocean Heritage is my grail watch but totally understand someone hating it.

Wibbs

unkel wrote: »

I guess you prefer the Grand Seiko because you know and appreciate they have a far superior finish / polish. And because of the innovative spring drive they keep far better time than any watch Rolex has ever made?

Well except for the Oysterquartz.

But kinda, certainly at that price level it's clearly the far superior timepiece, except of course for the brand cache. That's what we're paying for. Not just Rolex either. The quality of the fit and finish of the GS is way ahead of all the other mid tier Swiss offerings and would rattle the cages of PP and AP too.

Is it a bit like preferring the quieter, more reliable, better built Lexus LS over say a BMW 7-series or Mercedes S-class?

Actually that could be a good comparison in a few ways Unk. Lexus doesn't have the cache of Mercedes or BMW so falls short there, but objectively would be the better car(not dynamically in the case of the Beemer). Lexus designs are an issue too. An awkward mishmash of Japanese and Euro, while being neither which makes them look insecure in a way. Grand Seiko can have that problem too IMHO(The Seiko Credor line can be similar). Though I'd not say that of the Snowflake. It has the design language of this is a conservative very high quality watch down well, but doesn't stand out. Which could be argued is very Japanese.

The divers illustrate it better I think. The Grand Seiko Divers look like a mashup of Rolex, with a bit of Omega and hands that look like they come from a 400 quid Seiko diver. It blows the doors off the Swiss offerings by every technical metric, but the design language really lets it down.

redlead

dinorebel wrote: »

Totally agree it's such a subjective hobby what works for you may not work for me love the look of most Rolex's but cant get past the Mercedes hands for me a Breitling Super Ocean Heritage is my grail watch but totally understand someone hating it.

To be fair to Unkel, he doesn't hate it, more just a discussion of the nuances of finishing / personal brand preference.

Breitling seems to be one of those marmite watch brands. They are possibly my favourite brand but people tend to love them or hate them. I think a lot of the hate is fed from lazy analysis from youtubers but that could just be my own personal bias because I'm a big Breitling fan boy. Its like if there is even a hint of criticism of Rolex, alarms start going off in Unkels bat cave and he rides on in in his big green horse to defend them. I would be the same Breitling if anyone ever gave a sh1t enough to discuss them lol. They did have some howlers throughout the 90s and naughties but their current line up is great in my opinion and has been for a number of years.

Unkel I'm only taking the mick ;-)

[Deleted User]

If I saw a watch that looks like it's been finished by a blind man I couldn't justify paying 5.6k for it (if I was privileged enough to be offered one from an AD)

I started a thread way back in the first lockdown on OP vs GS (would have been OP39 at the time). Doing some research, watching reviews etc simply lead me to believe that there was no comparison. Just my opinion, others will think differently no doubt

Here's another of the OP39 where again it looks poor finishing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPpdv-WlJOE

What are we paying for if not quality craftsmanship?

Linking not going too well for me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPpdv-WlJOE&ab_channel=HafizJMehmood

893bet

I think that youtuber is extremely skilled at capturing defects on the macro. Right lighting, right lens, right angle etc. None of those defects are visable with naked eye. And I suspect we would struggle to see alot of them defects under loupe on even with normal lighting.

With Rolex you ain’t paying for high end finish. You are paying for the brand.

From a bang for buck point of view the comparisons are pointless as it depends on your motivation as a buyer. If your tipple of choice is finishing and innovation you might tip toward the GS.....if you tipple is brand recognition and strong residuals you will choose the Rolex.

Neither watch is better than the other exclusively. They both have their strengths and weakness.

Fitz II

I get Unkles point here, and I would joke that the GS owner oft puts a microscope in their pocket when going out in case they need to talk about their watch

It similar to ornate movements behind solid case backs. If you cant see it, and its purely decorative, does it really matter? But macro topography it is GS's thing, and one that any conversation of GS is quick to move to. And I think that this focus on the macro details is to the detriment of the brand, cause when you get them in hand you are suddenly presented with the things you never though.

893bets points are good, and it would seem from sales figures that when it come to parting with our own money, us collectors are quicker to praise GS than buy their watches. I applaud the OP for buying one.

893bet

Fitz II wrote: »

It similar to ornate movements behind solid case backs.

Funny enough I have been considering a 1957 railmaster (as I am still an Omega fan boi and this model has vintage inspired sizing which is more to my tastes than most of Omegas range).

It has a visually attractive movement....but......hidden behind a solid caseback (as it is a homage to a 60 year old watch).

It’s def one of the turn offs for me as I am a sucker for a display case back.

Thirdfox

893bet wrote: »

I think that youtuber is extremely skilled at capturing defects on the macro. Right lighting, right lens, right angle etc. None of those defects are visable with naked eye. And I suspect we would struggle to see alot of them defects under loupe on even with normal lighting.

With Rolex you ain’t paying for high end finish. You are paying for the brand.

From a bang for buck point of view the comparisons are pointless as it depends on your motivation as a buyer. If your tipple of choice is finishing and innovation you might tip toward the GS.....if you tipple is brand recognition and strong residuals you will choose the Rolex.

Neither watch is better than the other exclusively. They both have their strengths and weakness.

I think it ties in with “why are we paying XYZ thousands for an item?” - going for technical features whether it be finishing or hand-crafted vs machinery or say timekeeping abilities (spring drive/zenith defy lab movement) are all some of the ways we justify spending quite large amounts of money on lovely luxury products. A comparison I’d draw would be to the different types of leather finishing and how my wife would be able to explain the difference between Hermes level leather to Prada to Guess etc.

Anyway - roundabout way to contribute a little to the finishing conversation - in China they do finishing to a number of levels - A level would be eye clean and perfect at 30cm distance (pretty reasonable from a day to day usage level and this is the standard used by Longines/Mido/Tag etc.) and AAA level which is eye clean and perfect at 10cm distance which is Omega/Rolex standard (so says my supplier anyway). No loupes are expected - but something to consider is - should they be expected when say, paying over (arbitrary) 5k price point? Interesting thought experiment trying to reconcile luxury products with logicality when arguably luxury products exist outside of “normal” logic at least

Skyflake is gorgeous - well wear!

Cyclingtourist

CarProblem wrote: »

What are we paying for if not quality craftsmanship?

Linking not going too well for me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPpdv-WlJOE&ab_channel=HafizJMehmood

That's a critique of an OP but apparently the QC issues extend to much more expensive models.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_jyY6ESZO4

My first luxury watch will more than likely be a Tudor. Rolex quality at a realistic price.