-
Jul 8, 2020, 03:00 PM
#81
Yep, and even if it is original, I'd have serious moral problems with buying anything from there.
Edit: That said, Seiko doesn't seem to have moral problems with crapping on their customers and selling quality disasters, a topic touched upon on TZUK currently.
Last edited by rodia77; Jul 8, 2020 at 03:03 PM.
-
Jul 8, 2020, 04:54 PM
#82
Originally Posted by
rodia77
That said, Seiko doesn't seem to have moral problems with crapping on their customers and selling quality disasters, a topic touched upon on TZUK currently.
People ganging up on Seiko is not a pretty sight.
They could probably do better, here and there, but I’ve owned dozens without seeing a serious problem.
-
Jul 8, 2020, 05:20 PM
#83
Originally Posted by
tribe125
People ganging up on Seiko is not a pretty sight.
They could probably do better, here and there, but I’ve owned dozens without seeing a serious problem.
I've been lucky with Seiko, too, so far, but the very fact that I'm phrasing it this way is telling. I've seen too many reports of quality issues to ignore them just because I'm not the one affected. In the LIW presentation of the new 5s line-up, 3 out of 9 examples had misaligned chapter rings to my eye (nos. 1, 2 & 8). I mean, c'mon.
-
Jul 8, 2020, 08:16 PM
#84
Yep, the misalignment issues have been around seemingly forever. As has the issue with some movements where the balance spring can get stuck -- 7S26/36 or 4R36. I had none of those issues on any of mine so far however. Probably a problem of a high output with insufficient quality control on some models. Still they are among my favorit makers. And no maker is free of occasional problems. Some brands are just more in the spotlight than others I guess. And the more watches they sell, the more people will complain. Just the old internet phenomenon. People complain more than they praise a company when everything is flawless.
Cheers, Sedi
-
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Likes
-
Jul 8, 2020, 09:05 PM
#85
Originally Posted by
rodia77
I've been lucky with Seiko, too, so far, but the very fact that I'm phrasing it this way is telling. I've seen too many reports of quality issues to ignore them just because I'm not the one affected. In the
LIW presentation of the new 5s line-up, 3 out of 9 examples had misaligned chapter rings to my eye (nos. 1, 2 & 8). I mean, c'mon.
I confess I could only tolerate short bursts of the video - but that’s how I am with YouTube reviews.
But if I look at the Breitling currently on my wrist, I can persuade myself that the rotating bezel is slightly off, and it probably is, by a very thin whisker. The same was true of a Submariner that I used to own.
I have a Seiko SRP777, and the internet told me that every example had a very slight issue. When I looked very hard I could see what they probably meant, but it was entirely insignificant. I could have gone on the internet and said: “Mine too!” - but why bother, when my £300 Seiko has a microscopic misalignment, not unlike that of a Breitling or Rolex?
You will find Seiko misalignments that are more than microscopic, and I’m sure there are some I wouldn’t accept, but the Seiko hue and cry is disproportionate.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Likes
Sedi liked this post
-
Jul 9, 2020, 12:28 AM
#86
Member
I love Seiko movements but feel the qc of the watches was better in the past. I also consider Hardlex a scam.Just based on my own experiences.
Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk
-
Jul 9, 2020, 01:08 AM
#87
I don't think I had enough Seikos to pass any judgment about the question wether qc was better in the past. I had Seikos with fogged up crystals (same on a J.Springs and an Orient) years back and my first Seiko Monster I had when my son was born 13 years ago had a slightly misaligned bezel, same as my second gen Monster I bought 8 years later. But most others have been flawless. The ones with fogged crystals I simply opened and cleaned the crystal from the inside, then re-assembled them. Was not really hard to do. I had maybe 20 Seikos over the years (still have around ten), so I guess the sample size was not big enough. I still think they offer great bang for the buck.
Last edited by Sedi; Jul 9, 2020 at 01:12 AM.
Cheers, Sedi
-
Jul 9, 2020, 04:30 AM
#88
Originally Posted by
tribe125
People ganging up on Seiko is not a pretty sight.
They could probably do better, here and there, but I’ve owned dozens without seeing a serious problem.
I have had several Seikos and only two with serious problems. When I joined the other place, I had owned two Seikos, both with serious problems (my brother also had one with serious problems). I thought Seikos were junk. All my mechanicals were good, though. Not usually very accurate, except for my SRP043K, which was more accurate than all my Sumos, and my MM300, which was pretty good. But no chapter ring or functional failures.
-
Jul 9, 2020, 03:25 PM
#89
Originally Posted by
tribe125
I confess I could only tolerate short bursts of the video - but that’s how I am with YouTube reviews.
But if I look at the Breitling currently on my wrist, I can persuade myself that the rotating bezel is slightly off, and it probably is, by a very thin whisker. The same was true of a Submariner that I used to own.
I have a Seiko SRP777, and the internet told me that every example had a very slight issue. When I looked very hard I could see what they probably meant, but it was entirely insignificant. I could have gone on the internet and said: “Mine too!” - but why bother, when my £300 Seiko has a microscopic misalignment, not unlike that of a Breitling or Rolex?
You will find Seiko misalignments that are more than microscopic, and I’m sure there are some I wouldn’t accept, but the Seiko hue and cry is disproportionate.
Seiko's QC issues have become legendary, and for a good reason.
As you pointed out (kind of arguing against the point you wanted to make, I think), people don't rush to viciously report every single defect, and yet the number of cases we see (aka hue and cry ) is alarming. Many, if not most, of these reports come from the Seiko 'fan base' and go in the vein of 'I love Seiko, but'.
If the misalignments were indeed microscopic, they wouldn't be worth talking about. But I'd say they're usually between 'visible to the naked eye' and 'glaring'.
Originally Posted by
tribe125
- For mass-produced models, Seiko has a tolerance of 1.5° in the alignment of bezels and chapter rings, equivalent to a quarter of a minute on the dial. Many customers have a lower tolerance.
A quarter of a minute is still too much, and they unfortunately don't stop there.
Another brand that I would bring up in a similar context, albeit on a much smaller scale, volume-wise, is Zodiac. My personal bias aside, if you read through the Sea Wolf thread on WUS, a good chunk of it will be reports and complaints of issues, mainly with the STP movement (again, by people who do and want to like the brand).
-
Jul 9, 2020, 09:36 PM
#90
Originally Posted by
rodia77
Seiko's QC issues have become legendary, and for a good reason.
As you pointed out (kind of arguing against the point you wanted to make, I think), people don't rush to viciously report every single defect, and yet the number of cases we see (aka hue and cry
) is alarming. Many, if not most, of these reports come from the Seiko 'fan base' and go in the vein of 'I love Seiko, but'.
If the misalignments were indeed microscopic, they wouldn't be worth talking about. But I'd say they're usually between 'visible to the naked eye' and 'glaring'.
A quarter of a minute is still too much, and they unfortunately don't stop there.
Another brand that I would bring up in a similar context, albeit on a much smaller scale, volume-wise, is Zodiac. My personal bias aside, if you read through the Sea Wolf thread on WUS, a good chunk of it will be reports and complaints of issues, mainly with the STP movement (again, by people who do and want to like the brand).
Lately I've been playing more up the food chain in the Seiko house. All GS have been spot on including the two quartz (including hitting all the marks spot on)as I would expect from GS. My SLA033 is perfect (Also assembled and finished at the GS studio). One of my text thread buddies got a new LX SD diver and it was seriously out of alignment to the point the AD returned and replaced with one that looks pretty near perfect now. The diver model of the LX SD is the most expensive at $6000 because it has the micro-adjust bracelet. The GMT LX I had Seiko did not put any click stop on the two way bezel and it seemed to use the dirt seal gasket that Seiko uses to provide friction to hold the bezel in place. I found this a very poor set up that combined with the overly flat and long case design teeter-totted on my round wrist. This went back for trade after about four months. This is also the reason the LX cased 1968 reissue diver is the only one I'm not getting of that three this year.
On the Zodiac every one I have has the chronometer grade version of the STP movement. My Andy Mann 68 just stoped running one day and nothing would move with the crown. When I sent it to the AD for service it started working when it arrived just before the shut down. Bouncing in a USPS track maybe helped. Zodiac service is closed so it cannot go back to them until it reopens. I'm trading it when it comes back, but more due to the 68 case on my wrist shape, and the strange blue dial that was hard to read than the movement issue. My other two 53 series with the chronometer STP movement function perfectly and keep excellent time. I've had the one now 2 1/2 years with no issues and the other close to a year now. I've had a total of 6 STP Zodiac and the Andy Mann is the only one with a movement issue.
Last edited by Samanator; Jul 9, 2020 at 09:39 PM.
Cheers,
Michael
Tell everyone you saw it on IWL!
-
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Likes