How many times has it needed servicing over the years? I'm not trying to poke fun at Seiko, I'm actually curious. I've been contemplating getting a budget automatic Seiko to wear every day. I favor solar and quartz powered watches, but I'd like to have an automatic at some point, just for the reliability.
Adam if you wear it every day, maybe you have to take it to service like every 5 years. I think it will be the same whit any automatic. But like I said in my other comment, I have a seiko 5 automatic that I think was made like in the lates 80 or early 90 and never have take it to service. And it’s still working properly.
I have my late fathers Seiko 5 that he bought in 1983, he wore it every day and never had it serviced until 2006 when he passed I wear it every day and all I have done is replace the steel strap. It still keeps time very well and it is priceless to me.
My dad bought 2x 6139 Seikos, the Pouge and the 6012 Bruce Lee Lite. Plus 2x Seikos in the 90s, I still have them in the display case with my watches. :)
Give me the Seiko 5 and I'll spend the $5940 I've saved on not buying the Rolex on holidays. Plus the Seiko 5 has a day date and the Rolex has neither.
@@hoangpham309 That's the thing buying a Rolex; keep it in good condition and you will lose little to no money when you sell it. The only true cost owning a Rolex is the servicing (a good $800+ mind you) and the fear of scratching it (in case you want to sell it later).
@@zaggernut5054 I mean so you lose over 10 seikos worth of money? Nothing wrong with buying a Rolex but it's never really "worth it" as always the most important thing is if you are happy with your watch!
I own one Rolex Submariner and thirty-something Seiko fives. The Rolex always disappointed me a bit. Extremely pricey, the case finish leaves something to be desired, could be smoother, and out of the box my Rolex was seven seconds per day fast, which actually fells outside COSC specifications! I had to have it calibrated and indeed it now makes three or four seconds per day. Good, but I have several other Japanese Automatics doing the same deviation out of the box. The lume in the Rolex hands is VERY poor compared with a Seiko Diver. Overall, I'd say that a Rolex Submariner is worth less than half of its actual cost. The rest is sheer Rolex profit, made at your expense. A Seiko is probably the very best watch you can buy if you intend to own an excellent watch and not be plucked in the process.
@Hulk GTI 1 watch won't do it all. Plus if you lose one of those expensive watches you are out several grand. And I get the feeling those delicate expensive movements won't hold up in the line of work I am in (construction). Get a Seiko 5 and if something goes wrong 100 dollars gets you another. What am I supposed to do when my several thousand dollar watch gets damaged from using a rotary hammer that vibrates at a rate of 3,000 bpm? Get another? Not on a construction workers salary. Seiko 5 all the way. Even better go quartz, less moving parts means less to go wrong. High end watches are just like chains for rappers, wasteful and non-utilitarian status symbols for the obscenely rich.
Full of Mischief even a Sinn or a Damasko costs 10x as much as a Seiko. If I can get 20 good years out of a Seiko can I get 200 years out of a Sinn or a Damasko? Spare parts will probably be long gone.
I have my fathers Seiko automatic and its an early 70s watch bought in 1974/76 and it still runs today. This watch needs to be serviced but worn in nicely for its age but a true vintage watch that my father wore. This says a lot about Seiko for price and quality and age..my father wore this watch daily for 30yrs plus before his passing and I now wear it with pride. 😎👍
I'd rather prepare for the seiko 5(automatic 21jewels i have here a seiko 5 i bought it in 1980until now it's still working for almost 3decades and in A-1condition up to this very moment......
I bought a Seiko 5 back in 1969 while I was doing my tour in Vietnam. Outside of replacing the crystal a few times this watch is still working and doing a good job of keeping time.
@@johnfranklin5277 Thank you for the compliment. When I came home we had to keep our mouths shut about being in Vietnam, it was a very unpopular war. Our brave women and men changed all that with the excellent job they did during the 1991 desert war. After they came home people began thanking the Vietnam War Vets for what they did during that war. Again I thank you very much.
@@tayninh69 Hey, I just can't understand how dropping 11 million gallons of Agent Orange, causing generational disabilities and birth defects to millions of people to this very days; or commiting a few massacre here and there can be seen as an "heroic act" in anyway. But to each of their own I guess. I will never forget the image of a room full of children with really messed up disabilities caused by the agent orange when I visited Vietnam in 2017 - 40 years after the war. The kind of evil that doesn't realize that it's evil... is the worst kind there is
I own both Rolex and Seiko. I gravitate more to my Seiko collection for everyday use. The Rolex gets the least amount of wrist time. How about a Rolex vs Grand Seiko next time. Thanks
I do as well. I love watches. I appreciate the qualities of my only Rolex (a Sea Dweller) as well as my far more numerous Seiko dive watches. Each watch has unique attributes I love about it.
Fantastic video, I own one Seiko 5 but I will never buy a Rolex, when a watch price exceeds $2, 000 USD I lose interest, I can't see paying more for a watch than a good used car.
When in High School, in 1980, I bought a lightly used second hand Seiko 5 that my daughter is now wearing. It still works perfect although I havent been very kind to it .
Great video! 100x pricier but not 100x better. I appreciate the synchronization of the two watches right to the second. It kind of bothers me when other channels compare two watches that have different times, sometimes 1 or 2 minutes apart. I don’t know, that’s just me being nit picky I guess.
When you bump the one into a brick wall you say "damn", but when you do that with the other, you get full on tourrettes and an ugh feeling every time you see that scratch. I'll take the damn.
I am a seiko 5 junkie... I started with the SNK605.. now I own about 10 different seiko 5s... these watches.. they are just so special to me.. seeing it online or even video sometimes don’t do enough justice when it sits on my wrist they just look so nice.. if you haven’t brought a seiko 5 you’ll be amazed at that lil watch..
That's a fairly modern Seiko 5. I started with a Seiko 7009-3040. The current Seiko 5's have departed from the 5 features that the 5 in Seiko 5 stands for, have gone from the 37 mm case to the 40 mm saucer on your wrist format and the new Seiko 5 Sport logo watches divorced the serial number from the date of manufacture which makes keeping the original box, manual and receipt all the more important.
I have a Seiko 5, bought in 1992. I've been wearing it if I am not wearing my Rolex Air King which joined me 7 years later. The Seiko works very well and have never been taken back for service. The Rolex got serviced twice and it cost me quite a small fortune. Well, both were bought as a choice and I will still with them anyway.
Frank Overå it's not bad really, the movement is good but not $6000 good, if you want a justifiable bang for your buck just get an omega, because when you get a rolex you're just basically paying for the name of the brand
That sounds about right. Highly overpriced watch. People keep buying it because the Rolex brand carries a hefty price. The quality is not even a hair above an Omega, Breitling or Grand Seiko. In fact, I prefer a Speedmaster Pro over any Rolex.. the same with Grand Seiko. I really do not understand the fascination with Rolex.
I started with Seiko quartz, moved up to Tag, vintage Omega and some beat up Breitlings, lost a bunch of money along the way, then i finally got a Rolex, and when i put it on wrist i was like "okay, its a nice watch with great quality, but with a boring design and no added value to offer other than it's resale value". And i asked the question "WHY?" And then i rediscovered Seiko automatic Divers, modified Seikos and microbrands. What can i say, better looking watches that actually receive compliments and same build quality for 1/20 of the price. Rolex is all hype, trust me.
@@-Jason-L no, i actually mod my own Seiko divers with high quality parts and make them look 10 times better than any Rolex i ever had with 1/20 of the price, not a few thousand dollars like you mentioned. Regulate the movements to be as accurate as any "superelative chronometer" and just enjoy the heck out of them without any intent on selling them.
@@-Jason-L you Rolex brainwashed sheep forget that you are paying 10-20 times the price of other watches just because of Rolex marketing, dirty AD/grey market practices, scumbag dealers and biased social media convinced you to. If a Toyota is slightly better than a Hyundai and was 10-20 times more expensive than a Hyundai, i bet you will think that it's bananas to buy a Toyota and never buy one.
@@masterg7895 you’re speaking facts and people are getting offended because Rolex has a cult like following lol I had one and sold it because I felt it was not worth the money. Bought a omega speedmaster and I am much happier with what I got for the price.
If you can’t see the differences with the naked eye and need to use a macro lens to see the difference in price then why on earth would you spend money on something you can’t see with your naked eye.
Alexander Vickers well with your logic, wth buy a mechanical if you only see it when you turn it round, if it’s a show case? Sure, the sweeping second hand (though now you can find quartz like that too), but the quartz is more precise. You see, sometimes, it’s how a watch makes us feel, not just how it affects are senses.
Ken Cur Not true. Mechanical is more logical in some ways (it keeps going and doesn’t need battery replacements) and also the sweeping second hand is simply much more aesthetically pleasing, and the fact that the back of it looks just as good as the front is also a cool selling point. It’s really not the same thing at all.
Alexander Vickers “not true” sure, it needs regular winding, but let’s mention the fact that once in a blue moon you need to replace the battery... like I said, sweeping seconds are now a thing in quartz watches as well. It is ENTIRELY the same thing, according to your own logic. I know what a mechanical watch is, I own several, but if you’re going to go by “what you can see”, then most mechanicals do not even show you the mechanism. And those that do, require you to remove the watch. So in both cases, the “cool selling” point is being sold “on something you can’t see”. Sounds familiar?
Ken Cur Well it’s just not true though. In my case my seiko DOES have a mechanical back and I love this; I look at it all the time, something a quartz could never offer. Also; an automatic watch will go a lot longer without a service than a quartz will one battery; making the automatic better in terms of longevity. The fact that the automatic will stop running when you stop wearing it unlike the quartz means that it will last even longer; because it doesn’t run unnecessarily. You CAN see the pros in mechanical watches, and that makes me want to stick with them for the most part. Of course I have a quartz for some cases (like doing manual work) but like I said the automatic just makes more sense for me most of the time.
Alexander Vickers it IS true though, and you’re just mentioning what suits you and what is convenient to your argument. I clearly stated, in very plain English, that some have a mechanical show case, but even in that case, you must remove the watch to actually SEE the mechanism. In many, many, many other watches, the mechanism is not even visible. Most of my mechanical watches fall under this category. So I never ever get to actually see the mechanism unless I open the case back. The fact that it goes longer till the service does not nullify the obvious facts that it needs to be wound, especially if you rotate watches. Unless you have an auto winder, but then you are actually paying for that, so I don’t see how the battery issue is an inconvenience or issue at all. You’re just trying to validate your point, and just mention crappy would be pros without listing any cons. The quartz will also be way, way more accurate and never need a readjustment. My Seiko needs constant adjustment, and even if it keeps the time accurately (which no Seiko at this price point does) you still need to change the date. Nobody I know bought a mechanical for “practical” reasons, and this includes yours truly. It was about how it made me feel, and in most cases one does not get to see the mechanism. So yeah, people buy them and spend more despite them being impractical and despite not seeing the mechanism. People pay for things they don’t see, but feel. No amount of rationalization on your part will change this fact.
Price of Rolex is justified only by snob value. I was gifted a Seiko 5 Automatic when I was in secondary school by my father. When I got married almost 15 years later, I got a swiss luxury brand and since a few more that I purchased. I now also have several Omegas, including a Seamaster. But I still have my Seiko 5. I tell you, it is an amazing watch. It never needed any maintenance the last 46 years and it is chugging along with no issues. I have been wearing it the last several days and amazingly, it is still giving time accurately for my purpose. If you cannot afford to lose 20 seconds a day, you have not achieved much in life!
I bought my Seiko 5 in 1998 and it has been working perfectly without servicing. I wear it in alternation with my Rolex Air King and my Breitling Aviastar. All are well-loved time pieces and I have no intention to retire any of the three.
I do not find fault with the Rolex’s quality, but as your examination demonstrates, it simply is not 100 times better than the Seiko. Seiko, like Toyota and Honda, demonstrate how “bang for the buck” is done correctly. The Seiko is a true value proposition.
I dismissed these Seiko 5s until recently. Bought an snkl45 not expecting much but I was really surprised how good the watch was. Even the bracelet wasn't as bad as I was led to believe.
The Rolex price is beyond most to build its allure - on other reviews like this I ask the question "if Seiko put another $100 into this watch what could they do?" Better crystal? Better band" Upgraded movement? Better finish? Seiko has the ability to do all these and does in their other watches. So Seiko makes a very nice affordable entry level watch and Rolex has an entry level watch starting at $6,000. Different business models - one includes most the other doesn't.
Seiko is the watch for the people,Rolex is overpriced times 100. My Rolex is in the safety deposit box sleeping in the bank vault, my seiko is on my wrist doing what I watch is made to do, marking time. my beloved SKX 173 is getting a rebuild can't wait to get it back, battle scars and all.
I have that same Seiko with a slightly different band and I love it. Of course it's not on par with 4 figure watches and shouldn't be but on its own and especially compared to other watches in its price range it's an amazing watch. It's looks great, looks like a much nicer watch than it's price suggests and I don't have to be afraid to wear it while working or engaging in activities that may scratch or damage it. For an everyday watch under $100 it can't be beat.
@@illuminati10yearsago80 It's the difference between buying a watch just to wear it and trying to make money out of it. By the way, by keeping the difference in the stock markets 50 years ago he made a fairly decent profit.
No, the $60 Seiko is a better value - it tells the time, can be regulated, can be upgraded with a better bracelet and crystal at a fraction of the price of the Rolex. The advantage of the Rolex is after market value not as a time telling device. The Rolex is bit nicer to look at, will get noticed on your wrist and some really weird looks from your wife who you forgot to tell what you bought. I can bang around in a Seiko 5 all day long and not worry about a scratch here and there and when it stops I can get a new movement for $35 or a brand new watch. The Rolex needs a $800 service every 5 years or so. Buy the Seiko and a bar of gold - tell the time and get and investment you can look at.
Yeh, if I were to buy a Rolex, I'd keep it in a padded box in a bank vault for fear of scratching or dropping the thing, and its only value would be resale value. If I had a decent Seiko (the 5 is decent), I'd wear it every day and enjoy it. I might as well buy the bar of gold, for the amount of timekeeping the Rolex would do for me!
In Germany there are several companies that run as a charity. The idea is to keep the business for its employees and away from capital market & banks and ‚shareholder value‘.
No, no, no. Because the watch doesn't know the month, thus at the start of each new month you'll have to set the date. You want a perpetual calendar, preferably one that takes leap years into consideration. The reason that these watches are deemed to not need a perpetual calendar is because if you leave them off your wrist all night they're liable to stop running, thus you have to reset them every morning anyway. And that's a pain in the asssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss. "Oh, I have a lovely Rolex worth $6000.." you'll be ready to chuck it at the wall after a few mornings have been screwed up because your damn watch is running late. You won't care anymore whether it's a Rolex, to you it might as well be called a Shitex.
For a fan of Seiko, it would be for the most practical choice. For those who have their own preferences, my choice would be a Tissot Automatic Seastar(PR516 GL circa 1970) which I think is underrated. But if you have money to burn, go for it ! 🤗
Although the price one pays for a watch doesn't always relate to production costs; I'd still like to know what it really costs to produce the Rolex. After all, just how much quality and precision can be built into anything. I think we all know that the price on a Rolex is inflated due to demand. So is an Omega, for example, a better buy notwithstanding cache?
The big thing is the movement. The first watch I bought as a collector was the SNKL795. So I've got a soft spot for the Seiko 5. The bracelet never bothered me, but you could spend an extra $20 and put it on a pretty nice strap, so it's hard for me to consider the bracelet a dealbreaker. But the movement pretty much *is* the watch, so you're not going to swap out the 7S26 for another movement. And while I never really had an issue with the accuracy of the Seiko 5 I had, the numbers don't lie. And being able to hack and hand wind is clearly better than *not* being able to do that. The macro shots probably surprised me the most. If I were going just by finish alone, the difference between the two wouldn't be worth almost $6,000 to me. They both looked really damn good, and let's be honest: You're going to look at your watch that close up maybe _once_ while you have it.
I'm not saying that the Hardlex crystal is better than the Roex's sapphire but there is actually one area, apart from price or vfm, where the Seiko is objectively better than the Rolex and that's because Hardlex is less brittle than sapphire so it's actually stronger, in terms of it's resistance to impact, and less prone to a catastrophic failure if hit hard or dropped. I'm sure you and most of your viewers will probably already know that but I just thought I would remind people of that fact and how it is one area where the Seiko objectively out performs that Rolex. Maybe the Seiko movement might have a longer service interval, what with it's lower beat rate, as well. It's parts might not wear out, or be getting worn down, as quickly as the Rolex's and the Rolex's lubricants' properties might not last as long, as they have to work harder to combat more friction. I wonder how much better the Rolex movement's constituent components are, though, in terms of their durability and resistance to wear, than the Seiko. I would love to see some data on how well, say, 100, of each of these watches, have continued to perform over a period of, say, 20 years or something, with absolutely no servicing work done, whatsoever. We're never going to see information like that. It's probably never going to happen, but I wonder how each of these watches would perform, completely unserviced, over time, as it would tell us about the robustness and resilience, of each (I have a sneaky suspicion that the Seiko might outperform the Rolex, in that respect too; depending what tolerance of overall timekeeping and deviation one might consider acceptable, of course but, then again, should one consider lasting longer, when beating at a lower rate, 'outperforming', at all). My god, I have become a watch geek.
When I was on my first tour in Vietnam, I bought a 6619-8060 in one of the PXs in Saigon... This watch accompanied me through very difficult times. The following years I was promoted to sergeant platoon and my pocket allowed me to buy my first Rolex at the Danang PX, a 1500. Even today, the watches are in my possession and still work. The seiko will remain my favorite because it has endured shameful things for a watch.
I’m born in 1980 and remember Seikos on a lot of the older men around me. I once even got to play with a bullhead. I didn’t know what the complications or buttons did because i was just a little kid, but I always respected the brand throughout my life.
You got me... I thought I was clicking on a "watchfinder" video. having said that, you produced this video very well. Looking forward to more videos of this quality :D
0:52 Of course it's clear which one of those is a better watch - Seiko tells you not only hours, minutes and seconds but also day of the month and day of the week! And to get same info from a Rolex watch you'll need a their day-date model which is on a 2-year waitlist.
@BBD Design An well tune 7s26 mouvement have some accuracy ..... not as good as Rolex, but damn good for this price tag ! In mention, Seiko 5 it's an "10.000 euro" watch with cheap 5$ bracelet !In the fit an finish department there is no 5.940 euro diference between the two !Only the bracelet ... but you can swap to an decent lether one !And in the luxury department the Grand Seiko trow apart almost all Rolex watches in this category !In tehnology as well ....
@BBD Design Because of the price point .... for this kind of money Seiko 5 is still a LEGEND ! Not everyone has 6-7-10.000 dollars or euros to spend to a watch like Rolex , Omega etc ... And straight ahead competitor to Rolex is the Grand Seiko (watch that is more acuratte, more reliable, and has grater tehnology than Rolex) !Escuze my poor english by the way ... ps: And i repeat ... .for the price point Seiko 5 is a 10.000 dollar watch for what kind of finish has at this kind of money !The bracelet is't a joke ....but the detail of the dial is almost as good as Rolex ! Cheers !
@BBD Design The movement is fairly robust. They've been used in dive watched for years. Seiko 5 is an excellent watch for someone looking to get into their first automatic and well worth the money. Better than someone buying an Invicta, fossil, MVMT or any of those other brands
@BBD Design I own lots of Seiko 5s,some I bought in the mid eighties.They all run still, look good and keep accurate time,most have 40 hour power reserves.The reason they do it is because they can along with making a profit.Quartz watches always end up out of juice and out of sight.Orient and Citizen also make great mechanicals at this price point.
I still think Seiko has done more as a brand for horology than any other manufacturer. Seiko has put the time on more wrists than any other. Of course the superior watch is the Rolex, but you have to appreciate seiko’s contribution to providing the time to the masses.
@@silverghost4206 I’m not comparing the rolex to a grand seiko. I’m comparing it to a Seiko. I agree Grand Seiko is superior to many watch brands, including Rolex.
I own Rolex GMT master 2 Batman and Seiko 5 SNK 796 with blue dial and when I bought Seiko to wear for everyday use I noticed that too how close they’re looks like... and I’d like to say if you’re not put super accuracy in mind Seiko doing pretty good in all aspects !! Glad that someone like you made such a nice video!! Thank you so much
I still have my doubts Rolex steel has it’s better corrosion resistance. But it definitely has softer steel that gives you easier scratches. And what I’ve noticed with the latest Rolex watches, watching channels like Horology House, Rolex is becoming 2nd tier with all the macro videos showing serious flaws. I think with them running shifts day and night the quality is really deteriorating.
Not only easier scratchable, worst of all is the very high nickel content in 904L which causes allergies, which is why many owners have to tape the inner side of their Rolexes.
I really liked this video. Love the perfectly timed and framed split screen. Interesting comparison. Very much apples & pears comparison though. Rolex is to me overpriced and prices for service are skyrocket given the fine tolerances of the parts meaning they are susceptible to wear and then replacing which again is costly. I know from experience that a 7S26 is basic but very well engineered and I’ve have recently serviced one that was I think 20 years old and I was the first to be inside it since it left the factory. It was still running really well even though all the oil was solid. That said I would still like to experience Rolex for myself one day ..
Thanks for watching friend. I too would like to own a Rolex one day, although I am not quite there yet, as I don't want to sacrifice many watches from my collection to get ONE
i think the smaller dial on the rolex will make it less desirable in the future and not a good investment. i can tell you i have had a seiko chrograph for 20yrs never been serviced and tells time to perfection. never let me down - been the most reliable thing in my life.
Seann Huang This is true about the pre-owned market and the demand for new models. However, I was implying that they are now worth the asking price. This is only my opinion. Plenty of people think it’s worth it and many pay way overpriced over retail. My opinion is that it is not worth spending this type of money for a watch.
Real Rolex or fake Rolex?..., with so many around nowadays Rolex brand has lost all its value unless you want to spend half an hour telling everyone the minor differences between the genuine and the fake. I'll happily take the Seiko and use the difference to actually live my life and experience things...
Many years ago I was serving a very wealthy chap (multi-billionaire), a bottle of expensive wine - a bottle Penfolds Grange, if you must know. For some reason he felt a reason to justify the expense and he turned to me and said, "if money is no object, then it only makes sense to have the best". Indeed.
I have had nothing but Seiko Watches all my life, now 73. I've changed only because of style changes. I have every watch I have worn through the years, they still run. In this last year, I have purchased three new Seikos . I love all three. I have finally decided the Solar or battery operated are my favorites. I have automatics, but they are a pain to get back on line after sitting for awhile. I like to change from time to time. Seikos are great watches , very good workings, very nice styling, and affordably. I WILL ONLY BUY SEIKOS. Heard recently at a department store Seikos are going high class. Such as Rodeo Drive clientele . Prices will go very high end ! They want to be considered more classy. If I see one I want, I'll buy NOW. CHERYL
I had a grand seiko hi beat and a rolex explorer 1. Unfortunately, the extreme mirror polishing of grand seiko is picking up scratches much more easily (or at least more visible to the eye). Ended up selling it, since it always worries me when I wore it. People often say that the finishing of a grand seiko is on another level. I agree, but sometimes, a simpler high quality brushed finish is much more practical......Or on the other hand, I can go with an affordable daily watch... but then, what's the point of having a high quality luxury sports piece if it stays in the box, right?
An old saying ‘you get what you pay’, in fact with Rolex would be ‘you get what you pay and some’. Rolex will not depreciate in some cases it will appreciate in value and will last 100 years so when you divide 6000 by 100 years you get en exceptional value for money, while Seiko 5 has a life spam of maximum of 10 years.
I's sorry but where do you get your information about longevity?! Seiko 5's are notorious for lasting 20+ years even without a service. In fact in my country ask any 50+ year old guy about what watch is the best in the world, and chances are many will say its a Seiko 5 as most of them bought theirs when they went abroad to work and most of them wore them for 20+ years. Rolex does hold it's value and it is beautifully made, there is not question about it, but commenting on longevity the way you did, is simply ridiculous
Watch Geek I would be wrong if I argue with you on longevity on Seiko 5 and most definitely they would last 20+ years. I was only trying to illustrate the picture that a 6000 Rolex is a better value for money overall if you can afford one to start with. Mind you a Rolex needs to be serviced every 7-10 years so that adds to the total cost of 500-700 each time but it will definitely keep its value and appreciate in time too. Rolex it’s a piece of art that in the future you can pass it on to the family members and depending on a model can become a desirable classic collective item.
@@mmexecutivechauffeurs9411 You must be kidding mentioning "value for the money"...what are you talking about?? First of all, there are many Seikos (even Quartz) that are into 40 years of life (I own one) and still going strong. I have a Swatch steel chrono (55 Euros not even repairable) part of my regular rotation that is almost at the 25 years mark, going strong, no dial fading or hand corrosion, etc... Second, there is no guarantee your Rolex will appreciate or even hold its value in time...as a matter of fact, other then the current collective craze of the Rolex sport watches (Submariner, etc...) many models actually lose value with time.....consider that for every servicing needed for a Rolex you can probably buy 2 new solid Seikos lasting for decades.....the Rolex "value for the money" proposition is only for the dupes that cannot do math very well and fall too easily for marketing myth......great watches but overpriced to the extreme...value for the money?. Seiko, is not even close....put the difference in a S&P500 passive investment without touching it.....
John Doeit everyone is right to express their opinions and so are you. Just to give you an example to support my theory on value for money. Today you can buy any steel rolex and wear it for 4-5 years, then sell it before you even need a service so no extra cost is involved you’ll make a minimum of 15% return of what you paid msrp. Let’s just say you buy a Grand Seiko instead for the same price and wear it for same period when time comes to sell you would be looking 50% depreciation. You probably are thinking why have I not thought of this, who wouldn’t want to wear a Rolex for free for few years and make some money right. All I can say that I’m speaking from my own experience, in last 11 years I had a submariner wore it - sold it made money, had a GMT Master 2 wore it - sold it made money. Currently I’m on my third Rolex piece a 42mm Polar Explorer 2 that I’ve purchased brand new in June 2018 for msrp of £5950 and if I wanted to sell today just after a year I could ask for £6500+ check chrono 24 or watchmaster.com.
Seiko 5 is a very good watch. I got mine at a police auction in a mixed bag with other standard no name quartz watches, and it was the jewel in the bag since I only paid $25 dollars for the whole lot. This watch has really impressed me. It has kept very good time, much better than the stated accuracy. It usually comes in within plus or minus 5 to 10 seconds a day, but the nice thing is these plus or minuses balance out over longer periods and the watch seems to be within 30-50 seconds a month. While the Rolex is a beautiful well made watch with exceptional tolerances and detail, it is more of an investment piece. But for what it does as a timepiece, it's asking price compared to a Seiko 5 is not justified.
Also with a rolex I would always be scared to wear it out in public, you will get robbed violently for it and almost anywhere in the world even supposed safe places because it's the price of a brand new car lol with a seiko like this you still might as well but then you might as well not have a smartphone either
I like this kind of video. Food for thought in the pocket. There's a recent one by Watchfinder comparing a $250 Seiko with $250,000 VC, 1000X! Anyway, for 6K, i did by myself the SBGW231, a handmade Thee Centre Hand manual wind, with the caliber 9S64, which is not matched by even Patek or Lange, and it cost me only 3K new, after 25% regular discount. When people say high horology need not be expensive, this would be an excellent example. Then, i bought my self 2 very high class Seiko 5; 1. 7619 9060 Sportmatic for $150 (1967). Take a look and see if it's nicer than the Oyster Perpetual. It has zaratsu polished hands and indices. It has similar indices like those of the 62Mas, only that it's tipped at the outer end which is much nicer. 2. 7619 7060 Sportsmatic for $170 (1966). Take a look and see if it's nicer than the Datejust. The hands and indices are zaratsu polished. The zaratu polished bezel is inside the case, protected by the glass which still glitter after more than 50 years. Then, I bought two very high class GS which are also not matched by Patek or Lange; 1. 4522 7000 for $920 (1969). This is a 5 Hz Three Centre Hand manual wind. 2. 6146 8000 for $920 ( 1969). This is a 5 Hz automatic. Hei, there is still change for a handmade Urushi lacquer dial, the SARD011 ($1200) with a 31 jewels 4Hz 6R24 mechanism. It gives me +2 spd. Only one out of my 7 rolex keeps better time. 6K for 6 very nice watches. Cheers!
@@eyeheartsushi2212 thanks. It need to be said that the +/-2spd of the superlative is regulated on static position. In actual use, you generally get more deviation. It's lot more accurate than the older models, but, they still tend to keep negative time, especially, if rested on the 6th position, which they are not tested for. If you buy a seiko, this is not important, but, if you spend 6k for a watch, you want to know a little more. I used to like rolex, but, bec of the hype which created a lot of misinformation, i lose interest with them. Look at the video by idguy on the new cellini. I don't expect any reply, bec, like most youtubers, their job is not to tell you the whole truth. And, in many cases, they know less than you.
As simple watch collector, I have appreciated this video. But is just provocation, cause the items are very distant. Seiko is really worth its price and works very well also Witherspoon basic calibers. But if you upgrade to 6r15 there is always a very improvement and so on with other calibers. But nowadays Rolex is no more a simple watch but is seen as status symbol or shelter goods, no more a simple watch. So they are rising too much and going in a speculative bubble. I own about 20 Rolex, but I don't buy more them and prefer other brands and Seikos of mid level (SARB, Prospex Presage) are really well done and worth its price. Hope to have soon a GS: I had it in my hands and it seems near to very high end watches like PP but much cheaper. Of corse revalutation in years is not my goal. I am just a simple collector and lover
True. It is madness how exensive rolex is even compared to other luxury watches. For 6000 you can get a oyster Perpetual. Or you can buy a Heuer Monaco Calibre 11 for 5000 which even has a cronograph function.
Seiko 5s accuracy is, generally speaking, about 7-8 seconds per day. Checked it in many models of seiko 5s from any era and using most of the movements has been used in 5s. I have never seen a 5 going 20 secs per day. The bracelets are the only flaw of a 5 but they are not bad either. They just do their job and look ok (and feel quite comfortable). I think that buying a rolex today and paying crazy money for nothing, has nothing to do with seeking quality. Buying rolex sets you in a certain category of a person and not a nice one. There is a psychopathological term to describe this kind of disorder.
SNKK15 would have been a tad more comparable given the colour scheme, but a very good comparison. Ain’t nothing wrong with the Seiko 5 dress watch series for the price. They punch way above their weight.
As a 17 year old high school student, I saved and saved my money and bought a Seiko 6138-0040 Bullhead for a whopping $155 dollars. At the time, I thought it was the end of the world to spend that much money on a watch. But, 42 years later, it's still on my wrist as I type this comment. Get the Seiko, you won't regret it.
I'm all about the Seiko 5... I had a woman Seiko 5 buried in three feet of snow for two weeks..... Well I found it sparkling in the melted snow... I picked it up when I gave it a shake.... And it kept on telling time.... Pretty amazing watch.... It was a thirty-year-old watch... And now it's a fifty-year-old watch and it works like a charm..... Thinking about putting a sapphire crystal on it.. perhaps the screw down crown as well...... The dial is so awesome and dope!!!!!!
I believe when you compare the brand, clearly Rolex leads in terms of marketing and the fact they have created an artificial demand for their watches. In terms of technology both brands have out a lot of experience and technologies to develop a product that is reliable across the board. While the metal finish of the watches and price are factors which out each watch into an individual category. We cannot argue the fact that they both are fine time pieces. I own a rolex, Sinn, Bulova, Omega and Casio and i have to be honest. I wear my Sinn and Casio the most, Rolex gets the least play time. I am always afraid i am going to scratch my Rolex GMT II- coke dial purchased in 2005. I wear my casio everywhere and i love that watch. In the end this is a nice review of similar products each appealing to distinctive customers but from the horological stand point both watches are beautiful time pieces in their own right.
I have a Seiko DX I purchased in 1971 while in the USVI. I used it while snorkeling and working around heavy equipment. Today it still runs and keeps good time. I ask my son who owns a Rolex Submariner what time he has? When he responds I laugh and say well look at this, my almost fifty year old Seiko has the same time. Ego vs. utility.
This Seiko is so beautiful that I decided to buy it new. I also needed to pay extra for shipping from USA To italy but I don't care. I think it's one of the most beautiful Seiko 5 ever made
Also it is worth adding that Rolex’s indexes and hands are made of white gold and not steel like in a Seiko. With Rolex you get a desirability, brand recognition, prestige and value retention, with Seiko not that much. If I had the money, I would choose a Rolex.
I own a Seiko 5 since november 1969. It's a great watch. And I recently bought an snkl23... Although ORIENT is close, I think that nobody gives you more for your money than SEIKO.
I use Seiko 5 for daily wear rotation while my modern GS is for dress purposes/second watch. i do not worry with seiko 5 about getting mugged. mind you, grand seiko is one hell of a shiny watch that shouts out quality albeit discreetly. we pay a premium with rolex because it is simply a rolex brand but with that price range id rather splurge with a GS quartz gmt and a spring drive
It really doesn't matter. At the end of the day, watches that cost more than $100 are all emotional purchases. If the Grand Seiko moves you, then that's the watch to buy. Same with Rolex. There's nothing wrong with emotional purchases (assuming you're not going broke because of it), but there's no watch that "smokes" another.
I am a retired Gardener and wore my Seiko 5 every day for work for over 30 years i take it out of the draw every now and then shake it and it fires up! My heart is with Seiko.
I think that Rolex watches are very beautiful, and are made with outstanding craftmanship. I think your price you are giving for the Seiko 5s might be a little low. The seem to sell for around 80 to 150 for different models. The lower beat rate for the Seiko leads to less wear, and I think the can work wonderfully for much longer than the Rolex before needing servicing. Then again you would probably be better of financially to just replace the seiko movement. The Seiko 5s can be regulated to run fairly accurate, but 2 seconds a day is really pushing it. I have a 2013 SNKK31 that runs within about 4 s/d. I think that is pretty good for a 7 year old unserviced watch. I am pretty sure tha the Rolex would have needed to be serviced by then. I would really like to own a Rolex, but would be afraid to wear it. I would , and do choose the Seiko 5s. I own 3 different ones, and really like the variety available in these watches.
