Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- From: Longfellow <not@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 05:39:52 -0000
On 2005-12-01, Jack Denver <nunuvyer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Seiko I don't think releases any details on how the achieve the 20 secs/year
> but they do. One downside of quartz (indeed any chip) is that you can't
> tell how it works just by looking .
>
> Quality is excellent - pocket change for a watch with accuracy that once
> would have been considered miraculous and a perpetual calendar (another
> semi-miraculous complication). An everyday miracle. Seiko is a top
> Japanese producer and they take quality seriously.
>
> Personally I dislike 2 tones.
>
> Here's a slightly different one for $100:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5055992930&category=31387
Saw that. I'm of two minds on the two tones. The old Seiko I have has
been an excellent watch, at least compared to other < $100US watches
I've purchased over the years; learnt never to pay very much for them as
I used them pretty hard. The one I had before this was a Pulsar (made
by Seiko) and it finally gave up holding the day/date. Bought this one
and it more or less has been trouble free since the mid '90s. One thing
I discovered through the years is that readability is important. Gold
hands on a black face are very readable, hence the two-tone style.
Silver just isn't as eye-catching when it comes to spotting those hands
at a glance.
All that said, I also feel they are a bit garish.
Anyway, I configured the ebay page for Seiko/men's/new/perpetual
calendars, and found that the SMD series was what I wanted. There is an
SMD001 for $89US, and it is a very tasteful chrome time piece, very
understated. And I can tell I'd have a hell of a time being sure I'd
actually spotted the position of the hands at a glance, just not enough
contrast. That leaves the 008 and 014, both of which are in the low
three figures.
The 014 is a two-tone white face, and looks fairly readable, including
the day/date black on white. However, I've come to appreciate the
reversed color scheme, and the black/dark background is (at least for
me) easier on the eyes. I work sometimes on a blackface console with
grey text and color highlighting when I'm coding, and not having to
stare at a bright background really does make a difference.
So the 008 seems the choice, but the contrast doesn't seem very sharp, I
think. In short, none really qualify for my tastes in readability.
But I've not exhausted my search yet; want to discover whether there are
other models of the SMD line.
I wonder how much attention is generally paid to the usability of a
watch. Seems clear that the addition of the magnifier is at least a nod
in that direction, but some of the dials look like they'd require
thoughtful regard just to make certain that one actually sees the
presented time! Not good, I think; at least when one is busy.
And I agree with you: for the price, these watches are near miraculous.
Which brings up another question: how can they be sold so cheaply? It
would seem that the MSRP is at least triple the reasonable price, which
suggests that they really don't cost all that much to manufacture.
Quality chips and whatever they use to make them super-accurate, plus
really nifty manufacturing capability, may mean they can mass produce a
level of quality only attainable by master craftsmen not all that long
ago. Or so it seems to me.
In any case, I may just be casting my option for a Christmas present
momentarily. ;)
Longfellow
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- From: Jack Denver
- Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- References:
- Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- From: John S.
- Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- From: Longfellow
- Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- From: Jack Denver
- Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- Prev by Date: Re: Casio G-Shock Case Metal?
- Next by Date: Re: Singapore Sandoz
- Previous by thread: Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- Next by thread: Re: Rolex warranty myth?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
