We don't care. We are Seiko.
What's really kill me is the fact that when Seiko decides to care it manage to make excellent watches at perfectly reasonable price points, like this SGG731, and when they don't care we get watches that cost a heck more than what the SGG does, but with a date window that looks as if it was punched with an awl at a random location (eg SCC Speedtimer). Then there are the true idiocies such as the 24Hr indicators on chronographs, or worse: bi-compax meca-quartz chronographs lacking a second's hand.
Sometime I think that Seiko doesn't exist any more, it's just a brand name shared by completely different companies that have each their own agenda. It's worse than lacking a vision because it's a case of having too many of them.
I mean really, how could you get it so right with this simple quartz driven SGG731 and yet end up with looking at a typical Prospex dial and thinking that this brilliant and it's exactly what we, Seiko, intended to achieve?
Maybe the movements are not the only things that are unregulated at Seiko.
I'm a big fan of watches that are interesting because they are either unique, have interesting features, well designed or simply offer a great value for their price.
I resolved my love/hate relationship with Seiko by only buying old ones, second hand. That way, the company doesn't get my money. And the old ones were better designed and better made anyway. Win/win.
I resolved my love/hate relationship with Seiko by only buying old ones, second hand. That way, the company doesn't get my money. And the old ones were better designed and better made anyway. Win/win.
Smart move - and with you there. The pricing on the new ones has crept up over the last few years and so they don’t represent good value. The only ones I have bought new recently were 30%+ off RRP so back into sanity range but vintage is a good way to go.
This SKX was buttons because it’s the 171 not the 007 - go figure?
And the KS wasn’t much more than a new Seiko 5!
Smart move - and with you there. The pricing on the new ones has crept up over the last few years and so they don’t represent good value. The only ones I have bought new recently were 30%+ off RRP so back into sanity range but vintage is a good way to go.
This SKX was buttons because it’s the 171 not the 007 - go figure?
And the KS wasn’t much more than a new Seiko 5!
Nice both. A 171 with a switched out bezel. I like the KS too. 👍
30% off sounds good... as long as there are no QC probs. 🙄
Nice both. A 171 with a switched out bezel. I like the KS too. 👍
30% off sounds good... as long as there are no QC probs. 🙄
I actually prefer the 171 because of the monochrome colouring and the indices have the silver surrounds that the 007 doesn’t have. The bezel switch was easy and inexpensive.
I have yet to have a QC problem with Seiko but I do see plenty others who do. Just adds to my perception that they have the price/value proposition wrong.
I resolved my love/hate relationship with Seiko by only buying old ones, second hand. That way, the company doesn't get my money. And the old ones were better designed and better made anyway. Win/win.
@Whitesalmon is a prime example for demonstrating why older and vintage Seiko are better than their modern counterparts.
Never get tired of this watch. I wear it often over that past years and the titanium is ageing nicely.
Never get tired of this watch. I wear it often over that past years and the titanium is ageing nicely.
I called it once "Seiko best kept secret" and I still think it's one of their better models.
Obviously Seiko were quick to fix their mistake and they discontinued the SGG to replace it with a larger model which is toes the line by being both worse and more expensive.
I've never seen anyone else with one. We'll done my friend.