I personally liked Grand Seiko less after trying on a bunch of them at an AD. The sizing of many models is odd (thick, top heavy, weird lug lengths). Bracelets are lackluster with no microadjust. I don't find dials that look like crumpled pieces of paper to be very attractive. The watches with simpler dials are a bit better but just seem to lack life to me. I like a lot of what Grand Seiko does on paper, but they just don't do it for me in person. Go look at them and try some on before you buy one based on what you read online.

I appreciate people trying something different, but those are some ugly watches.

I have read about the new factory. I hope it leads to improvements. I just think there will always be QC issues with watches that are totally machine made without rigorous post production testing and an actual person going over every watch with a loop to identify issues. The companies are trying to do these at scale to make money. It is a different business model vs companies selling really expensive watches by hand or with rigorous individual testing and inspection of each watch before it goes out the door. The brand offers a 5-year warranty so they can fix watches post sale rather than rigorously inspect them all before going to dealers. It is a cheaper way to do things. It was definitely disappointing to have my time-only watch movement fail. Clearly, my watch was never individually tested. Tudor did ultimately swap the movement for a new one that works well, but it took around 5 months. When you send a watch back for warranty repair, it actually gets the individual attention it never got the first time around. If you want a watch that gets individually tested, then you need to move up the ladder. I believe JLC is one of the most affordable brands that does this kind of quality check on each watch, but those watches start around $10k, not $3k.

I think Tudor has some QC issues generally. I got a Tudor Ranger with a bad movement that needed replacing immediately after purchase. There are a lot of other negative stories as well. These are machine-made watches so mistakes happen. If they were hand finished and inspected individually by a watchmaker then they would cost a lot more. Take a good look at a Tudor before purchasimg and buy from an AD so you get the warranty in case something goes wrong. I think Tudor should do better, but this is where you see the difference between a brand positioned like Tudor vs a higher end brand with hand finishing and more rigorous individual care and inspection. Of course, those watches cost a lot more. I think Tudor is a decent tool watch brand because the finishing is not the greatest, but they have good designs, specs, and movements (hello 70 hr power reserve). If you want a dressier watch look elsewhere. Try to see the watch in person before buying and avoid grey market Tudors with no warranty.

I tried on a GMT model at an airport in Portugal a few months ago when I was travelling through. It definitely felt more entry-level to me quality-wise. The brand is positioned at the lower-end of the Richemont Group hierarchy and it shows. I think they are a bit overpriced based on the quality of the one I tried on. I would personally seek out more value by going for a either a more affordable brand (Seiko, etc) or trying a different luxury brand with better quality and finishing.

I would think about quality vs quantity. Although not my cup of tea style-wise, the Longines Spirit is a good watch. However, it appears you already have a decent collection, which already includes a Longines. Maybe it is time to save up for something you like from a higher end brand like IWC, Rolex, GP, Zenith, Omega, etc? Buying a bunch of watches that cost a few grand prevents you from saving up for a watch in the next tier. It's up to you obviously, but I would seriously think about it.

I thought about this watch (and others) when I was looking for a field watch, but I ultimately chose a Tudor Ranger. I highly recommend it.