Seiko Prospex Alpinist Battle
I can’t decide between the Seiko SPB121 vs SPB155 (Baby Alpinist) Please help me by casting your votes and explain which one has an edge over the other and why.
Here are likes/dislikes in my personal opinion:
SPB121:
-I like the lifted numbers on the dials and the rotating inner compass bezel
-not a big fan of the magnifying date window, or the extra crown that comes with it
SPB155:
-I like the texture of the dial, and without the magnifying date window
-but the numbers are printed on the dial and the second hand tip is red which im not the biggest fan
Both price in similar range, same movement 6R35, same sapphire crystal, both has lume, both have cathedral hands
Just starting my watch collection journey. My belief is that every watch in my collection should represent a milestone or a memory.
My pros and cons:
Compass Alpinist:
+applied indexes
+available
-obnoxious compass
-crown guards
I don't mind the cyclops, but it can be removed.
Baby Alpinist:
+dial texture
+smaller size
+slightly curved crystal
+clean look
-printed indexes (not a huge deal, though)
-sold out with AD's
What can I say, it's my next watch, if I can find one.
One has a Cyclops one doesn't, therefore the choice is very easy. 😁
If the Baby Alpinist had the applied numerals or even better lumed numerals it would be my choice. But I also like the classic look of the Alpinist with the compass and the double crown. And now they released the GMT version and then it's even more difficult to make a choice. So no choice for now...
It's the SPB155 for me.
I never took part in the love for the original Alpinist so I don't have any nostalgia for it. I don't like crowns at 4.30 unless they're part of a compressor configuration. With its various protuberances, the SB121 looks warty. The shiny dial and the equally shiny applied numerals look cheap. The compass complication is nice. That makes it a rather different proposition from the SPB155, so much so that they're not really equivalent choices.
That said, the Baby Alpinist is a simple and toned down watch. That's a virtue in itself, especially as I'm now in a phase where I look for less complicated stuff. The dial is lovely, and the combination of features works fine. That includes the use of both applied and printed details, the granular fumé dial, and bold cathedral hands. The red tip on the lollipop second hand is a barely perceptible touch, but shows Seiko bothered at that level of detail. I have no opinion on the presence of the Prospex decal above the 6. Overall, the green, gilt and beige make for a lovely little combination. The one downside of the Baby Alpinist is its average bracelet and clasp, but that's splitting hairs.
SPB121 for me.
It’s closer to the OG SARB017–“Alpinists” without the internal rotating bezel really aren’t Alpinists IMHO. It was designed with the internal rotating bezel for a reason. It’s kind of like someone takes the original Sub and removes the bezel—it becomes a different watch altogether.
SPB121 for me.
It’s closer to the OG SARB017–“Alpinists” without the internal rotating bezel really aren’t Alpinists IMHO. It was designed with the internal rotating bezel for a reason. It’s kind of like someone takes the original Sub and removes the bezel—it becomes a different watch altogether.
Yes, it becomes a Black Bay 41.
The Alpinist originally didn't have a compass, so removing it doesn't remove the name.
Yes, it becomes a Black Bay 41.
The Alpinist originally didn't have a compass, so removing it doesn't remove the name.
Sure, but the BB41 isn’t an Sub and doubtful anyone would call it one…
The Alpinist has had the internal rotating bezel since the 3rd generation in 1995, and prior to that the 1st and 2nd gen were from the early 60s. Those were early models and still trying to figure out it’s design identity. Like the Rolex Ref 6204 didn’t have a Mercedes hands but subsequent models have had them as a part of its design.
I don't like the compass with the second crown and the cyclop eye, but I really love the metallic green dial with gold applied markers over the sunburst dial with painted markers. I've always been torn between the two, hense the reason I haven't bought one yet, I can't decide. Life is full of hard choices sometimes...
Sure, but the BB41 isn’t an Sub and doubtful anyone would call it one…
The Alpinist has had the internal rotating bezel since the 3rd generation in 1995, and prior to that the 1st and 2nd gen were from the early 60s. Those were early models and still trying to figure out it’s design identity. Like the Rolex Ref 6204 didn’t have a Mercedes hands but subsequent models have had them as a part of its design.
It's the closest you can get to one; this was a mere addendum agreeing with your point that the Sub without a timing bezel is something completely else.
However, I disagree that the absence of the compass changes the Alpinist to the same extent. Following the SARB017, there have been five parallel variants. Six, if you count the recreation of the original. It's not like the Sub, which got the mercedes hand early, it's more like the Seamaster. Bezel or no bezel, dressy or tooly, current or retro, they're all Seamasters. The difference is, the Seikos don't have individual names to differentiate them from others.
I get it, for you the green/gold/compass is perfection and nothing else can touch it. It's not to me. Other mountaineering watches did fine without a compass, like Rolex Explorer, Smiths Deluxe or what have you. Using a watch as a compass is imprecise with or without a dedicated bezel. So, 1) compass is unncecessary (opinion based on my experience) and 2) it's also ugly (my taste)
The watch has enough character to not lose much sans compass, it still looks like an Alpinist. If they're not,as you said, IYHO, Alpinists, so what are they, then?
It's the closest you can get to one; this was a mere addendum agreeing with your point that the Sub without a timing bezel is something completely else.
However, I disagree that the absence of the compass changes the Alpinist to the same extent. Following the SARB017, there have been five parallel variants. Six, if you count the recreation of the original. It's not like the Sub, which got the mercedes hand early, it's more like the Seamaster. Bezel or no bezel, dressy or tooly, current or retro, they're all Seamasters. The difference is, the Seikos don't have individual names to differentiate them from others.
I get it, for you the green/gold/compass is perfection and nothing else can touch it. It's not to me. Other mountaineering watches did fine without a compass, like Rolex Explorer, Smiths Deluxe or what have you. Using a watch as a compass is imprecise with or without a dedicated bezel. So, 1) compass is unncecessary (opinion based on my experience) and 2) it's also ugly (my taste)
The watch has enough character to not lose much sans compass, it still looks like an Alpinist. If they're not,as you said, IYHO, Alpinists, so what are they, then?
Well, the baseline is that regardless of my opinion, Seiko has named those variants Alpinists. They are the source of truth after all, so can’t argue about that.
Respectfully though, for me, the internal rotating compass bezel coupled with the dual crown and cathedral hands make these Alpinists. The color isn’t necessarily part of that (since the SARB017 has the cream and black dial variants), nor the type of indices (either mixture of “claw” and numeral markers or just all “claws”). Also, the mountain inscription on the solid case base is a nice design touch as well.
No arguments from me about the compass being useful. Im sure a real compass is likely more useful. But it does add character to the original design concept of a “gentleman hiking through the mountains in Japan” from what I can remember.
Your point about the Seamaster makes sense, I agree it’s more apt than the Submariner comparison. I suppose the Seamaster did go through various changes before splitting off into different-enough variants for there now to be the Seamaster 300, Diver 300M, Planet Ocean, Aqua Terra, etc.
Anyway, just IMO. The non-rotating Alpinists are handsome design as well, so I’m all for it if it scratches one’s itch.
Well, the baseline is that regardless of my opinion, Seiko has named those variants Alpinists. They are the source of truth after all, so can’t argue about that.
Respectfully though, for me, the internal rotating compass bezel coupled with the dual crown and cathedral hands make these Alpinists. The color isn’t necessarily part of that (since the SARB017 has the cream and black dial variants), nor the type of indices (either mixture of “claw” and numeral markers or just all “claws”). Also, the mountain inscription on the solid case base is a nice design touch as well.
No arguments from me about the compass being useful. Im sure a real compass is likely more useful. But it does add character to the original design concept of a “gentleman hiking through the mountains in Japan” from what I can remember.
Your point about the Seamaster makes sense, I agree it’s more apt than the Submariner comparison. I suppose the Seamaster did go through various changes before splitting off into different-enough variants for there now to be the Seamaster 300, Diver 300M, Planet Ocean, Aqua Terra, etc.
Anyway, just IMO. The non-rotating Alpinists are handsome design as well, so I’m all for it if it scratches one’s itch.
Got it. :)
Le's enjoy them and hope that Seiko makes something for everyone in that line. After that GMT I wouldn't be much susprised if they added a chronograph or a moonphase. Only divers are unlikely, since they have enough divers already.
A logarithmic bezel would be cool and more useful than any other complication. Let's see. The Alpinists are the bridge between tool watches and dress watches and they're not trying to look like Swiss sports watches.