View Single Post
      08-08-2019, 04:13 PM   #709
GuidoK
#buildnotbought
GuidoK's Avatar
1301
Rep
2,354
Posts

Drives: Z4 3.0i ESS TS2+
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tinkering in the garage

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWatchGuy View Post
You could have picked any other cheap quality movement and you went with a low end seiko? Outside of the Grand Seiko movements, the seiko movements are very cheap movements that costs significantly less to make than even those clone movements. Sure they are "reliable" but even if they tick forever, their average daily error rate is up to +25s/d.
I dont agree with that. My 6r15 ticks just as good and accurate and reliable/stable as my 2824. they are each nemesis if you ask me. the timegrapher doesnt lie. I also dont have the alledged 6r15 problems as spencer klein somethimes points them out with the balance, so that is also not an issue.
Also there are some seiko movements that are certainly fairly high end and not GS. Some used in the brightz series for instance (Seiko 6s), like a very nice column wheel chrono.
Seiko 8R is also nice, and I believe also not a GS movement.

I saw that video on youtube about the latest rolex counterfit from watchfinder&co (2 months ago) and I was not that impressed with the finishing of the materials in the fake movement.
I mean, virtually first videoshot they made:


If you think this is quality engineering and finishing we have completely different standards. Sure if you take a $100 Seiko 5, than you could accept this, but finishing like this is absolutely not seen anymore in the sarb/sarg/pressage line ($350-700), and mind you, this is, I believe a $1000 fake, so a $1000 watch.
I mean yes, it has stipling (is that the correct english word? not a native speaker), but it has been applied because its there on the original, not in any way nice to actually improve the finishing.
And that cutting on the movement ring? (I guess thats what it is)...
was that done with a woodchisel? That kind of coarse, sloppy, cheap finishing surface, which is a result of cheap, inaccurate substandard machining, thats not something you'll find at seiko. Certainly not in that pricerange. And is it me, or does that baseplate look dirty?

Also I think that a lot of parts might not have been machined to tolerance, but having used cheaper production methodes, and maybe even started out as a cast part instead of a billet part (further in the video, the column wheel). The latter of course way more expensive but way stronger.
The only thing that makes that video bad, (and my only comment there ) is that they didnt put the fake on the timegrapher. (and dismanteling the watch to take a really good look at the movement parts. for example a delicate and very difficult part like the vertical clutch, I'd be eager to see what kind of botchjob they made of that)

And if we look at older seiko's, as that is of course the only real benchmark there is to determine how a movement holds up to time and is a good marker for a companies merit and quality attitude:
I have a 4006-7020, the 27J version with # 871955, so thats a 50+ year old watch, from what I could see never serviced (no marks) and if it so it was extremely long ago as I could only get the crown/stem out pulling so hard that the stem bushing/case tube came out with it. It was totally fused with the orings in the crown. First I thought thats a peculiar crown before I realized what had happened
Case tube is of course impossible to source but I managed to get it undamaged out of the crown by heating, incinerating the o rings, and later microsolder the case tube back in the case (there was no clamping action present anymore). So long story short, very old watch, if serviced certainly before I was born. But on the timegrapher...Deadstraight (+/-6 sec or so in multiple positions), beat error? 0,2 maybe... And good amplitude.

I also have a 6138 (well... more than one), same story. Even unserviced ones tick and tock very nice after 40+ years, and are easily regulated if needed.
For sure we wont know until after 40 years if a 6r15 or such will hold up that well, but the heritage is there.
So I certainly dont share your views.
Obviously comparing $300-$800 seikos to $4000-$15000 rolexen there will be differences, but that $1000 fake, when the back was opened to me it became immediately clear where corners had been cut. It is made to look the same, but certainly not to be the same. The production methods used in that watch to make it look like a rolex are the cheapest of cheapest. And of course there is no way of telling, except of using a multi million$ lab, but I bet that critical components like hairsprings will be made of the cheapest of cheapest materials to keep it more or less ticking and not of very bespoke materials resulted from decades of research by the best time keeping companies of the last century (and mostly then patented I'd imagine). But thats something you cant see, but will arise if it has ticked a decade or so and gradually seems impossible to regulate anymore.
__________________
Z4 3.0i | ESS TS2+ | Quaife ATB LSD | Brembo/BMW performance BBK front/rear | Schrick FI cams | Schmiedmann headers+cats | Powerflex/strongflex PU bushings | Vibra-technics engine mounts | H&R anti rollbars | KW V3 coilovers | Sachs performance clutch

Last edited by GuidoK; 08-08-2019 at 04:28 PM..