WATCH POP

Did a search, but would like to know people's opinions. I would not get to "hold" it before buying. Does it feel substantial? Is the mvmt really smooth? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. i don't know what you mean by "substantial", but IMO
GS Spring Drive is good "value-for-money" & practical watch.

good finish, stunning accuracy, 72-hours power reserve,
quick winding, power reserve indicator, display back etc..

above all, complete sweep second hand, from which you can't
turn your eyes off. I was looking at GMTSBGE001. By substantial I mean does the band/clasp feel like it is of good quality. Unfortunately, this one does not have a display back, but otherwise it seems, as you say, as if it would be eyecatching to say the least. Thanks. Grand Seiko is as 'substantial', well-designed and -finished as anything out there.

As for the spring drive movement, perhaps these 2 little movies might help:





You can view a brief movie of the flywheel and last wheel in action by clicking here:




 


While the seconds-hands performs like this:




 




Great videos. Thanks. Concerned that I will just stare at second hand. (If I used emoticons, which I don't, I would put one here.). In any case, I am thinking of this, which I would add to my collection. Is this a watch that I will give to my kids someday? Thanks. I purchased the Grand Seiko SBGE001 - Spring Drive GMT. I own 2 Rolexes new (new models, from the last year)and have owned many prior to that over the years. My Rolex Yacht-master two-tone and new style Datejust with white gold roman numerals on a white face are spectacular timepieces of great beauty and refinement. I keep them on display in Rolex watch holders and wear them on occassion. However, it is a sad fact that bumping them over and over while sailing can do a number on the regulation and on several occassions they have had to be re-regulated far more often than is reasonable to get back in COSC timing. They are fine 90% of the time, which leave 10% of the time that they are picking up time each day until accuracy is no longer suitable for me. I need a watch to work within COSC specs. I am an avid offshore sailor and want a tough, highly water resistant, fairly accurate GMT watch, but with sufficient accuracy sustained over time, for use in situations where (for example) a minute or two fast or slow does matter, such as with log-book entries, indicating position (latitude, longitude) at a particular time while underway, and other navigation/business tasks where one would prefer not to have to be standing in front of an instrument panel or paging though instrument options to get GPS time over an over again. Quartz is definately out, and digital sport watches seems akin to completely surrending to the notion of a disposible world where one can never enjoy the thought of having something beautiful and useful. I have a box of quartz watches with dead batteries, each of which managed to die at the wrong time, and as much a hassle to get changed as a Rolex watch service, but the batteries die suddenly! (even the "ten year" kind that last 3 years).

The Spring drive movement has it all -- quartz accuracy, automatic predictabily, mechanical charm and manufacturing excellence, self-contained with no reliance of a power cell that has a short life and no guarantees of existing in the right size when needed, and perpetual functionality wherein service is infrequent and occurs when I decide, according to my schedule and plans, and the prospect of a graceful degrading of performance that is usually very subtle at first and then gets worse over time (a major consideration when far away from civilization).

The quality of the Grand Seiko gives nothing away to the Rolex in terms of being solid, refined, beautiful to look at, and highly luminescent for low-light conditions (Luminova). The bezel on the Seiko is far superior to all Rolex bezels in that it is extremely precise in its stops, they being perfectly aligned with the hour markers on the dial. Rolex has never seemed to be able to get the bezel to stop centered on the correct time value value, whether it is a Yacht-master, sub-mariner, or GMT model -- wierd, considering how it should not be so hard to do.

The water restance is supposedly double that of the Rolex Datejust or Yacht-master (though the Rolex Yacht-Master, for example, is clearly capable of greater water resistance than the 100m rating).

There is simply no comparison in a functional sense between a Rolex sport watch and the Grand Seiko GMT. I will say the lack of screw-down crown on the non-sport Grand Seikos, with or without spring drive, is a tremendous oversight on the part of Seiko and reflects an unforgivable design anomoly. A primary reason Rolexes sell at the price they do is because any dress Rolex is nearly as good of a sport watch, in terms of reliable water resistance, as most diver watches. Seiko evidently figured that people who spend $4000-$5000 on a general purpose watch will want 100m water resistance, but then those same people will simply excuse the vulnerablity of the crown getting pulled open in the wet. Fortunately, Grand Seiko sport watches with Spring Drive (the GMT and Prospex diver) have GREAT screw-down crowns with lots of thread and wonderful smooth operation.

As for timekeeping, the Rolex's chronically misaligned timing bezels and all-mechanical movement are not comparable at all with the Spring drive -- different animals. The Rolex does the best it can with an all mechanical design, yet as a timekeeper, an all mechanical design is too flaky, effected by motion, shock, temperature, and internal wear, to ever match the Spring drive. The comparison is one of a horse and buggy comparabled to an automobile. The Spring drive on my GMT has neither lost nor gained even a fraction of a second in weeks. Many reports from others confirm this result is to be expected. The spring offers accuracy that is in a league with the best quartz watches, not mechanical watches.

The Rolex is a charming, highest quality item of practical jewelry that keeps time well enough for 99% of us. The Grand Seiko GMT with Spring Drive is more of an instrument, particularly with its extremely precise and solid bezel positioning and extreme resistance to shock and extended periods of being submerged (200m water resistance). It too is beautiful and like jewelry, through Rolex styling and overall design is exquisite. Generally speaking, there would seem to be no valid distinction of the casework and band quality between the two, but the Seiko clearly has the edge on timekeeping, water resistance (compared to my Datejust and Yacht-Master), shock resistance, low-maintanence, and winding efficiency. As for cost, the stainless GMT I purchased costs at least $1000 more than for a comparable new stainless Rolex GMT, so one pays a premium for quartz accuracy and durabilty in the largely mechanical Spring drive.