That is very true
. Despite my feelings towards Rolex, I would take one over any Seiko up to the GS's of course [and maybe the MM300].I thought it was obvious that I was talking about fit and finish --not about precious metals. With that clarified, I stand by my claim. My 80s Rolex Datejust comes on a jubilee bracelet that is pressed metal rubbish. Feels cheap, looks cheap, but costs a lot. I'd say that the Seiko 5 bracelet may actually be superior in build. The way the crystal meets the Rolex Oyster case, compared to the way the crystal sits on a recent Seiko 5, looks to be inferior. The finish of the dial itself, the hands, the inner bezel's tolerance for the watch case --I think all of things are pretty iffy on my old Rolex. When I look at one of my Seiko 5s it is apparently very well assembled. Things fit together. The watch adjusts with a steady turn. It feels tight. Now I can't say what it'll look like in 30 years. Maybe my 5 won't age well. Who knows. My point here is to draw attention to the very high level of fit and finish routinely achieved on many mass produced watched today. Compared to 20 years ago, today you get quite a lot of watch for your money on the low end.
I'm definitely not trying to argue that Seikos are better than Rolexes. I hope no one got confused on that point. Maybe I should mention that I have a very recent Rolex Milgauss and the level of fit and finish on it is superb. It definitely looks, feels, and wears like a high-end technical watch. Of course it costs like 100 times what the seiko 5 does.
Of course the Prospex line including the Marine Master is a tremendous cut above the 5 line. Beyond that Grand Seiko is truly a marvel (get it?). The new Spring Drive stuff is completely out of sight. In order to get oohs and ahs for wearing this stuff you either have to be in the company of crazy watch enthusiasts OR hanging out in a major Asian city. I had a Seiko MM that would routinely get stares and compliments when I rode BKK's BTS a few years back. I regret having parted with it I think.
The high end vintage stuff is really tricky. I've had a couple of old Subs, a Fifty Fathoms, and a few vintage Omegas in the past 10 years or so. I'm a divewatch nut mostly. The old pieces definitely have a certain "soul" to them that the new stuff doesn;t. But they don't wear as well. They aren't as durable or as reliable as a modern watch. What's more, I'm not sure that owning a classic without having a modern high end watch to compare it to really gives you the proper perspective. Those old watches are like history lessons. They're cool. But they don't make good office watches I'm afraid.
