Introducing: The New Seiko Prospex 1968 Heritage Diver’s GMT 60th Anniversary Edition SPB519

They make quartz movements that are superior to any mechanical movement. Anyone who needs accuracy would be negligent in using a mechanical time measurement device. Seiko has a rational approach that many of its customers prefer. I wish more European brands did the same. Mechanical watches are jewelry. I wish I had the option to buy a new Omega in quartz, but I cannot. Similarly, I preferred when Omega, IWC and Hublot used ETA calibers. I do not care about “hi-tech” in the archaic tools we wear as the only socially acceptable male jewelry. I can appreciate a beautifully decorated movement, but for a dive watch, it is silly to a Seiko customer such as myself.

Mechanical movements are fun, but they are inferior tools for keeping time. Swiss marketing has been brilliant, and one can see its messages repeated in forums by the masses, but it does not change the reality that mechanical movements are not accurate. None of them can match quartz, and none of us need them to. For a watch that will likely sell for $1500, Seiko offers a beautiful case, dial and handset. That is what sells the watch. If one must have a mechanical chronometer, he can buy one from Tissot or Certina for the same price or even a bit less. When customers are given a choice, many of us will choose the nicer watch with a cheap movement, because we just do not care whether it is one order of magnitude less accurate than quartz or two orders of magnitude less accurate than quartz. I usually tell the time from a screen anyway.

I know beautiful manufacture movements have a place in fine watchmaking, but this is not fine watch making. I wish more brands offered basic movement options, or better yet, quartz options. We can have beautifully decorated movements in higher-priced models, but there is a place for attractive watches in quartz or the cheapest automatic available (4r, 6r, 2824, SW200, 9015,… are the same to me).

Seiko is offering an attractive, nicely finished watch for a good street price (not MSRP, but what Sakura charges). That is what their customer base wants. If someone wants a chronometer in a $1500 watch, there are many, MANY watches out there meeting this demand. In general, if someone believes that the primary reason for buy a watch is the mechanical movement, he should avoid Seiko. Seiko caters to the buyers who buy a watch for reasons other than the movement (excluding a handful of spring drive SNR models that are three times the price of this watch).

I think it is strange for a movement-focused buyer to even bother with watches at this price point. I know people exist who get excited about an undecorated SW200 chronometer, but these individuals never buy Seiko. They buy Chinese-made watches that say “Swiss made” on the dial. I do not see more people buying models like this SPB519 at a higher price with an 8L35 powering it. Even with the aforementioned “Swiss” models, if there is a base and a chronometer on offer, the gray market tends to have an awfully large volume of the chronometers. Many, if not most customers are not buying watches under $2k for the movement. The movement-focused market segment shops at higher price points. You can see this in Swiss brands as well. Tudor used mass market calibers in its 1926 and similar entry-level models, while the more expensive Black Bay and Pelagos models come with their superior in-house movement.

I am not trying to change your preferences, but I do want to explain why Seiko caters to the market segment I am part of (and I buy too many Seiko watches, just ask my wife).