Glad you enjoy your Steinhart. They are an incredible value.

Rolex gets a lot of flak sometimes when people finally get their hands on one. Usually it's because they feel a little lighter in the metal and I think people generally have super high expectations for Rolex in the first place. The truth is, anyone can throw together a heavy watch. We are dealing in steel here after all.

But it is to my understanding that rolex doesn't want you to have some weighty piece on your wrist as a daily wearer. It's designed to be the way it is, and don't let the lighter weight fool you. The bracelets are VERY well made and also very durable.

Some people prefer the weight and associate that with quality, but I just wanted to clear that up.

 

But it is to my understanding that rolex doesn't want you to have some weighty piece on your wrist as a daily wearer. It's designed to be the way it is, and don't let the lighter weight fool you. The bracelets are VERY well made and also very durable.

i respectfully disagree with you.
Rolex Bracelets Suck !.. speaking from my bitter/costly experience.
besides. they make Gold and Platinum Watches & Bracelets that are quite HEAVY.

ferrari,
thanks for sharing your story with us.
who said you have to spend lots of $$$$ to have a good watch ??.

 

An interesting explanation of how Steinhart has altered what you expect. In a sense I agree, however I will say that my Tudor Pelagos did change my perception of how well built a watch can be and the attention to detailing I expect. However, after that my Steinharts are right there in the top off my collection. Steinhart has also altered what I expect from a watch for the money.

 

SO happy to hear you're enjoying the watch but beware of those comparisons. No Steinhart owner wants to be told they have wasted their money by a fellow happy with his Rolex or Tudor and likewise we must be respectful of how we speak about brands that are held in high esteem by others. I would not go so far as to suggest that my watch is of better quality than the Rolex watches but it is a good watch.

They are an extrem quality for the price, perhaps one of the few purchases I've made in years that was worth every penny and I'm surprised didn't cost more. A good solid watch that, as the OP has stated can be regulated to run with amazing accuracy. I wear one 24/7 and am so happy with it that I don't shop any other watches although I'm building one. The Steinhart provided a basis for quality and the build will be as good as my Ocean One or better I hope.

Ard

 

Perhaps it was Gunter's initial goal to make a good, budget friendly work watch/time telling buddy to average Joes earning humble salaries to eventually got the watch collecting community caught in the little STEINHART storm... I believe he won't discourage average Joes to go for the "Crown", however should one have to spend a big chunk of his/her several years earnings and savings on a "Crown" which may eventually ends up in the safe or watch box in one's closet... It defeats the purpose...

 

I can relate to ferrarif1fan's statement. I to hunted down a Rolex Sub and was underwhelmed when I first held it.
I have to say it was a 1999 14060, later I held a 114060 SubC and that was a totally different experience. My Ocean One Vintage Red doesn't come close to that Sub.
It does however come with a significant price increase.
I do own a Omega Seamaster Bond and it is a better finished piece than my O1VR. That said, I still love my Steinharts and wear them regularly.

 

Yeah, I don't want to offend anyone who's purchased one of the premium brand watches. I do want to make an observation though. I've not really been a watch enthusiast until maybe about two years ago. But even now, I don't have a "collection." I am a bit too practical, and don't have the disposable cash to actually collect nice watches. So, instead, I have an old Citizen Wingman quartz ana-digi that was one of the first watches I really, really liked, and then I've got two Steinhart Ocean Ones at the moment.

At 51 years of age, and having saved some money from some side endeavors, I've decided maybe I deserve to have a nice watch. Maybe something in the $1,000-1,500 range. The Bond Seamaster was really the "grail" watch for me for quite a while. I still really like the watch. But the skeleton hands just didn't show up enough for me, so I let it go. At the moment, I'm still on the hunt for the "nice" watch. But my original point was that I think I've come to realize that a lot of what makes a premium brand special is as much or more the status of the brand vs. the actual watch itself. I mean at the end of the day, any decent watch is going to be comprised of a stainless case, sapphire crystal, nicely executed dial and hands, and a well-made bracelet. Most of the movements (not all though) are going to be based on an ETA movement. What seems to make one cost more than the other appears to be the name on the dial.

I do agree that weight doesn't necessarily equate quality. But it's not just the weight of the Ocean One that impresses me. It's the overall qualities of the watch that impress me. For me at least, it has set the bar high. Because of that, it has been very difficult to understand why the Rolex and Tags I've viewed in person command so much more in price vs. the Ocean One. I just can't seem to see the point in paying so much more for what is, at the heart, a watch of similar components and quality.

I'm going to keep looking for the next watch. After all, part of this hobby/addiction is the quest for the next great watch. Someone on the Omega forum put together a nice mix of Seamaster and Planet Ocean parts to come up with what I'd consider a very clean looking Omega. It's actually for sale now, but quite a bit above what I really want to pay. We'll see...

 

Yes, the Steinhart value is in general high, one of the better quality/price ratios between European brands. Before I encountered Steinhart, the Japanese were my main choice for excellent quality/price ratio automatics. Since then I found a few more smaller brands with very good proposition, they are not alone.
Mind, I do think that a current Submariner is in a different league. It also was designed to be light, and they use a harder steel which will scratch less than the one used in nearly all affordable watches. Still it is to my taste too expensive from a semi-rational point of view.

 

I don't know why people can't be just happy with Steinhart? I really love my OVM but comparing with brands like Rolex you end up disrespecting Steinhart for what it delivers. I own OVM and also Rolex and I don't see no comparison between them. I'm happy for folks who continue and prefer to live in the bubble, good for them!

For now just enjoy you Steinhart and forget thinking about Rolex(in good or bad way).

 

So about a year ago, after my recent divorce, since I didn't have a wife around to buy me a nice Christmas present, I decided to buy my first automatic watch- a Steinhart Ocean One black with ceramic bezel. When I got the watch, I was amazed at how nice it looked. Everything about the watch oozed quality. Mine ran pretty well right out of the box, but I'm a DIYer and tinkerer, so I ended up removing the case back a few times to tweak the regulating screw and got it to running within 1 second per day. The darn thing was as accurate as my Citizen quartz, except that it ran on a spring and a bunch of gears. I was amazed.

Fast forward a year. Being bitten by the watch bug, I'm always looking for the next one. I got an Omega Bond Seamaster in black recently. I loved the contours of the case, the contrast of the polished and brushed surfaces, and that great Bond Seamaster bracelet. However, the scalloped bezel was difficult to turn and my 51 year old eyes had trouble with the skeleton hands. So, with heavy heart, I let it go to a new owner.

About a month ago, I toyed with the idea of picking up a Rolex sub, both as a nice watch to have and wear, but also as part of my investment portfolio. I found a jewelry store about a half an hour away that dealt in used Rolexes, so I drove there one weekend. I wore my Steinhart Ocean One. When the guy handed me the Rolex sub, I thought, "This thing is an 8/10's scale, flimsy copy of a Steinhart Ocean One." My Rolex bubble literally popped. I left knowing I'd never pay that much for a Rolex because I really felt the Steinhart was as good a watch at 1/5 the price.

Today, I drove an hour to a Tag dealer to look at the latest Aquaracer divers. I looked at the 300 & 500 meter versions. They were not that bad looking. But the bracelet on both seemed thin and lightweight compared to my Ocean One, which I was wearing. Again...I had this feeling. "Why would I pay SOOOO much more for a watch that seems about as well built as my Steinhart Ocean One?" And for that matter, they both use the same ETA 2824-2 movement.

So...I've come to realize that owning a Steinhart Ocean One should be one of the later watches you own in your watch collecting career. Because if you own it early on, it can ruin your experience with other watches that are supposed to be superior. It is A LOT DIFFERENT when you compare watches in person vs. doing it online.

More like 20x the price!

 

Vlance,

I had that same thing happen to me when I worked in the Men's Haberdashery business. When some men tried on a heavy wool overcoat vs a Cashmere overcoat, the weight was perceived as warmer. After some hard selling and explaining the technologies of Cashmere and a few men did purchase the cashier, The feedback a few winter weeks later I was thanked for doing right by them.

 

May I suggest you upgrade to Ocean One Premium Blue?
Slightly better movement, see through caseback, better lume (bg w9), nicer blue dial (subjective).

This model might as well become my next watch too ?

http://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/OCEAN-One-Premium-Blue,902.html

 

May I suggest you upgrade to Ocean One Premium Blue?
Slightly better movement, see through caseback, better lume (bg w9), nicer blue dial (subjective).

This model might as well become my next watch too 

OCEAN One Premium Blue - Premium Line - Steinhart Watches

I often feel that the Ocean One design, no matter what color it may, should come with the usual 2824 movement...
Soprod A-10 should be reserved for Ocean Two to signify a generation upgrade to the Ocean Series. Hmmm...

 

If you are wondering what you could do to make them even more desirable maybe add a Jubilee bracelet.

I really like mine and if I could change the size to 40mm ............ Well, I get by with the 42 but it does wear a bit large.

 

I would disagree because I feel my 114060 with glidelock and all is a lot nicer and higher quality.

no comment on the older used subs though, the older models may underwhelmm esp with flimsier bracelets.

I also own a steinhart and I still prefer the rolex. So each to their own, but certainly it is great what steinhart has done for the money. However I would not go as far as declare it a bubble popper. It was for you, and you are lucky in that sense!

 

Saw this thread got revived, so thought I'd post an update. I still have my Steinhart Ocean One. But although I love the build quality and looks of the watch, it is a bit heavy. So I ended up creating my version of a mix between an Omega Seamaster and Planet Ocean. Started as an Omega 2230, which already had the non-AC dial and sword hands, then had a Planet Ocean second hand installed. I was going to put the full Planet Ocean bezel on it, but ended up liking the sveltness of the standard SMP scalloped bezel with an aftermarket PO bezel insert.

 

These watches are so disappointing that I just keep collecting them until I find one that is even decent.....lol. These things make it very easy to forget about my Submariner.......Love the brand!
G

 

These watches are so disappointing that I just keep collecting them until I find one that is even decent.....lol. These things make it very easy to forget about my Submariner.......Love the brand!
G View attachment 19116496

 

So about a year ago, after my recent divorce, since I didn't have a wife around to buy me a nice Christmas present, I decided to buy my first automatic watch- a Steinhart Ocean One black with ceramic bezel. When I got the watch, I was amazed at how nice it looked. Everything about the watch oozed quality. Mine ran pretty well right out of the box, but I'm a DIYer and tinkerer, so I ended up removing the case back a few times to tweak the regulating screw and got it to running within 1 second per day. The darn thing was as accurate as my Citizen quartz, except that it ran on a spring and a bunch of gears. I was amazed.

Fast forward a year. Being bitten by the watch bug, I'm always looking for the next one. I got an Omega Bond Seamaster in black recently. I loved the contours of the case, the contrast of the polished and brushed surfaces, and that great Bond Seamaster bracelet. However, the scalloped bezel was difficult to turn and my 51 year old eyes had trouble with the skeleton hands. So, with heavy heart, I let it go to a new owner.

About a month ago, I toyed with the idea of picking up a Rolex sub, both as a nice watch to have and wear, but also as part of my investment portfolio. I found a jewelry store about a half an hour away that dealt in used Rolexes, so I drove there one weekend. I wore my Steinhart Ocean One. When the guy handed me the Rolex sub, I thought, "This thing is an 8/10's scale, flimsy copy of a Steinhart Ocean One." My Rolex bubble literally popped. I left knowing I'd never pay that much for a Rolex because I really felt the Steinhart was as good a watch at 1/5 the price.

Today, I drove an hour to a Tag dealer to look at the latest Aquaracer divers. I looked at the 300 & 500 meter versions. They were not that bad looking. But the bracelet on both seemed thin and lightweight compared to my Ocean One, which I was wearing. Again...I had this feeling. "Why would I pay SOOOO much more for a watch that seems about as well built as my Steinhart Ocean One?" And for that matter, they both use the same ETA 2824-2 movement.

So...I've come to realize that owning a Steinhart Ocean One should be one of the later watches you own in your watch collecting career. Because if you own it early on, it can ruin your experience with other watches that are supposed to be superior. It is A LOT DIFFERENT when you compare watches in person vs. doing it online.

View attachment 2653698

A Rolex is a Steinhart copy? Good one lol. But in all seriousness, that's a fine watch you got there.

 

So about a year ago, after my recent divorce, since I didn't have a wife around to buy me a nice Christmas present, I decided to buy my first automatic watch- a Steinhart Ocean One black with ceramic bezel. When I got the watch, I was amazed at how nice it looked. Everything about the watch oozed quality. Mine ran pretty well right out of the box, but I'm a DIYer and tinkerer, so I ended up removing the case back a few times to tweak the regulating screw and got it to running within 1 second per day. The darn thing was as accurate as my Citizen quartz, except that it ran on a spring and a bunch of gears. I was amazed.

Fast forward a year. Being bitten by the watch bug, I'm always looking for the next one. I got an Omega Bond Seamaster in black recently. I loved the contours of the case, the contrast of the polished and brushed surfaces, and that great Bond Seamaster bracelet. However, the scalloped bezel was difficult to turn and my 51 year old eyes had trouble with the skeleton hands. So, with heavy heart, I let it go to a new owner.

About a month ago, I toyed with the idea of picking up a Rolex sub, both as a nice watch to have and wear, but also as part of my investment portfolio. I found a jewelry store about a half an hour away that dealt in used Rolexes, so I drove there one weekend. I wore my Steinhart Ocean One. When the guy handed me the Rolex sub, I thought, "This thing is an 8/10's scale, flimsy copy of a Steinhart Ocean One." My Rolex bubble literally popped. I left knowing I'd never pay that much for a Rolex because I really felt the Steinhart was as good a watch at 1/5 the price.

Today, I drove an hour to a Tag dealer to look at the latest Aquaracer divers. I looked at the 300 & 500 meter versions. They were not that bad looking. But the bracelet on both seemed thin and lightweight compared to my Ocean One, which I was wearing. Again...I had this feeling. "Why would I pay SOOOO much more for a watch that seems about as well built as my Steinhart Ocean One?" And for that matter, they both use the same ETA 2824-2 movement.

So...I've come to realize that owning a Steinhart Ocean One should be one of the later watches you own in your watch collecting career. Because if you own it early on, it can ruin your experience with other watches that are supposed to be superior. It is A LOT DIFFERENT when you compare watches in person vs. doing it online.

View attachment 2653698

I love bashing Rolex as much as the next guy but then, I'd say your 51 year old eyes are fooling you. While it's true that no watch from first tiers "really costs" but a meagre fraction of its retail sticker ("it costs what people is wanting you pay for it yadah, yadah..." yeah, I know) it's no less true that those first tier brands finish and quality is head and shoulders over Steinhart both on the parts you can see as well as on the parts you don't. Steinhart builds quite honest watches for the price and that's all (and that's no minor feat). On the other hand, more than half of what you said was about design. You like the Submariner's design and design choices over those of your skeleton-hands Omega or percieved ligthness of the Aquaracer's bracelets? That's all well and good but says nothing on the quality of those watches themselves (I myself, on the contrary, think that most bracelets are too heavy nowdays just to be percieved "high quality" in photos and/or a first glance)