You raise very valid points. Just realize that the slide in Glycine online prices is very recent. The MSRP are a good bit higher, not that that really matters in the marketplace.

Seiko are somewhat overpriced and those of us who buy them, snag them at discount prices which occur often, especially around the holidays. For example, I try not to pay more than $400 for new release Seiko containing the mediocre 6r15 movement, which is a lowbeat workhorse.

In addition to Glycine, I have been scooping up other Swiss Made low priced brands such as Alpina, Hamilton, Bulova and Victorinox at steep discounts new.

I like Seiko, own a bunch of them, but am very leery of paying too much for their lower end models with lowbeat movements.

 

How about you take a long break from watching The Urban Gentry?

 

Beat me to it.

 

Better design? Except for the Airman, no.
Better movement? Not sure how you’re quantifying that.
Genuine Swiss? Who cares, and nope, 49% Asian
Better finish? No way. Seiko, for their price points, are very hard to beat here.
Sapphire? Ok, sure. I guess if that’s what you’re buying, the crystal, have at it.

SKX is 5 times the watch that the Combat Sub is, by my tally. But I weigh authenticity heavily. If what you want is a sapphire crystal, then you’re calculus may be different.

Bottom line: Way more value in Seiko than in Glycine, of all brands.

 

Better design? Except for the Airman, no.
Better movement? Not sure how you're quantifying that.
Genuine Swiss? Who cares, and nope, 49% Asian
Better finish? No way. Seiko, for their price points, are very hard to beat here.
Sapphire? Ok, sure. I guess if that's what you're buying, the crystal, have at it.

SKX is 5 times the watch that the Combat Sub is, by my tally. But I weigh authenticity heavily. If what you want is a sapphire crystal, then you're calculus may be different.

Bottom line: Way more value in Seiko than in Glycine, of all brands.

Sure you could argue on the aesthetics but combat sub design is superior. It is thinner and wears better. Has drilled lugs, Signed crown.
Movement in combat sub is objectively superior. Hackable, better accuracy(My combat sub runs +5 sec/day while the SKX runs +30 secs/day), superior crown action, higher beat I like the smooth sweep of the seconds hand.
Swiss brands do command a premium price in the market. It is a fact you cannot ignore.
Combat sub has objectively better finish. No misaligned chapter rings, Lume is applied precisely on the numerals. I see lume on SKX is not properly aligned on the markers. The same carries on to the case. Both the case and case back are way better finished than my skx. Not sure where you are coming from but looking at them side by side, it is not a debate. It is like debating if a toyota has a better finish than a mercedes.
I forgot to mention the cheap strap that skx came with. The strap that came with my combat sub is way out of league compared to the oem skx strap. You can actually wear it.

What do you mean by authenticity and how does it make skx 5x a combat sub? May be list some tangibles?

 

It sounds to me like you've already made up your mind and are just looking for an argument. If you'd rather have a Glycine then get one.

 

Like I mentioned earlier, my experience with watches is very limited. I am unable to convince myself that Seiko provides a superior product or even comparable product for similar amount of money. In my personal experience it is the exact opposite. They ask for more money for an inferior product. I am trying to find out if I am missing something which adds value.
I am indeed looking for the argument to justify buying a Seiko. I am not a fanboy nor a hater.

 

Seiko also trade on a history that Glycine can't touch.

- first Auto chrono in the world (to public sale) that took just 2 years to develop and is a vertical column wheel calibre at that.

- first quartz watch and the starter of a movement that changed history

- a watch company that is truly 100% in-house

- During the late 70s and 80s they were the biggest watch company in the world.

- invented the LCD display

- first Auto chrono in space

- they still are the only company that makes quartz and mechanicals for every market sector from lowly SKX and cheap digitals through to Grand Seiko

- a range of in-house calibres that includes quartz, mechaquartz, mechanical, spring drive & solar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

What a load of mumbo jumbo...ohh look that's yer handle.

 

Well don’t look at them then and don’t come on a seiko forum to diss seiko watches - many of us know what we like, know what the alternatives are, know what constitutes value, and prefer seiko all day over Glycine.

 

Boring watch with no identity, and Glycine is owned by Invicta and is as Swiss as they are.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

The Glycine Combat Sub is just another Submariner knock off. The SKX is 100% original Seiko design. Personally I value authenticity very much and it's the main reason that I was drawn to Seiko in the first place. If you add to this the fact that Seikos are 100% in-house, then there is nothing to compare between the two brands!

 

Seiko through the years have created some iconic watches and I would say the SKX, despite its short comings, is definitely one of those iconic watches.

For me Seiko are fun watches which, for the most part, are not trying to be something they are not. I have plenty of Seikos and Omega too, and the Seikos always get wrist time because they just have something about them which many other watch companies dont, thats what I feel about Omega too.

If you need someone to convince you about Seiko then you are looking too hard, just enjoy the watch for what it is, a classic icon

 

For me, that is another classic troll....

Послато са Nexus 7 помоћу Тапатока

 

Combat subs just never did it for me, even if they are great value. If they make you happy then great.

Value from specs is overrated to a large extent. The same way you don't understand why anyone would pick an SKX over a combat sub, I could make the same argument against the Glycine. Why would I buy a combat sub when an Orient Triton is an even better value?

If the watch puts a smile on your face when you wear it, that value will never be trumped by the specs.

 

I've never seen or met anyone wearing a Glycine, let alone a combat sub.

See a lot of Seikos though.

The world must be full of dumb people throwing their money away...

^^ tells the truth on Internet forums

So many watches, So little time...

 

I've never seen or met anyone wearing a Glycine, let alone a combat sub.

I wear my Airman almost exclusively on the road, and I'm a Seiko fan.

+1 to whoever upstream said the Triton has both of them beat for value though

(On the gripping hand, Glycine has nothing in the Marinemaster or Spring Drive or even auto Tuna class. At the value end, Combat Sub vs Sumo vs SKX end of the market, it's almost a discussion, but aside from vintage, Glycine doesn't have anything that will justify laying out thousands of bucks. Is a cheap watch from a company that makes expensive watches somehow borrowing cachet from the upmarket end, and thus better value? Interesting idea...)

 

If you're not going to get an excellent Seiko timepiece I reckon you should get a Tauchmeister automatic diver rather than an anonymous looking Glycine. That way, when you are doing the dishes you can pretend you are 1000m down on the seabed watching your pseudo German (chinese) diver implode - much more fun - and all for 100USD :-!

 

I agree on all, especially the better design of Glycine and Seiko's poor movement. But I did hear a few complaints lately about Glycine QC. It seems they are going downhill.

For example:

 

OP how many accounts do you have on this forum?

(I'm just curious.)

 

Here is the simple answer

"Buy what you want to see on your wrist! What will make you happy as you glance down and check the time out a few times as day? Go for that one regardless of brand or specs or what the masses think is good/better/best"

Here is the long answer.

"There is always a watch with better specs....always....let me give you an example

https://invictastores.com/invicta-d...s-limited-edition-batman-mens-automatic-47-mm-black-case-black-dial-model-27174

A Selitta Auto Chrono with 500M WR for less than $200!!!!!!

Great specs right? Does that make it a better value than the Glycine you have? I would likely guess that your answer is no. Ultimately the watch should be more than a set of checklists! Watches are an unecessary luxury in todays world of smartphones. So if you are goign to have a luxury item that is many orders of magnitude less functional than the phone in your pocket, shouldnt it be something that makes you smile?

Seiko has managed to capture that feeling for a lot of people. One Seiko watch/diver tends to entice people to get a second and third. Maybe Glycine does that for you? That is great if you love Glycine! I think they make quality products and you are right the Sombat Sub spanks the SKX in terms of specs. But for me I've owned the Combat Sub, COmbat 7, and Double Twleve. The COmbat Sub and Field watch felt bland on the wrist. Just not appealing to me at all. The Double Twleve I was really good though.

Trying to rationalize your way into a watch purchase is usually a qucik route to flipping it in my experience. Buy what really appeals to you. Good luck!"

 

"Buy what you want to see on your wrist! What will make you happy as you glance down and check the time out a few times as day? Go for that one regardless of brand or specs or what the masses think is good/better/best"

Trying to rationalize your way into a watch purchase is usually a qucik route to flipping it in my experience. Buy what really appeals to you. Good luck!"

I wish I could like this more than once. Best answer.

 

Seiko have dropped the ball a bit lately when it comes to providing the sort of stuff we WISs like to see on a watch but for me, at least, Seiko turn such a nice watch out that I’m quite prepared to overlook those minor shortcomings. Heck, I even accept alignment that I would find totally unacceptable in any other brand.

 

Thanks for your input guys. It seems most people are buying Seiko for aesthetics or their lore and not for the specs which is perfectly fine. However both of these are intangibles and generally associated with luxury and not value. And therein lies my issue with these YouTube channels. These guys are misguiding new buyers into thinking Seikos are value buys and provides more watch for the money which is clearly untrue.

 

Sorry you don't get it. A watch with Seiko branding on it *is* more watch. When you buy a watch you get the whole package. Seikos are value buys because Seiko could have priced them 10 fold, then it would have been fair. Look at Swiss makers, compare them to Seiko and you will see.

 

Seiko used to be the best value brand not more than a few years ago, then they decided that they don't want to undercharge anymore. So they've started inflating prices without improving quality. They're still a powerhouse, but I haven't been blown away by their latest offerings, and they're no longer the first brand I'd recommend to a newbie.

Glycine appear to be going out of business in slow motion and have been hemorrhaging good stock at crazy discounts. Yes, I'd say they are the best value for money brand at the moment.

The SKX used to sell in the $100 ballpark. The Glycine used to have MSRP in the $1000 ballpark. What the prices are now is the result of market forces skewing the street price based on demand.

I think the Glycine combat sub is a fine watch. I just don't particularly want one. I do however feel my collection would be missing something if it didn't have an SKX.

Perhaps it is a "stages of WISdom" thing. When most people are new, they're probably looking to get the maximum bang and objective "best" deal. Once you've seen it all, you realise that your most expensive and "best" watch isn't necessarily going to be your favourite. Sometimes you just like that crappy SKX or Vostok more than your Omega Seamaster... and that's okay!

 

A lot of it depends on how much you have or are willing to spend on a watch. $250 probably won't get you a whole lot of Glycine, but it'll get you a whole lot of Seiko.

Or at least it used to. Times are-a-changin...

I got an Invicta Pro Diver because it was an incredible value. 200m WR, solid case and bracelet, high quality movement, all for less than $100. It made sense.

I never wear it. My SKX is objectively less watch for more money and it completely eclipsed the Invicta in my mind as soon as I got it.

There's more to a good watch than specs.

 

Basically no, there is no value in Seiko or any other watch brand. They are essentially all useless. My phone or a smart/fitness watch/ diving computer is way better and an up-to-date way to tell time.

You buy a watch because you like and enjoy it, so get the one you want more.

Did you notice that a two tone Rolex Daytona is easier to get than an all steel one. Its crazy since the former one has solid gold, right?

All this influencer talk is brainwashing people in believing that they buy some value. Its all a waste of money

 

I have two Sumo's, a Turtle and an Urchin. I bought them all carefully at good prices and I have yet to be disappointed. I never tire of wearing the Sumo's.I recently purchased a Glycine GMT 46mm (have large wrists) and I have to say i am pleasantly surprised at what appears to be very good quality. It's two years old and the fellow I bought it from said he had worn it very little, it looks and appears new. it is solid and comfortable and the GMT feature is nice. I don't feel that I need to compare them to my seiko's, they are a different breed.

 

This is the good thing, as new as you are to watches you're far on the way to becoming an expert. You've already sussed out the falsehood that is the SKX. Probably one of the biggest pieces of shjte out there. How that watch lasted 23 years is beyond me (not to mention the 7002 forerunner, and before that the 6309 and before that the 6105). So it seems that seiko just doesn't seem to understand consumers much less dive watch needs.

It's good that you come in to the seiko forum, all shiney new and madly educated on all things watchy. Sure some people will argue that the skx is just dam good at what it is, a robustly built, inexpensive, beater dive watch but those in the know understand that the skx is just a child's toy compared to the much better watches out there.

Granted the skx doesn't come with a sapphire crystal (I guess seiko felt a few scratches would give it character, as if, right?), doesn't hand wind or hack (which we all know is absolutely important in an entry level dive watch, one can't afford to miss that submarine rendezvous), fuggetabout those horrible, functional, accordion rubber straps, what a stupid idea that was) and of course what may be the most egregious mistake (or sin of omission) is no signed crown! How is anyone supposed to identify a watch if there is no 'signature' on the crown...sheesh, cheapo company.

Now here I am a bit confused. You've already clearly proved that glycine (an unessential amino acid btw) is far and away better than the skx but what is puzzling is that you would even consider yet another inferior seiko. Have you lost your mind man? Why throw good money after bad? What company in their right mind would refuse to put an altogether much better (read-more expensive) movement, with a sapphire crystal no less, into their cheapest (and likely soon to be discontinued) dive watch? It's just unimaginable, I mean, to quote the OP, "WTF is going on?

P.S. can't say for sure but you might very well be received and lauded as the new watch god over there in the glycine (an unessential amino acid btw) forum, given your amazing insights. If nothing else, thank you very much for even bothering to take the time to educate us slobs here in f21. ;-)

 

Some pople here are being WAY too harsh on OP, in my opinion. Does Seiko provide less bang for the buck than it used to? Do other brands (Glycine or other) provide more or comparable bang for the buck these days and if so, in what ways? Those to me are interesting questions that could make for good discussion.



Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

Some pople here are being WAY too harsh on OP, in my opinion. Does Seiko provide less bang for the buck than it used to? Do other brands (Glycine or other) provide more or comparable bang for the buck these days and if so, in what ways? Those to me are interesting questions that could make for good discussion.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

It's not really the points he's making, but rather how he makes them. Kinda like kicking in the bar door and shouting 'all you people are idiots'. Ya just know someone's gonna take a swing. He comes into the seiko forum and just starts trash talking the skx and in a very indelicate manner. However if you happen to think that his 'bedside manne is perfectly fine and appropriate well then by all means, go stand by the door and back him up.