Return

Sent from my K92 using Tapatalk

 

Sounds really absurd...

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

I can't return it after 2 months. I have already learnt to live with it. Just want to share their reason.

 

I must profess bafflement as usual. With machines playing such a big part in production a misaligned Seiko out to be about as common as teeth in a hen.

 

That's fair enough, IMO - if you had been promised perfect alignment by Seiko, I can see why one might get upset. But this is painfully common knowledge, and, usually, the photos on Seiko's website have watches with misalignments, so they are nothing if not forthcoming in that regard

On my 777, it's not misaligned - the rehaut/chapter ring is misprinted - so all my hours line up except 11 and 12. Quite a few others on here appear to have the same issue. C'est la vie - annoying, yes, world ending, no.

Enjoy the watch and revel in the character - like us, it's not perfect! I do think they should be able to work on dividing a circle equally, but I am told these things are trickier than one might think. A stretch target for Seiko, perhaps!

EDIT: In reply to me old mate sticky above - one suspects that the machines are a key part of the issue - tolerances upon tolerances for various pieces of equipment involved in assembly process will add up, and collectively reducing those tolerances is probably not feasible from a cost perspective - you pay orders of magnitude for magnitudes of improvement in such things at an industrial level. Stretch target!

 

Experiences like yours are all too common and really make me wonder why I'm such a rabid Seiko fanboy. :-s

 

I sold all but one of my Seikos for precisely this reason. If other brands in the same price range can do it, why can't Seiko?

(The Seiko watches I sold either did not have an alignment issue, or I explicitly stated it. It's more a matter of principle)

 

Standard lines from seiko, they tell this to everybody who asks them the same question.

 

its an auto-reply !!!

 

I saw somewhere before that the misaligned chapter ring can often be fixed by simply rotating it 180 degrees, so that the spot originally at 12 is at 6.

I did this on my SRP775 and the alignment is now perfect. The only drawback of this fix is that it requires removing the crystal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I have a perfect SKX and a slightly off SRP. In all honesty i could not care less.

I do wonder though how such a company can get it so wrong. Citizen don't. So it strikes me that as a company making money hand over fist they do not really care.

It still won't stop me buying a 6105 re-issue if ever one comes out.

 

I do think it's pretty clear now that the issues have to do with the printing of the markers and not the assembly of the watch. As such it is true that sending it back is no guarantee of a fix. And just to add I personally don't think it's that big a deal. I have an SKX and a Turtle that are slightly off. Keeping and enjoying both.

 

Not so big a deal maybe but that's a terrible reply coming from a manufacturer explaining clearly visible misalignments as 'acceptable'. They can get their dress watch chapter rings dead straight even on Seiko 5s but for some unknown reason can't do the same for relatively expensive pro-spex divers. Disappointing.

 

Hi, I do agree, that a company like Seiko should be overthinking their spec. limits. But, I can still honestly say, that I do love each and every one of my seven "crooked" Seikos. Four of them being SKX007/009, there is no mistaking one for the other, since each one is unique and that is wonderful.
Sure, when a newly ordered watch arrives, I do check it and hope for an acceptable quality, but compared to other members here, that state that they would send a certain watch back, because they could never overlook a flaw after recognizing it, I only need a few days to accept it, and wouldn´t want it any other way.
Might be the fact, that I have the tools, and worked on quite a few watches before, that makes me relax more about flaws, which could quickly be taken care of. But maybe I just accept the fact, that -almost- nothing in my world is perfect. Cheers

 

Hi, I do agree, that a company like Seiko should be overthinking their spec. limits. But, I can still honestly say, that I do love each and every one of my seven "crooked" Seikos. Four of them being SKX007/009, there is no mistaking one for the other, since each one is unique and that is wonderful.
Sure, when a newly ordered watch arrives, I do check it and hope for an acceptable quality, but compared to other members here, that state that they would send a certain watch back, because they could never overlook a flaw after recognizing it, I only need a few days to accept it, and wouldn´t want it any other way.
Might be the fact, that I have the tools, and worked on quite a few watches before, that makes me relax more about flaws, which could quickly be taken care of. But maybe I just accept the fact, that -almost- nothing in my world is perfect. Cheers

I found this comment to be so helpful: what a relaxed and nice way to view these imperfections. Very Wabi-sabi. Many thanks!

 

Most things mass produced technical stuff has this, look at cars for example

 

I wish I could care about this like most of you do but as hard as I try to care about a very slight misalignment I just can't. I stay awake at night trying to be upset that one of my Seiko dive watches has a misalignment that can barely be seen by the naked eye. I worry so much that a stranger on the street will notice. I now get so upset when I get a Seiko that has perfect alignment, I so want to be like you, mad, angry, disgruntled that a 200 dollar watch has a slight imperfection. I'm teaching myself watch repair so I can go in and misalign all my Seikos. Only then can I be truly happy.

 

If they can't get it right they should change the design - either the engineering design or the cosmetic design - to reflect their capabilities.

 

Why should they? People like us keep buying their stuff like we have no watches...

 

Disgraceful reply

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

I do not forsee a Seiko boycott on the horizon.

 

I'll be upset about this for 5 minutes, go eat a ham sandwich, and forget all about it.

That being said, how can Casio pump out perfectly aligned MDV-106s one after another for the whopping cost of $40?

Shame on you, Seiko.

 

im surprised at the amount of members on here that find this acceptable. i wouldnt.

 

I don't accept this and I wont buy Seikos anymore.

 

Thank you. Finally, some acknowledgement on Seiko’s part.

 

Double post

 

If /F21, as a group, could say something to Seiko about this, what would it be?

 

This has been Seiko's stance on misalignment for quite some time, I know chino has had a disclaimer about it on some product pages going back several years. Just astounding how they could let it go on and remain an issue even on new products, particularly on an area of the watch that is so visible. I'm not buying any arguments that the separate chapter ring is more difficult to align with the dial, other cheaper watches manage to get it right, and it's not just chapter rings - Seiko likes to drop the ball on bezel and hand alignment at times.

Odd how I've never seen a Seiko 5 misaligned, yet costlier watches that are supposedly "professional specification" are afforded less precision. Any tool company following the same strategy would be in deep trouble.



Seiko, please get your s*** together.

On a serious note, what I just said. Short and to the point with enough expression of frustration highlighted.

 

Has anyone had alignment issues with Orient watches?

 

Me! I have a Mako which has a misaligned chapter ring and misaligned hour hand!

 

I'd say the answer is straightforward enough: SEIKO don't think it is a big deal whilst some customers think so -- and the critical word of this sentence is "some".
SEIKO wouldn't do anything unless their sales figures are hit badly by a big enough boycott, which is not likely going to happen...

 

thats a good point. however ive always bought seiko because the quality has always been top notch. not anymore. and the fact that they are passing this off as acceptable, well, it may be a minor issue for them, but knowing WIS lads, this is something that they wont be happy about.

 

I don't find the Seiko reply horrible at all. It clearly states their position that the watch is mass-produced and as such does not require them to be perfect in chapter ring alignment. The repair tech stated it more precisely by adding there's a 1.5 degree error allowed. So they are quite clear in this regard. WUS-ers may not LIKE it but at least Seiko definitively made their point clear - mass-produced means they are OK with a bit of mis-alignment. How can anyone argue with that? You want better alignment, move up in price to a watch built with more precision and care.

And we've all seen this here on WUS. Plenty of "common" watches are misaligned so we know it's possible and we might get one that'd dead on or ones that are off by 1.5 degrees. Just the luck of the draw.

I find the reply quite reasonable and it defines their position clearly. You can't complain about that.

Sure, the small number of WUS members might not like it but how many Seiko-WUS-ers are there compared to the huge number of watches Seiko makes and sells each year? A few thousand WUS members but tens or hundreds of thousands of watches made? We might be a picky lot but Seiko still sells tons of watches despite any misalignment of chapter rings. Seiko wins every time.

And knowing this, I prefer to buy watches in person so I can select the one I want. Problem solved.