Thoughts on cutting corners
After owning GS SBGA109 limited edition for almost a year now, I have come to full appreciation for the GS brand. I like to share some photos that display the beauty of 9R15 movement. IMHO, the hand polishing achieved is breathtaking and better than most of the polishing on entry level high end Swiss movements. Photos of my entry level movements from AP and Piaget are included for comparison. The GS movement has slightly better polishing than the AP 3120, but the AP has hand beveling where the GS beveling looks to be machine stamped. The GS movement is better looking than the Piaget 800P in almost all departments except the 800P has blued screws. I think GS deserves tons of respect for churning out such a nice movement at significantly less price. Hope you enjoy!
[pics deleted]
The measure of a man's character is found in his closet. The measure of a watch movement's finishing is found in its corners. Seiko literally cut corners in designing the movement's bridges of the SBGA109's movement.
Audemars Piguet 3120
3120 Rotor Removed
Piaget 800P
I think Seiko has done a very fine job executing the finishing elements they've included in their SBGA109's movement. I'm not terribly familiar with the SD watches Seiko offer and thus must based my view on yours and other images. Based on those images and constraining my comparison of the AP and Piaget to a comparable level of detail, I gotta say the sole things I see comparable between the GS you noted and the other two makers movements is that each of them have accomplished to a very high degree what they have undertaken to accomplish. It strikes me as patently obvious that makers of either Swiss movement have endeavored to incorporate more, more advanced finishing elements into their movement design and execution than has the GS SD movement you've cited.
Movement finishing is unquestionably about execution. The thing is that there's no doubt in anyone's mind that all three makers are more than capable of executing to the highest degree; it's only a matter of when and on which movements they opt to do so. With an egalitarian spirit, I'm fine with considering the three noted makers equal, regardless of whether a loupe would show them to be in fact equal, on the matter of whether they've executed to comparable extents.
Along with "mere" execution, finishing also must also consider what elements a maker includes in the movement. It's one thing to, say, bevel/chamfer an edge, it's another to do so to an inside edge or sharp corner. Since watchmakers have wide degrees of freedom as to how they design the visible components with which they can "show off," it stands to reason that as an observer comparing a maker's output, the more sophisticated the techniques are, and the more of them present, the more credit a maker is due. In that context, I ask you, where are the corners in the Seiko? I see a lot of lovely curves and not-so-sharp corners on the Seiko's movement, I see few sharp corners -- two or three -- that are beveled/chamfered. Looking at the 800P and 3120, I'm sure you can also see more corners and more sharp corners than are present on the GS discussed here.
Another element of finishing is the artfulness of it. Looking at the Piaget, I see circular Geneva "striping," which alone ups the art ante. But lets now consider last the single most obvious illustration of finishing present in the three watches: the rotor. Perhaps you didn't notice them? <winks> Well, I bid you look at them. Even with it's lion, the GS just isn't in the same league. Need I say more?
You compared the price of the GS with that of a, say, Piaget Polo and AP RO. Were you being held at gunpoint when you did so? <winks> [dramatic for effect, not to be derisive] No matter how slight be the correlation between production effort and cost and MSRP, a watch is more than it's movement and finishing applies to the case and bracelet as well. The RO is one of the HEW segments finishing benchmarks as goes case/bracelet finish. The Polo is right there with it, although not as widely distributed or as well known.
The GS is an extremely well made and designed watch (case and bracelet) but again, there's not a lot of art in the external parts of the watch. I mean really, one would need to be considerably less price sensitive (conscious of utilitarian value propositions) than a huge number of consumers, even HEW consumers, to pay a $5K to $15K premium for the artfulness of the GS's external elements. And as any highly self indulgent consumer, a genuine luxury consumer, knows, art and style are expensive and rare. There's no good/rational reason (other than that people are willing to pay silly sums for it) for it to be so; it just is.
Lastly, I'm not attempting to knock the GS SD, but I am trying to cast a bit of perspective to the discussion. Yes, the GS model discussed here is a very fine watch. It's considerably more accurate than either of the other two could ever hope to be. But superior on finishing? Not remotely close, to say nothing of superior.
All the best.
If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
― George Carlin
