PDA

View Full Version : Review: SEIKO SLC033 QUARTZ


moeharri
May 29th, 2009, 04:39
SEIKO SLC033 QUARTZ
List Price: $375
Purchase Price: $160
Movement: 7N32 quartz
Dial Color: Dark gray
Case: Titanium
Crystal: Hardlex
Back: Titanium
Hacks: Yes
Handwinds: No
Lume: No
Water Resistance: 5 Bar (150 feet)
Bracelet Micro Adjustments: 2
Purchased: December 2004
Purchased From: Ebay

DIMENSIONS
Width: 36.00 mm
With Crown: 38.50 mm
Lug Width: 18.00 mm
Height (lug to lug): 41.40 mm
Thickness: 7.60 mm

WHY I PURCHASED THIS WATCH
This was my first “real” watch. At the time (about 5 years ago), I was having a hard time finding any watch that I wanted to purchase. One day while in JC Penney department store, I spotted this watch. I tried it on and LOVED it; I then glanced at the price tag of $375 and my jaw hit the floor. There was NO way I would ever pay that much for a watch I thought. A $25 watch would keep time as well as this watch, why would I pay extra? Back then a watch for me was for telling time, not to be admired and cared for as it is now. However, I hit up Ebay and found the watch at about a 60% discount and decided to go for it!

QUALITY (fit, crystal, lume, bracelet)
To begin with, this watch is extremely light weight--being made completely of titanium, it disappears on the wrist. I like the simple design of the face and the bordered date window. It does not have lume, to my surprise, but this is fine to me as I would rarely use it on a watch of this style.

The crystal is a hardlex, but it has sustained quite a few blemishes with my extremely tame lifestyle. I do not know how I got a slight scratch and a ding on the crystal. I would have hoped the crystal would hold up better than this, but perhaps it is to be expected.

As mentioned above, the titanium bracelet is extremely light weight, but seems to scratch very easily. I don’t mind the scratches too much as it gives the watch character, but I would have expected a bit more durability from the bracelet and clasp.

ACCURACY
My unscientific observation is that the watch currently runs about +/- 5 seconds per month.

HIGHS
Design
Accuracy
Light weight

LOWS
Crystal durability
Bracelet durability

SCORES
Fit/finish: 9/10
Crystal: 3/5
Dial/Bezel: 4/5
Lume: N/A
Bracelet/Strap: 4/5
Accuracy: 5/5
Value: 8/10
Overall (not an average): 7/10

http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/6127/img1403.jpg

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4144/img1398n.jpg

http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/1940/img1404e.jpg

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/5877/img1405e.jpg

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/9828/img1406nlo.jpg

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/3294/img1408h.jpg

Comparison to SKA387
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/209/img1410w.jpg

MY BACKGROUND
Here is some background information about me. This may help clarify my point of view and what shapes my opinions. If there is anything I can do to help you with more information about the watches in my reviews, if you’d like more photos, etc, please let me know and I’ll try to help.

I am a computer programmer/analyst from a very small town in central Wisconsin. I am a husband and father to two boys, ages 3 and 1. My interests include digital photography (Canon SLR’s), watches (Japanese mainly), Apple computers, cars (Japanese and German), and LED flashlights. I am a self-professed perfectionist and appreciate an extreme attention to detail and like to have a sense of value for my money. I believe this is what draws me primarily to Japanese watches. I have written my reviews in an attempt to provide information that I found difficult myself (at least before finding WUS) to obtain. I typically research a new watch purchase for about 20 hours in an attempt to make sure I’m happy with my purchase.

TECHNICAL INFO
My measurements were all performed with a digital caliper accurate down to .01 mm and rounded to the nearest .05 mm. I believe these to be as accurate of measurements as I have seen anywhere and may differ from official specs and other websites. For reference in the photos, I have approximately a 6.5 inch wrist.

ytwokc5
May 29th, 2009, 14:37
Thanks for the review. I am also a computer programmer, the father of two boys, and have a 6.5 in. wrist!

I have an older generation of the titanium Seiko LeGrandSport, purchased new in 1999. Mine looks very similar to your SLC033 with my watch sporting roman numerals. The original crystal on mine was awful, scratched badly within the first few months of ownership and got worse over the years. I have never had a crystal scratch as badly as the one on my LeGrandSport. I finally replaced the crystal this year and it looks as good as new. My watch also had the earlier gen kinetic with a capacitor, I replaced that also this year with a lithium for $15.

Wear it in good health. I wear mine less often now as my tastes have gravitated towards larger watches, but I still have a soft spot for my LeGrandSport.

mikeynd
May 29th, 2009, 15:40
Love the review,and the watch.I am a big fan of Ti. watches to.Despite the size of the watch it sure is a good looker..The 7n32 movement is a good work horse..I like the way you think my friend.I hope you share your post with us more often.Japanese watches are tops with me. I do have others in my collection,but Seiko is my favorite.

moeharri
May 30th, 2009, 04:44
Thanks for the review. I am also a computer programmer, the father of two boys, and have a 6.5 in. wrist!

I have an older generation of the titanium Seiko LeGrandSport, purchased new in 1999. Mine looks very similar to your SLC033 with my watch sporting roman numerals. The original crystal on mine was awful, scratched badly within the first few months of ownership and got worse over the years. I have never had a crystal scratch as badly as the one on my LeGrandSport. I finally replaced the crystal this year and it looks as good as new. My watch also had the earlier gen kinetic with a capacitor, I replaced that also this year with a lithium for $15.

Wear it in good health. I wear mine less often now as my tastes have gravitated towards larger watches, but I still have a soft spot for my LeGrandSport.

Boy, we have quite the life similarities! ;-) A coworker actually has the same watch as me and his crystal is completely trashed and is barely transparent anymore due to the number of scratches that he has o|

I too wear this watch much less now that I have some new "toys" to play with. This week I purchased a needed digital watch (Casio Mudman) and also the Orient Mako to give Orient a try. I'll be posting both of those reviews this weekend. Take care.

ytwokc5
May 30th, 2009, 15:56
Boy, we have quite the life similarities! ;-) A coworker actually has the same watch as me and his crystal is completely trashed and is barely transparent anymore due to the number of scratches that he has o|

I too wear this watch much less now that I have some new "toys" to play with. This week I purchased a needed digital watch (Casio Mudman) and also the Orient Mako to give Orient a try. I'll be posting both of those reviews this weekend. Take care.

I have the GW9010 mudman for my beater.

moeharri
June 1st, 2009, 07:08
I have the GW9010 mudman for my beater.

I considered that Mudman, but finally went with the one in my signature; it's sweet! I was never a digital guy before, but the Mudman watches are pretty neato.

Jollymann
January 29th, 2010, 22:04
Enjoyed the review, Moe. You refected a lot of similar taste and impression to myself. I've had the exact same model purchased at a Sears (I think) in California in Summer 1999, just before a trip to England. I paid retail for around $270-280. It was the absolete best watch(and most $) I owned up to that time and for a long time afterwards. It moved me to get more Seikos eventually. I must of replaced the battery twice on it. Water resistance has always been adaquate for showers and hot tubs. My crystal has also suffered a bit, but I've never felt a total need to replace it. For myself, I've also become used to larger watches as you can see with my list. Before 1999 I'd looked at watches like you explained. More just for the time and I liked G-shocks. Still do. Had a Seiko digital 25 years ago but misplaced it once in a dangerous spot and never saw it again. My father always had a Seiko.

I have to say that I feel the bracelet is quite tough. It's never broken or given me a worry, besides maybe a pin break. The metal is quite strong even though there is quite a lot less of it here.

I enjoyed seeing the excellent photos too.

warriorsociologist
January 30th, 2010, 04:37
Nice review -- and "|>" from a fellow cheesehead!

b-)