Grand Seiko vs. JLC Master Ultra Thin

[ljb187]

Both are terrific though I can't help but think that JLC would make more sense as a 36mm watch.

[TheWalrus]

This is a tough one. I've loved the Master Ultra-Thin ever since I first saw one. Stunning watch. An ideal dress watch.

That said, Grand Seikos are incredible, and for the price, as against, the MUT, a real steal for a watch that equals the JLC on every level.

I think, entirely for myself I'd relunctantly put down the MUT and buy the Grand Seiko, and spend the savings on dive gear / trips / pick up a Marine Master on the side.

That said if the watches were more comparable in price I'd probably go with the JLC.

[Likestheshiny]

For me personally, JLC ultra thin moon > any Grand Seiko > any other JLC.

Grand Seikos are amazing, but I think the ultra thin moon is one of the nicest watches I've ever seen. It's not $5000, though.

[drunken monkey]

crikey, the Master case looks so much better with a thinner bezel.

I have to say, the GS watches never look quite right to me in terms of the case and bezel ratio.
I find many of the SARB watches better looking than the GS watches.

[dbakiva]

Is it just me?

I've read much about the technical sophistication and manufacturing excellence of Grand Seiko. I get that. And that's important of course.
But I look at the watches, and they do nothing for me. Nothing. They may be a in-house, hand-built, supremely accurate. They may be finely finished non pareil. They may be all that, but they just don't interest me.

When I look at a beautiful Jaeger leCoultre, or an IWC, Glashutte, Lange, Vacheron, etc. etc.... I can get a frisson and a dizzy desire that weakens my knees. With almost every Grand Seiko I've seen, I have to stifle a yawn.

[80talisten]

If I wanted a pure dress watch, I would have chosen the JLC, if I wanted an elegant but still a little sporty watch, I would selecting the GS. It all depends on what you're after.

[mrplow25]

I would choose the JLC due to its looks and the finishing of the movement. I just don't find the design of the Grand Seikos attractive, they just look too much like the regular lines of Seiko in my opinion.

[jilgiljongiljing]

I agree with a previous poster. In looks alone, the JLC is much nicer looking overall compared to GS. I too find GS models to be way too generic and boring, and I cant help but think of 100$ Seiko 5's immediately. Not that I'm comparing quality or movement or workmanship, surely they are better made than most watches near their price range, but in the looks department, they really need to get more creative.

[Likestheshiny]

In looks alone, the JLC is much nicer looking overall compared to GS. I too find GS models to be way too generic and boring

You're looking at that JLC and seeing innovation? It's a gorgeous watch, but it's also a gorgeous, canonical, traditional watch. That JLC follows an established watch design that can also be found in $10 quartzes everywhere.

Of course, I can easily understand why anyone would prefer the JLC to a GS. But, I'm confused how between the two the Seiko is the "generic and boring" one. Both watch designs are equally available at much cheaper price points, but the Seiko certainly expresses a design style that is more characteristic of its own brand name.

[celloboy]

I agree with 80talisten.

Two very different watches. Apples and oranges.

The MUT would be a better choice for formal/dress wear. The GS would be a better choice for all-round versatility. But for a dressy choice from Seiko, Credor's Signo range probably would be a better comparison.