Seiko Transocean... Sales dud?? - Page 7
Like Tree121Likes

Thread: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 105
  1. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    313

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Again, speaking only for the Spring Drive version, my fear was also that it would be too big, but it sits way smaller than other 44mm watches I own. I think the bezel diameter is actually smaller than 44mm, and the short lugs make it sit very handsomely on a small wrist like mine. Another big winner for this watch is reasonable thickness. MM300 and MM600 are way too thick to be worn comfortably, but the Transocean is perfectly fine for a dive watch.

  2. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    337

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Quote Originally Posted by EugV12 View Post
    Again, speaking only for the Spring Drive version, my fear was also that it would be too big, but it sits way smaller than other 44mm watches I own. I think the bezel diameter is actually smaller than 44mm, and the short lugs make it sit very handsomely on a small wrist like mine. Another big winner for this watch is reasonable thickness. MM300 and MM600 are way too thick to be worn comfortably, but the Transocean is perfectly fine for a dive watch.
    azfinetime has the lug to lug for the spring drive Trans Ocean models. They list the dimensions of the SBDB017 and SBDB018 as H51.7mm x W45mm x D15.4mm

    They don't have dimensions for the 6R15 one or the chrono.

    Their width and height for the SD agree with Seiya's.

    Are they wrong? Are you sure it's thinner than an mm300? I see the mm300 as 50x44x14.6mm

    Maybe it seems thinner because the mm300 is more top-heavy?

    I think it's so funny about the mm300. Some people say it's super comfortable and wears small for its size, and others say it's too heavy and especially too top heavy and the band is too narrow and it twists around too much.

    I won't be buying an mm300 unless I get a chance to at least set one on my wrist first.

  3. #63
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    337

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    I also wanted to say that I think unconventional lugs look cool to me on unconventional watches like the monsters and the tunas. But I think the Trans Ocean is more of a dress-diver, and on that type of watch I'd want conventional lugs like on the mm300. I like the Sumo lugs too and the Shogun's.

  4. #64
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Maine (Canadian ex-pat)
    Posts
    516

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Type on bezel is too small. Looks like a printing error.

  5. #65
    Member DarthVedder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    834

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Quote Originally Posted by 6R15 View Post
    DNA so clear that it makes Steinhart blush.
    While it looks very similar to that IWC's render, the real life IWC is very different, and I wouldn't call the TO a homage/imitation of it.

    Name:  iwc-gst-aquatimer-2000-white-6.jpg
Views: 217
Size:  226.1 KB

    Many divers look very similar, but the TO is still very "Seiko" to me.
    Sevenmack likes this.

  6. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Nowhere Special, USA
    Posts
    2,041

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Quote Originally Posted by RSDA View Post
    Type on bezel is too small. Looks like a printing error.
    Yeah, I didn't think the condensed font on the bezel was good choice. I thought the other day how the very modern typeface on the Stargate bezel would have suited the futuristic styling of the Transocean but alas, we get the crowded condensed font.

  7. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    313

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Quote Originally Posted by awayne View Post
    azfinetime has the lug to lug for the spring drive Trans Ocean models. They list the dimensions of the SBDB017 and SBDB018 as H51.7mm x W45mm x D15.4mm

    They don't have dimensions for the 6R15 one or the chrono.

    Their width and height for the SD agree with Seiya's.

    Are they wrong? Are you sure it's thinner than an mm300? I see the mm300 as 50x44x14.6mm

    Maybe it seems thinner because the mm300 is more top-heavy?

    I think it's so funny about the mm300. Some people say it's super comfortable and wears small for its size, and others say it's too heavy and especially too top heavy and the band is too narrow and it twists around too much.

    I won't be buying an mm300 unless I get a chance to at least set one on my wrist first.

    I can't speak for MM300 as I've only handled it once and it never appealed to me. However, I did own MM600 (SBDB001), and it was a ridiculously thick watch, so much so that I kept bumping into objects and walls with it. SBDB018 has none of those issues. The 45mm width is misleading as that must be the bottom part of the case, not the diameter of the bezel. The watch sits much smaller than 45mm on the wrist.

  8. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    337

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    The mm600 SD SBDB011 is 46mm wide and 17mm thick.

  9. #69
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    36

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Integrated bracelet is a massive failure. It is terrible and uses the worst diver extension that digs into my wrist, just terrible. Over a grand for 6R15 and craptastic bracelet with their terrible clasp? Would be worth it maybe if I could use strapcode or a nato on it and a 28800 bph movement. A grand is too much for a 21600 movement.

    Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
    dZeak likes this.

  10. #70
    Member eddiea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Dixie
    Posts
    1,084

    Re: Seiko Transocean... Sales dud??

    Quote Originally Posted by yankeexpress View Post
    6r15 is a movement that should not be inside a watch costing more than $300US IMHO.

    This thread needs pics
    Have a Transocean , had two Sumos... they are not on the same ball park, not even on the same planet, from fit/finish to a superbly adjusted 6r15 the Transocean is a far better watch.. bit puzzled by the 6r15 should not be inside a watch costing more than $300 comment ??? I don't see, many hissy fits over Bremont, Panerai, Tudor or Breitling (just to name a few) using ETA products and charging thousands of dollars for it ?
    As far as aesthetics goes, no one really knows what will become a classic and what will not , they are some pretty ugly watches out there enjoying cult status

    And....Here is a pic
    Hidden Content
    This spring, I will do Everest without oxygen. I did all my peaks without oxygen except Everest. I just want to continue be happy, doing what I love—climbing mountains.
    Edurne Pasaban Lizarribar

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Did I get a dud Deluca?
    By nerfedup in forum Straps & Bracelets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 28th, 2014, 01:10
  2. Chances of getting a dud?
    By wilson_smyth in forum Steinhart
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: June 17th, 2014, 03:03
  3. A dud Mako?
    By deafmute in forum Orient
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 10th, 2010, 00:21
  4. A dud Orient? What do you do..?
    By flawless51 in forum Seiko & Citizen
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: February 2nd, 2010, 19:40
  5. £36 for a dud...what a swizz!
    By carrot in forum Casio G-Shock
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 1st, 2006, 20:11

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •