Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II
Like Tree26Likes

Thread: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. #1
    Member Gary123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Washington DC area
    Posts
    5,100

    Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    I thought I’d write this because I happen to own both (at the moment), and because I prefer the Gen 1 though the Gen 2 is more popular.






    Gen 2 differences:
    - Thinner by 1.9mm (13.8 Gen 1 vs 11.9 Gen 2)
    - Powered by a Sellita SW300 with 42 hr pr, Gen 1 uses an Eterna 3090A with 65 hr pr.
    - Crown is smaller and has crown guards, the Gen 1 is larger with no crown guards
    - The bezel is narrower by about 1/32”
    - The date wheel is considerably more conspicuous and perhaps (?) more legible.
    - The bracelet length can be adjusted on the fly with no tools.
    - The crystal is flat whereas the Gen 1 is slightly domed.

    So let’s take a closer look.

    THICKNESS
    The Gen 1 is 13.8mm tall or thick vs 11.9 for the Gen 2, both cases are 40mm.






    The reduction in 2mm was achieved by swapping out the 5.6mm thick Eterna Caliber 3090A for the 3.6mm Sellita SW300 and using a flat crystal. Thinner is nice, but I prefer the slight domed crystal as it adds a pleasant aesthetic, a little nuance to the look. Monta says the flat crystal improves legibility, and I find this is slightly true only because the dome reflects a much larger area than a flat crystal (think car’s side view mirrors that say “Objects are closer than they appear”), though in actual use I do not find this to be a problem.




    The other reason a domed crystal would impair legibility is distortion when viewing the dial from the side. But with the slight amount of dome on the Gen 1 crystal, this is not an issue.


    MOVEMENTS
    The Gen 1 uses the Eterna Caliber 3090A with 29 jewels, 30 x 5.6 mm, 28,800 vph and 65 hr pwr res. I like the 65 hours. 50% more than the ETA. It will easily make it through a weekend of non-use. Here is decent article on the Eterna movement: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/di...rna-caliber-39

    The Gen 2 uses the Sellita SW300 with 25 jewels, 25.6 x 3.6mm, 28,800 vph and a 42 hr pwr res. This movement is a clone of the ETA 2892 clone which is a finer movement than the their 2824.
    ETA movements article: https://www.gentlemansgazette.com/eta-watch-movement/

    BEZEL
    The Gen 1 is a little wider and the zero marker triangle is more prominent. I prefer the slightly wider bezel for a bit more robust look, and the filled in triangle I prefer for legibility. In the picture above, notice that the the zero triangle on the Gen 2 is not even close to the legibility of the Gen 1.

    BEZEL LUME
    The Gen II has it, the Gen I does not. This can be an important factor in actual diving, or timing in low or no light, or it may be irrelevant if you never use the bezel when its dark. I frequently use the timing bezel but can’t recall needing legibility in low or no light. They are both adequate for my purposes.




    CROWN




    The Gen 1 uses a substantially larger crown which, coupled with the lack of crown guards makes for an exceptionally easy grip which I appreciate every time I set or wind the watch though it is unusual to produce a dive watch without crown guards. The Gen 2 crown is actually not so easy to grip when screwed down. The Gen 1 crown has, on occasion, caused some discomfort on the back of my hand though the past few days of wearing has been without issue. Some find the Gen 1 crown more appropriate for a pilot watch and not proper for a dive watch.

    DATE DISPLAY
    The Gen 1 is white on black and the date window supplants the 6:00 marker making for a much less conspicuous date display than the Gen 2 with its white background and position above the 6:00 marker. I find the Gen 1 date display to be nicely camouflaged on the dial.

    BRACELET CLASP
    While the bracelets are the same, the big difference are the clasps. When closed, they both look the same, but the Gen 2 clasp features a nice design that allows you to change the sizing on the go with no tools.

    In the photo below, the locking center link, which you can’t see, is open allowing for adjustment. The side portions of the link are laying flat inside the clasp and can slide back and forth to adjust.


    In the picture below you can see the center link with its spring loaded ceramic ball bearing that provides a detent to help keep the center closed when removing or putting on the watch.


    In the picture below the center link is just shy of its closed position.


    I like an on-the-fly adjustable clasp. Sometimes they are handy, like on a hot day or when working out at the gym. I much prefer them to be concealed, like the Monta, and I love the ones that allow downsizing while wearing, not a feature of the Monta. Also important, of course, is the adjustment must stay put, which unfortunately the Monta does not when off the wrist. When the watch is worn, the adjustment is secure, but when removing or putting on the watch, the lock link frequently opens and changes the adjustment. I am curious if others experience this. It is enough of a bother that I prefer the Gen 1 clasp.

    In sum, from my perspective, the differences are small and its a matter of preference. My preference is the Gen 1. I like the slight domed crystal, slightly wider bezel, the almost-not-there date window and that 65 hr power reserve. If thinness is paramount, then the Gen 2 trumps.

    Which do you like better?
    Last edited by Gary123; August 15th, 2019 at 20:56.
    MarkieB, oso2276, system11 and 7 others like this.
    Chronographs: Breitling 2 tone Chronomat, Roger Dubuis Easy Diver, DeWitt Academia Sequential, Franck Muller Conquistador, IWC Aquatimer, Hublot Oceanographic 1000, Parmigiani Pershing 45, Royal Oak Offshore Gstaad, Franck Muller Vanguard Carbon, Franck Muller Conquistador, Chopard Mille Miglia, Zenith Defy Aero .. 3 Hand: Angular Momentum diver, Bucherer ScubaTec 2-tone, UN MM Diver 2-tone, Omega Ploprof, Ball Hunley, Omega SM 300 Master Co-Ax 2-tone, Zodiac Super Sea Wolf, Panerai Sub 106, Muhle Glashutte Rasmus blue

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    ATL Metro
    Posts
    2,700

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    Thanks for the thorough comparison. While I definitely like the longer power reserve of Gen1, the reduction in thickness, lumed bezel, and improved clasp of the Gen2 win in a landslide. At least for me.
    badgerracer likes this.

  3. #3
    Member MarkieB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Chester, UK
    Posts
    1,635

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    Gen 1 for me as it looks far more the tool watch capable of actually diving whereas the Gen 2 looks like a fashion diver (but I prefer wider lume/less metal of the minutehand on the gen 2)
    Gary123 likes this.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member trf2271's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,275

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    Thanks for the detailed write up. I wish the crown from gen 1 carried to gen 2. Like you said, it’s not the easiest crown to manipulate. I’ve never had the clasp adjustment come undone though and I’ve worn it daily for the past 11 months. Might want to give Monta a shout I’m sure they’d sort it out for you.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Gary123 likes this.
    Current: Tudor Black Bay GMT, Monta Oceanking



    Instagram: therightwrist

  6. #5
    Sponsor expLr-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    166

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    The adjustable buckle is interesting. Would be cool to see a video of it's operation.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    2,264

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    I still looking for Monta to sell owners of the OK 1 the new clasp.
    On the date disk issue. If the date disk was damaged due to the "too much oil" issue that was originally delivered with the Eterna movement, looks like we could mount an ETA 2824 as a replacement.
    I'll try that, to fix my sample

    Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using Tapatalk

  8. #7
    Member system11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    581

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    The crown on the gen 2 looks irritating, and the gen 1 looks like it probably fits the wrist better as there's a subtle difference in the lug angle. I'd vote for the old one if it's a question of which to keep.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Glendale, AZ
    Posts
    622

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    I am a recent Gen 2 owner and still in the honeymoon period, so I am super biased. The longer power reserve of the Gen 1 is helpful, but the thinness and glide-lock win out. Plus I like the more dress-Diver look of the Gen 2


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #9
    Member Gary123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Washington DC area
    Posts
    5,100

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkieB View Post
    Gen 1 for me as it looks far more the tool watch capable of actually diving whereas the Gen 2 looks like a fashion diver (but I prefer wider lume/less metal of the minutehand on the gen 2)
    I agree with this but wasn't sure if the blue color had anything to do with it. I find the blue Gen 2 to be a bit feminine compared to the black Gen 1, and yes, a bit more like a fashion watch. But that could be due mostly to the brightness of the blue.
    Chronographs: Breitling 2 tone Chronomat, Roger Dubuis Easy Diver, DeWitt Academia Sequential, Franck Muller Conquistador, IWC Aquatimer, Hublot Oceanographic 1000, Parmigiani Pershing 45, Royal Oak Offshore Gstaad, Franck Muller Vanguard Carbon, Franck Muller Conquistador, Chopard Mille Miglia, Zenith Defy Aero .. 3 Hand: Angular Momentum diver, Bucherer ScubaTec 2-tone, UN MM Diver 2-tone, Omega Ploprof, Ball Hunley, Omega SM 300 Master Co-Ax 2-tone, Zodiac Super Sea Wolf, Panerai Sub 106, Muhle Glashutte Rasmus blue

  11. #10
    Member Gary123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Washington DC area
    Posts
    5,100

    Re: Monta Oceanking – Gen I vs Gen II

    Quote Originally Posted by oso2276 View Post
    ............... If the date disk was damaged due to the "too much oil" issue that was originally delivered with the Eterna movement, looks like we could mount an ETA 2824 as a replacement.
    ........
    I doubt it. They are completely different movements, different sizes.
    Chronographs: Breitling 2 tone Chronomat, Roger Dubuis Easy Diver, DeWitt Academia Sequential, Franck Muller Conquistador, IWC Aquatimer, Hublot Oceanographic 1000, Parmigiani Pershing 45, Royal Oak Offshore Gstaad, Franck Muller Vanguard Carbon, Franck Muller Conquistador, Chopard Mille Miglia, Zenith Defy Aero .. 3 Hand: Angular Momentum diver, Bucherer ScubaTec 2-tone, UN MM Diver 2-tone, Omega Ploprof, Ball Hunley, Omega SM 300 Master Co-Ax 2-tone, Zodiac Super Sea Wolf, Panerai Sub 106, Muhle Glashutte Rasmus blue

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 1 guests)

  1. djpharoah

Posting Permissions

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