# Seiko 6309 V Seiko 7002



## mickyh7 (May 21, 2009)

Hello again, I'm still waiting for my Seiko 7002 - 700 A1 to arrive, but I'm now wishing I'd bought the 6309-7040.But I thought the prices were going silly on e-bay and backed off. However, I do like the look of the face on the 6309. The 12 o clock marker with the cross inside appeals to me.

I know the older model is made of higher quality materials,so even though it will be older,will it (theoretically) last longer than the more modern 7002. Obviously, I will buy one sooner or later,when a nice one comes along.

Thanks Mick.


----------



## Thian (Nov 23, 2008)

mickyh7 said:


> Hello again, I'm still waiting for my Seiko 7002 - 700 A1 to arrive, but I'm now wishing I'd bought the 6309-7040.But I thought the prices were going silly on e-bay and backed off. However, I do like the look of the face on the 6309. The 12 o clock marker with the cross inside appeals to me.
> 
> I know the older model is made of higher quality materials,so even though it will be older,will it (theoretically) last longer than the more modern 7002. Obviously, I will buy one sooner or later,when a nice one comes along.
> 
> Thanks Mick.


Will a 6309 last longer than a newer 7002? In general, both will last the same all things being equal as to the condition they are in when you buy either one.

I have had both and still have one modded 6309, not because it will last longer but because the model and its pillow case is Iconic to Seiko diver collectors, along with the 6105s.

You are right that the prices for 6309s are a bit high due to demand, not due to their quality. Many stories are told of finding 6309s beat up and they still run.

There are many cosmetic parts available for either watch. The 7002 slimmer case has been neglected as collectible but nevertheless is an excellent watch. If you are not a purist, then find one in good clean condition and buy it...one day they will be collectible too.


----------



## mickyh7 (May 21, 2009)

What I meant was, If a watch made of better materials, say 30 years old is going today, and a watch made of lesser quality materials, say 15 years old,both going today. Will both of those watches still be going in 20 years time ?


----------



## pauluspaolo (Feb 24, 2003)

The 7002 is a very under-rated watch I think. It's very well made, good looking & mine keeps very good time as well. The only downside with it is that Seiko used a poor luminous compound which meant that the lume wasn't very bright even when the watch was new, over the years it will have got even worse - the lume on mine is virtually non-existant !

The trouble with the chunkier cased 6309 is that it's getting hard to find original examples in good condition & when they do turn up they go for quite a lot of dosh (as you've pointed out). Having said that is it wrong to buy a watch that's been fitted with aftermarket parts as long as you know what you're buying & aren't paying top whack for it? They're all old watches now & most old watches need replacement parts along the way.


----------



## pauluspaolo (Feb 24, 2003)

In what way was the 6309 better built than the 7002? Both used stainless steel as the main construction material, both used 17 jewel auto only movements, both are acknowledged as being reliable movements (as many mechanical Seiko movements seem to be), neither will have very good lume now (I've no idea how good the 6309 lume was when new but if it's original it won't be much cop now), both have bi-directional bezels with a ball bearing providing the ratchet (though I think later 7002's had a unidirectional bezel & flat spring to provide the ratchet), both were 150m water resistant, both were 40+mm in diameter, both 22mm lugs & both had a screw down crown at 4. Apart from the case shape they seem pretty close to each other really


----------



## mickyh7 (May 21, 2009)

From what I can gather the 7002 uses less parts in the movement than the 6309, and some of those parts are made of plastic !

They done this to try and stay competitive with the growing demand of Quartz watches on the market (much cheaper than mechanical movements to produce).


----------



## pauluspaolo (Feb 24, 2003)

mickyh7 said:


> From what I can gather the 7002 uses less parts in the movement than the 6309, and some of those parts are made of plastic !
> 
> They done this to try and stay competitive with the growing demand of Quartz watches on the market (much cheaper than mechanical movements to produce).


Ahh well you live & learn! If the 7002 is anything like the 7s26 movement (which I think is a development of the 7002) then it may be that the calendar wheel(s) are plastic & it may well have a plastic movement spacer. I suspect these are there for purely economic reasons (as plastic components will be cheaper to make/buy than metal ones). Despite the plastic parts I've never had a problem with my 7002 at all & I've had it many years now. I wouldn't say that the 6309 is superior to the 7002 just because of this - they're pretty much equal to each other & I think the decision to buy one or not - as with most things - boils down to aesthetics i.e. you'll buy whichever one you like the look of best!


----------



## mickyh7 (May 21, 2009)

I cant argue with that. I think your right about the cost involved between metal/plastic. Regards Mick.


----------



## bry1975 (Feb 6, 2004)

The 7002s are lovely when they do glow, found this online somewhere!


----------



## mickyh7 (May 21, 2009)

bry1975 said:


> The 7002s are lovely when they do glow, found this online somewhere!


Yes I agree, that's really nice.Mine has good lume,judging by the photo's.

Its like being a little kid again,waiting for the postman !


----------

