# Seiko Automatic 5 V Seiko Kinetic



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?


----------



## oubaas56

Because as autos they just tend to keep on running. Unlike the batteryless watch which every now & then has problems with it's capacitor (battery?)


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

oubaas56 said:


> Because as autos they just tend to keep on running. Unlike the batteryless watch which every now & then has problems with it's capacitor (battery?)


you mean the mechanism which converts the Kinetic energy into powering the Quartz, the Kinetic range are essentially non-mechanical automated quartz watches


----------



## mrteatime

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> non-mechanical automated quartz watches


yep


----------



## mrteatime

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?


im not sure there more desirable, just cheaper thats all....seiko 5 in its zillion guises can be bough from around the Â£30 pound mark depending on the model....

the '5' stands for...

Automatic

Day display

Date display

Water-resistant

Shockproof


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

mrteatime said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?
> 
> 
> 
> im not sure there more desirable, just cheaper thats all....seiko 5 in its zillion guises can be bough from around the Â£30 pound mark depending on the model....
> 
> the '5' stands for...
> 
> Automatic
> 
> Day display
> 
> Date display
> 
> Water-resistant
> 
> Shockproof
Click to expand...

all that for just 80 pounds, unbeliveable


----------



## BlueKnight

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?


As one of the watch people, can you please link me to the source of your information. Thanks.


----------



## Guest

The Seiko 5 watches are more consistent across the range, although a good Kintetic is preferable in my book any day.

Wouldn't part with this for the world


----------



## Angelis

oubaas56 said:


> Because as autos they just tend to keep on running. Unlike the batteryless watch which every now & then has problems with it's capacitor (battery?)


Thanks again for posting this thread!










Seiko 5s encompass a wide range of mechanical wonders, often in many configurations that last a lifetime, and for that matter, outlast kinetics, in most cases. Kinetics may lst a long time too, but good luck trying to replace the capacitor after it has died. There are so many Seiko 5 autos that are still running, after even 12-15 years of service. Replacement parts are not hard to come by for mechanicals.

However, I would love a kinetic...just for the joy of owning one.

Cheers,

Angelis


----------



## Angelis

BlueKnight said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?
> 
> 
> 
> As one of the watch people, can you please link me to the source of your information. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Here are some great referencing to the movement in the Seiko 5s:

http://www.thepurists.com/watch/features/8ohms/7s26/

http://people.timezone.com/msandler/Articles/Workbench/Seiko/Seiko7005.html

They are very detailed, enjoy!

Cheers,

Angelis


----------



## BlueKnight

Angelis said:


> BlueKnight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?
> 
> 
> 
> As one of the watch people, can you please link me to the source of your information. Thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here are some great referencing to the movement in the Seiko 5s:
> 
> http://www.thepurist...res/8ohms/7s26/
> 
> http://people.timezo.../Seiko7005.html
> 
> They are very detailed, enjoy!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Angelis
Click to expand...

Thanks mate. I was already familiar with those two links but does not cover the original question.


----------



## mrteatime

BlueKnight said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?
> 
> 
> 
> As one of the watch people, can you please link me to the source of your information. Thanks.
Click to expand...




> Thanks mate. I was already familiar with those two links but does not cover the original question.


i suppose its the fact that the seiko 5's were created for a price and have been around for donkeys.....for a minimum amount, you get all the features that you would expect from a higher priced (swiss?) watch at a time that people were'nt catering for that....im sure that seiko pretty much cleaned up when they first introduced this....

as for the kenetic range versus the seiko 5, im not sure that its a great comparission.....would it be fair to say that the kenetic is an evolution (or next step) from the quartz? Im pretty sure that the seiko model isn't the best out there, especially with the realiability of the capicitor, with a good few failures occuring....you don't seem to hear that many citizens failing...

but back to the originol question....i gues the fact that the '5's have been around since mac was a kid, and the fact that seiko keep churning them out (although with a lot of different movts over the years) and lots of different varients from divers to military to dress means that they have a bit of a head start.

Theres sellers on the bay that sell them new for around the Â£50 mark for one of there military, but some of the kenetics go for way more then that....so you makes your own mind up.....there certainly more desirable because of the price, and the fact that they cost nothing to run...repairs cost pennies, and replacements can be found easily and cheaply would support this.....the kenetics? well, to be honest, im not a fan....but i think that its the newer designs of the divers with the 'penis' hands that put me off.....

would i chance paying out Â£250 on a kenetic that i haven't handled? or Â£100 on a neo monster thats badged as a seiko 5? it would be the 5 everytime......i might not even take a chance on a pre-owned one unless i know that its had a capicitor change, and even then im still not sure.....

the thing is, its all relative.....i still think that japanese is better then swiss, but thats just my opinion....auto versus quartz? again, im sort of leaning towards the quartz.....but who really cares? Now this isn't meant to offend, but i really CGAFF about desirability in a watch, based on what others think or comment on...honestly im really not bothered.......but thats the thing aint it? its what you think, and not others...if you think its more desirable then fine...there will be ten people for or ten against......

get one of each....wear them both each for a week....write a review on here about both watches, and you still won't get the answer that your looking for 

a few more questions that you might want answers for as well....

*are rolex worth the money?*

*
*

*
is the ploprof ugly or stunning?*

*
*

*
will mac ever like a monster? (no scrub that....we all know the answer)*

*
*

*
does roy 'L' taylor really exist........?*

*
*

*
*we'll never get to the bottom of any of the above, as we'll all chip in, and we'll all offer different opinions.......


----------



## BlueKnight

mrteatime said:


> *are rolex worth the money?*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> is the ploprof ugly or stunning?*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> will mac ever like a monster? (no scrub that....we all know the answer)*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> does roy 'L' taylor really exist........?*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> *we'll never get to the bottom of any of the above, as we'll all chip in, and we'll all offer different opinions.......


Why does VW sell more cars than Porsche? Why does the Queen Mary II carry more more passengers than a shrimp boat? Why? Why? ( My head hurts...)


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

mrteatime said:


> BlueKnight said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Watch people can you explain why Seiko Automatic 5 are more desirable than the more expensive Kinetic range?
> 
> 
> 
> As one of the watch people, can you please link me to the source of your information. Thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks mate. I was already familiar with those two links but does not cover the original question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i suppose its the fact that the seiko 5's were created for a price and have been around for donkeys.....for a minimum amount, you get all the features that you would expect from a higher priced (swiss?) watch at a time that people were'nt catering for that....im sure that seiko pretty much cleaned up when they first introduced this....
> 
> as for the kenetic range versus the seiko 5, im not sure that its a great comparission.....would it be fair to say that the kenetic is an evolution (or next step) from the quartz? Im pretty sure that the seiko model isn't the best out there, especially with the realiability of the capicitor, with a good few failures occuring....you don't seem to hear that many citizens failing...
> 
> but back to the originol question....i gues the fact that the '5's have been around since mac was a kid, and the fact that seiko keep churning them out (although with a lot of different movts over the years) and lots of different varients from divers to military to dress means that they have a bit of a head start.
> 
> Theres sellers on the bay that sell them new for around the Â£50 mark for one of there military, but some of the kenetics go for way more then that....so you makes your own mind up.....there certainly more desirable because of the price, and the fact that they cost nothing to run...repairs cost pennies, and replacements can be found easily and cheaply would support this.....the kenetics? well, to be honest, im not a fan....but i think that its the newer designs of the divers with the 'penis' hands that put me off.....
> 
> would i chance paying out Â£250 on a kenetic that i haven't handled? or Â£100 on a neo monster thats badged as a seiko 5? it would be the 5 everytime......i might not even take a chance on a pre-owned one unless i know that its had a capicitor change, and even then im still not sure.....
> 
> the thing is, its all relative.....i still think that japanese is better then swiss, but thats just my opinion....auto versus quartz? again, im sort of leaning towards the quartz.....but who really cares? Now this isn't meant to offend, but i really CGAFF about desirability in a watch, based on what others think or comment on...honestly im really not bothered.......but thats the thing aint it? its what you think, and not others...if you think its more desirable then fine...there will be ten people for or ten against......
> 
> get one of each....wear them both each for a week....write a review on here about both watches, and you still won't get the answer that your looking for
> 
> a few more questions that you might want answers for as well....
> 
> *are rolex worth the money? <One can only tell after you've adequaltely used it for yonks or used it enough and sold it on for decent price, if *
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> it;s stolen or broken, you're fooked*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> is the ploprof ugly or stunning? <Ugly>*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> *
> *
Click to expand...

*
*

*
*

*
Interesting post, seems you lean toward practicality in watches, no bad thing, each to his own*

*
*

*
oh and the Proplof and Orange Monster are horrid looking watches :yucky:*


----------



## gchampi2

I wouldn't say that a 5 is any more or less desirable than a Kinetic as a watch, but I would say that an auto 5 is possibly more reliable than a Kinetic over the long term (15-20years).

The Kinetic movement has an inbuilt weakness, in that it uses a capacitor as its power store. Capacitors do degrade over time, and do lose their ability to store a charge when repeatedly cycled from minimum charge to full charge. Eventually, this leads to the watch stopping due to the cap being unable to power the rest of the mechanism. This isn't really a problem if there is a readily available supply of replacement caps and repairers familiar with fitting them, but if that supply isn't there you have a problem. For a manufacturer like Seiko however, this is not so much of a problem. The term is "built in obsolesence". After all, if they sell you a watch, and after 5-10years(or longer) it stops working, that's another opportunity to sell you another watch. Even more so, if the cost to repair the original watch is near to or more than the cost of a new replacement...

The Auto 5, otoh, being a mechanical watch is, in essence, infinitely repairable. With regular maintenance, a mechanical watch can last centuries. That said, a mechanical watch runs down a lot faster than a kinetic, so unless it is worn daily (or kept on a winder - more expense) it will need to be reset more often. This isn't a problem for the average WIS, but for the average 'Joe Public' this can be an annoyance.

As to the OP's question about Seiko5 Vs. Seiko Kinetic, I think it depends on who you ask and where you ask. On a watch forum, the 5 will probably come out on top, purely due to the fact that the majority of "watch forumites" tend to favour mechanical/auto watches. On a more general 'lifestyle/fashion' forum, the Kinetic would probably win because the posters on such a forum would be less interested in the internal mechanisim, and would be more interested in the looks/reliability/convenience of the watch.

Just my thoughts on the matter... G


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

gchampi2 said:


> That said, a mechanical watch runs down a lot faster than a kinetic, so unless it is worn daily (or kept on a winder - more expense) it will need to be reset more often. This isn't a problem for the average WIS, but for the average 'Joe Public' this can be an annoyance.


you've hit on something here, I haven't thought of, how much is the power reserve on a Kinetic?

more than 50 hours?


----------



## gchampi2

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> gchampi2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That said, a mechanical watch runs down a lot faster than a kinetic, so unless it is worn daily (or kept on a winder - more expense) it will need to be reset more often. This isn't a problem for the average WIS, but for the average 'Joe Public' this can be an annoyance.
> 
> 
> 
> you've hit on something here, I haven't thought of, how much is the power reserve on a Kinetic?
> 
> more than 50 hours?
Click to expand...

I think it varies depending on the particular model. I have seen some advertised that have a 'hibernation' mode where after an amount of time (48hrs, iirc) without any movement the watch stops powering the hands but still keeps track of the time/date. When you put on the watch again, the hands automatically reset to the correct time/date. Supposedly the watch can be left for several months unused, but still keep track of the time...

... G


----------



## gchampi2

gchampi2 said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gchampi2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That said, a mechanical watch runs down a lot faster than a kinetic, so unless it is worn daily (or kept on a winder - more expense) it will need to be reset more often. This isn't a problem for the average WIS, but for the average 'Joe Public' this can be an annoyance.
> 
> 
> 
> you've hit on something here, I haven't thought of, how much is the power reserve on a Kinetic?
> 
> more than 50 hours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it varies depending on the particular model. I have seen some advertised that have a 'hibernation' mode where after an amount of time (48hrs, iirc) without any movement the watch stops powering the hands but still keeps track of the time/date. When you put on the watch again, the hands automatically reset to the correct time/date. Supposedly the watch can be left for several months unused, but still keep track of the time...
> 
> ... G
Click to expand...

Kinetic Auto Relay. See here;- http://www.seiko.co.uk/technology/kinetic/kineticautorelay

... G


----------



## BlueKnight

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> Interesting post, seems you lean toward practicality in watches, no bad thing, each to his own


Yes, interesting indeed. I still would like to know the source of your information if you don't mind. You seem to be in possession of o lot of interesting data and information since your arrival that requires corroborating for the benefit of the Forum members.

Speaking of questions, how come you don't participate in the week-end threads. We would love to see your watches in their natural habitat especially that great Oris you were going to purchase with your next paycheck?


----------



## Angelis

gchampi2 said:


> I wouldn't say that a 5 is any more or less desirable than a Kinetic as a watch, but I would say that an auto 5 is possibly more reliable than a Kinetic over the long term (15-20years).
> 
> The Kinetic movement has an inbuilt weakness, in that it uses a capacitor as its power store. Capacitors do degrade over time, and do lose their ability to store a charge when repeatedly cycled from minimum charge to full charge. Eventually, this leads to the watch stopping due to the cap being unable to power the rest of the mechanism. This isn't really a problem if there is a readily available supply of replacement caps and repairers familiar with fitting them, but if that supply isn't there you have a problem. For a manufacturer like Seiko however, this is not so much of a problem. The term is "built in obsolesence". After all, if they sell you a watch, and after 5-10years(or longer) it stops working, that's another opportunity to sell you another watch. Even more so, if the cost to repair the original watch is near to or more than the cost of a new replacement...
> 
> The Auto 5, otoh, being a mechanical watch is, in essence, infinitely repairable. With regular maintenance, a mechanical watch can last centuries. That said, a mechanical watch runs down a lot faster than a kinetic, so unless it is worn daily (or kept on a winder - more expense) it will need to be reset more often. This isn't a problem for the average WIS, but for the average 'Joe Public' this can be an annoyance.
> 
> As to the OP's question about Seiko5 Vs. Seiko Kinetic, I think it depends on who you ask and where you ask. On a watch forum, the 5 will probably come out on top, purely due to the fact that the majority of "watch forumites" tend to favour mechanical/auto watches. On a more general 'lifestyle/fashion' forum, the Kinetic would probably win because the posters on such a forum would be less interested in the internal mechanisim, and would be more interested in the looks/reliability/convenience of the watch.
> 
> Just my thoughts on the matter... G


I wholeheartedly agree with you, and I could not have said it better myself!

I posted these links for the express pupose of covering details re mechanicals that lead one to see why mechanicals last so long, and often outlast kinetics:

http://www.thepurist...res/8ohms/7s26/

http://people.timezo.../Seiko7005.html

Cheers,

Angelis


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

> I think it varies depending on the particular model. I have seen some advertised that have a 'hibernation' mode where after an amount of time (48hrs, iirc) without any movement the watch stops powering the hands but still keeps track of the time/date. When you put on the watch again, the hands automatically reset to the correct time/date. Supposedly the watch can be left for several months unused, but still keep track of the time...
> 
> ... G


yeap, some of the basic Kinetc Models, in addition to the crown have a pusher in the 2 O'clock position

could this be for a quick reset to the actual time?

so what you're saying it actually has a sort of computer RTC in it


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

BlueKnight said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting post, seems you lean toward practicality in watches, no bad thing, each to his own
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, interesting indeed. I still would like to know the source of your information if you don't mind. You seem to be in possession of o lot of interesting data and information since your arrival that requires corroborating for the benefit of the Forum members.
> 
> Speaking of questions, how come you don't participate in the week-end threads. We would love to see your watches in their natural habitat especially that great Oris you were going to purchase with your next paycheck?
Click to expand...

If you are referring to why I think Auto 5's are more well liked, it's what I perceive, If you are referring to anything else, then I fail to understand.

Unfortunately I cannot do the Oris this month as I've needed blasted dental work the needed urgent attention and bill is outrageous.

Weekend Threads?, I don't know, I just come on here when I can because although I've worn watches all my life, I don't really have much knowledge and desire to know more.


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

As for the Photo's of my watches, I have taken them, as well as I can though it was indoors in my room, not really great.

The Idea of the time it will take to get the Pics onto the computer crop and cut then upload them to photobucket is not filling me with glee

hopefully it won't take A\L to get it done as there are so many things to do


----------



## mrteatime

> *I have taken them, as well as I can though it was indoors in my room*


:bag:


----------



## BlueKnight

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> As for the Photo's of my watches, I have taken them, as well as I can though it was indoors in my room, not really great.
> 
> The Idea of the time it will take to get the Pics onto the computer crop and cut then upload them to photobucket is not filling me with glee
> 
> hopefully it won't take A\L to get it done as there are so many things to do


Hey, that shouldn't be too hard. You have made 218 posts in a short time. You took the time to nic a whole bunch of pictures and quotes from the net so obviously you should have the time to post one of your own, right?

This is the week-end and you are posting. So..Whazzzup?


----------



## mrteatime

BlueKnight said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for the Photo's of my watches, I have taken them, as well as I can though it was indoors in my room, not really great.
> 
> The Idea of the time it will take to get the Pics onto the computer crop and cut then upload them to photobucket is not filling me with glee
> 
> hopefully it won't take A\L to get it done as there are so many things to do
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, that shouldn't be too hard. You have made 218 posts in a short time. You took the time to nic a whole bunch of pictures and quotes from the net so obviously you should have the time to post one of your own, right?
> 
> This is the week-end and you are posting. So..Whazzzup?
Click to expand...

scary movie whatttttttssssss uuuuuupppppp


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

BlueKnight said:


> You took the time to nic a whole bunch of ... quotes from the net


Elaborate?


----------



## BlueKnight

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> Elaborate?


Elaborate? Okay, since you're the one asking.

You are a fake. You have been blowing bubbles up our rear ends since you joined. You have no substance. The only thing I believe about you, is your interest in fiction because that's what you are. As a matter of fact, you could be a banned member back under another pseudonym .

You are just one of those internet Pinocchios polluting the web.

But being a gentleman, I will accept any sort of proof sent to me via PM. If I am wrong, I am man enough to publicly apologize. Deal?


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

BlueKnight said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate?
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate? Okay, since you're the one asking.
> 
> You are a fake. You have been blowing bubbles up our rear ends since you joined. You have no substance. The only thing I believe about you, is your interest in fiction because that's what you are. As a matter of fact, you could be a banned member back under another pseudonym .
> 
> You are just one of those internet Pinocchios polluting the web.
> 
> But being a gentleman, I will accept any sort of proof sent to me via PM. If I am wrong, I am man enough to publicly apologize. Deal?
Click to expand...

Here's what I suggest, You are obviously trying to bait me, I am genuine, if you need photograhpic evidence for me to proove that at the snap of your finger then you can go hang.

You obviously have a bee in your bonnett from what I said after massively overreacting to that jokey post I made about Wristwaches v Mobilephones

I suggest just ignoring me and I'll ignore you for the health of this forum if you wish from now on. for this I'm willing.

I suggest easing up on the drink and lying down for a bit


----------



## Chromejob

Angelis said:


> ... There are so many Seiko 5 autos that are still running, after even 12-15 years of service. Replacement parts are not hard to come by for mechanicals...


That got a good laugh out of my 1980 Seiko 5. "15 years ... kids!"


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

David Spalding said:


> Angelis said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... There are so many Seiko 5 autos that are still running, after even 12-15 years of service. Replacement parts are not hard to come by for mechanicals...
> 
> 
> 
> That got a good laugh out of my 1980 Seiko 5. "15 years ... kids!"
Click to expand...

I read on Wikipedia that Seiko Automatic mechanism are thought by some/many (can't remember which) to be as good as Rolex's, anyone agree?


----------



## BlueKnight

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> Here's what I suggest, You are obviously trying to bait me, I am genuine, if you need photograhpic evidence for me to proove that at the snap of your finger then you can go hang.
> 
> 
> 
> You are just a fecking little troll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously have a bee in your bonnett from what I said after massively overreacting to that jokey post I made about Wristwaches v Mobilephones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No idea what you're talking about. Did I participate?...NOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest just ignoring me and I'll ignore you for the health of this forum if you wish from now on. for this I'm willing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will not ignore you. For the health of this Forum, I suggest you disappear.
Click to expand...


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

BlueKnight said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's what I suggest, You are obviously trying to bait me, I am genuine, if you need photograhpic evidence for me to proove that at the snap of your finger then you can go hang.
> 
> 
> 
> You are just a fecking little troll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously have a bee in your bonnett from what I said after massively overreacting to that jokey post I made about Wristwaches v Mobilephones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No idea what you're talking about. Did I participate?...NOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest just ignoring me and I'll ignore you for the health of this forum if you wish from now on. for this I'm willing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will not ignore you. For the health of this Forum, I suggest you disappear.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Admin, Help needed here please!


----------



## BlueKnight

Yes, Admin. Lets help Suzy and her little lies.


----------



## mrteatime

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> I read on Wikipedia that Seiko Automatic mechanism are thought by some/many (can't remember which) to be as good as Rolex's, anyone agree?


theres a couple of seiko movts that could be considered an equal to the rolex.....but there a looooooong way off a seiko 5 movt


----------



## Thus Spoke Zarathustra

mrteatime said:


> Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:
> 
> 
> 
> I read on Wikipedia that Seiko Automatic mechanism are thought by some/many (can't remember which) to be as good as Rolex's, anyone agree?
> 
> 
> 
> theres a couple of seiko movts that could be considered an equal to the rolex.....but there a looooooong way off a seiko 5 movt
Click to expand...

I see, Maybe Spring Drive


----------



## Angelis

I would like to just jump into this amazing debate.

I own a cherry red Seiko S-Wave from 1999. It was my daily watch, and is my watch I wear at least once or twice a week now. It has been running wonderfully for 11 years now...as it just celebrated its 11th birthday....and I love it. My other S-Waves are 13 years old, and they are all running, never having been opened, nor serviced.

*BUT FOR GOD SAKES PEOPLE...IT'S A 7S26A FROM 1999 THAT HAS RUN STRAIGHT FOR 11 YEARS WITHOUT EVER HAVING BEEN OPENED, NOR EVER SERVICED!*

*
*

Why would I spend thousands and thousands on a Rolex? I'll buy hundreds of Seikos with that money!

Now, without further adieu, here's my 11-year-old cherry red Seiko S-Wave.





































Cheers,

Angelis


----------



## Chromejob

I've handled a couple Kinetics ... meh. Extra button that only does one thing, and (on the model I played with, WITH the instructions in hand) the "power meter" second hand that you have to operate at the top of the minute. A watch is more than just features and glitz. It's DESIGN, elegance, function, utility, style, appropriateness to need. I think the Kinetic is just another way of powering a quartz movement.

I don't know why this thread even is. Are we once again trying to satisfy someone's curiosity or penchant for reviving an age old question: *which is better?* Which? ... the ones we choose to wear.

Mod ... check IPs please.


----------



## mrteatime

David Spalding said:


> Mod ... check IPs please.


great minds think alike


----------



## Guest

My Kinetic has the li-ion battery upgrade (which I did myself ) and the power meter can be activated with the second hand at any position on the dial.

With the old capacitor a 30 second sweep was supposed to indicate approximately three months of power reserve.

With the new rechargeable battery I have been told by the supplier that this will probably mean more like six months.

In addition to being a beautiful and practical 200m diving watch, it's extremely accurate, and feels quite characterful as you feel the charging weight moving around as you turn your wrist.

I do not wish to insult Seiko 5 watches, as I've seen a great many which looked very attractive, although I honestly think that a good kinetic is much more of a current watch ...no pun intended.


----------



## mrteatime

Om_nom_nom_Watches! said:


> My Kinetic has the li-ion battery upgrade (which I did myself ) and the power meter can be activated with the second hand at any position on the dial.
> 
> With the old capacitor a 30 second sweep was supposed to indicate approximately three months of power reserve.
> 
> With the new rechargeable battery I have been told by the supplier that this will probably mean more like six months.
> 
> In addition to being a beautiful and practical 200m diving watch, it's extremely accurate, and feels quite characterful as you feel the charging weight moving around as you turn your wrist.
> 
> I do not wish to insult Seiko 5 watches, as I've seen a great many which looked very attractive, although I honestly think that a good kinetic is much more of a current watch ...no pun intended.


its all about opinions mate......and yours is as valid as the next mans......


----------



## Chromejob

Thus Spoke Zarathustra said:


> I read on Wikipedia that Seiko Automatic mechanism are thought by some/many (can't remember which) to be as good as Rolex's, anyone agree?


Weasel words, and should have been edited out right quick.



Om_nom_nom_Watches! said:


> My Kinetic has the li-ion battery upgrade (which I did myself ) and the power meter can be activated with the second hand at any position on the dial....


You're right. I downloaded and reread the instructions, they "recommend" doing it at the 12 o'clock for ease of reading. So depending on where t'is when pressy the buttony, it jumps ahead and freezes to indicate reserve? Sounds complex. Must be why I like the Kinetics that don't have that button at all.

This weekend I looked at Kinetics, and see they have some GMT models (SUN005, -007, -009, -010 IIRC) which are rather neat, with an independent 24H hand you "set 'n forget." I'm even tempted by the black "Ion" model for the bargain price of US$188.... Damned temptation, get behind me,...


----------



## sam.

Hi, i have a Seiko 5,and i am really happy with it, i like the auto movement,i also like the Kinetic,i have often wondered if the second hand on a Kinetic ticks like a quarts watch, or sweeps/ticks like an auto or manual? :umnik2:


----------



## The Canon Man

If you're tempted to add a Kenetic to you're collection, and don't want to spend too much, Argos have some Pulsar badged ones for about Â£70, not bad looking either, choice of strap or bracelets.


----------



## 7ygixop

In my opinion I think it is mostly a matter of preference and I don't think that one is considerably better than the other.

Personally I like the design better of the kinetic watches but I like the see-through backs of the Seiko 5 watches and the fact that they are automatic. I think the kinetic watches seem to be a little more expensive.


----------



## pauluspaolo

I've never really been a fan of the kinetics (the Swiss made a similar movement called the auto-quartz which is a better name I think) but my fiance bought me two recently & I've been seriously impressed with them. Both are different versions of the same watch (200m diver); both are fantastically well built for watches that cost under/around Â£200. Both keep excellent time - better than any automatic Seiko 5 ever will - I don't really want to start anything but they use a well made modern quartz movement so they WILL be more accurate. Both - when fully charged - will run for 6 months so if you fancy a change then chances are the watch will still be running (most auto's run for approx 40 hours then stop). I'm probably the only one but I find the power reserve function useful & I fail to see what the big deal/problem is with pressing a button & watching how far the second hand moves :blink: You're all interested in watches (otherwise you wouldn't/shouldn't be on here), you all know that there are 60 seconds/minute, 60 minutes/hour so it's not rocket science is it :huh: Another useful feature is that before the watch runs down & conks out completely the second hand will move in 2 second steps to indicate that the charge is low - therefore it's probably best if you wear it for a couple of days to build the charge back up again - I think it's pretty cool - just as I think it's pretty cool that moving an automatic watch will keep that running as well.

I doubt that I'll ever go off automatic/mechanical watches completely (never say never) but I appreciate kinetics more than ever after having got these two divers - they're a quality watch no doubt about it :thumbup:


----------



## skyMAX08

I have a Seiko Kinetic 200m diver that from an AD it was at a very good price so could not resist its now my daily wearer and is a nice weighty piece which if anyone saw the Boschett Cave Dweller i got the other week will know i like my watches with some substance anyway here it is


----------

