# Seiko 5 and Rolex date just



## 1475lee (Mar 15, 2011)

I recently purchased a seiko snxj92 from eBay and I have a friend that owns a Rolex date just bi metal so I took a look at them side by side.
Now I know the rolex is made of real gold and has an fantastic movement but the 7s26 works just fine and the gold colour metal looks goldish, but remember one was £60 and the other £3500.










The dimensions are very close and they feel the same on wrist.










The braclets feel the same and are similar dimension.









The clasps feel the same quality to me.










I'm sure the rolex is far more accurate but for 60 quid I'm really happy with the seiko.
But I do love that rolex though.
Here's some more pics


----------



## vinn (Jun 14, 2015)

i prefure the seiko just on principle. BUT; now (i learned recently here) it is faked in India ! let us put one next to the above two for our info. vin


----------



## ong (Jul 31, 2008)

I used to have a Seiko 5 with the same style but in steel. Was always getting mistaken for a datejust back in the 80s.

Wish I'd kept it but after 15 years I bought another Seiko and the lookalike went to a charity shop.


----------



## al_kaholik (May 22, 2018)

Not bad! It does a good imitation job. I'm not a fan of gold watches but they both look good to me. Each with its place


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

Until this morning I had the Citizen Eagle 7 equivalent. Now on its way to a new home.


----------



## Rotundus (May 7, 2012)

cheap swiss rubbish !

the Seiko has a day complication too (admittedly for the feeble minded).


----------



## Deano3 (Dec 28, 2017)

Good little comparison  i like the seiko 

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk


----------



## deano1956 (Jan 27, 2016)

thats a interesting comparison, especially side by side with the good images, does make you wonder ! :yes: deano


----------



## Nigelp (Jan 28, 2015)

its a good comparison, but it shows there is no comparison, though given the price there shouldn't be, both are nice. I never realised how differently Rolex Jubilee actually was to all the pretends.


----------



## deano1956 (Jan 27, 2016)

Nigelp said:


> its a good comparison, but it shows there is no comparison, though given the price there shouldn't be, both are nice. I never realised how differently Rolex Jubilee actually was to all the pretends.


 really nigel, I have a date just and I think the pictures show how close visually they are, in fact I think the locking part of the clasp( with the logos on) the Seiko looks better , in real life I am sure the difference is obvious ?

don't know

deano


----------



## Nigelp (Jan 28, 2015)

deano1956 said:


> really nigel, I have a date just and I think the pictures show how close visually they are, in fact I think the locking part of the clasp( with the logos on) the Seiko looks better , in real life I am sure the difference is obvious ?
> 
> don't know
> 
> deano


 here

[IMG alt="20190618-080901.jpg" data-ratio="114.78"]https://i.postimg.cc/g0YChDt3/20190618-080901.jpg[/IMG]

its that shortness of garland in the centres against the elongation in the seiko...

its that shortness of garland in the centres against the elongation in the seiko...

its that shortness of garland in the centres against the elongation in the seiko...


----------



## deano1956 (Jan 27, 2016)

Nigelp said:


> here
> 
> [IMG alt="20190618-080901.jpg" data-ratio="114.78"]https://i.postimg.cc/g0YChDt3/20190618-080901.jpg[/IMG]


 I see a lot more stretch on the jubilee rollie bracelet :biggrin:

deano


----------



## Nigelp (Jan 28, 2015)

sorry for the repetition but no proper garland no jubilee?



deano1956 said:


> I see a lot more stretch on the jubilee rollie bracelet :biggrin:
> 
> deano


 me too! lol

no in fairness might aswell have the seiko deano...you got ripped off matey!

live and learn as my gran would say.



deano1956 said:


> in real life I am sure the difference is obvious ?


 might not be get the seiko and see?

@BondandBigM we need expert witness.

Can you give us an objective cf of say Urchin v sub?


----------



## longplay (Sep 27, 2017)

As they saying goes


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

Nigelp said:


> here
> 
> [IMG alt="20190618-080901.jpg" data-ratio="114.78"]https://i.postimg.cc/g0YChDt3/20190618-080901.jpg[/IMG]
> 
> ...


 I agree, the Seiko bracelet does look much better, but for how long?

The datejust narrowly edges the seiko watch, by dint of the cyclops, but that's about it.


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

Jet Jetski said:


> I agree, the Seiko bracelet does look much better, but for how long?
> 
> The datejust narrowly edges the seiko watch, by dint of the cyclops, but that's about it.


 Never understood the "cyclops" acceptance. If you source the history you will understand that you are buying into the desirability of a watch designed around a feeble sighted relation of a watch engineer.... !?!? Oh the Glamour !!! ..... I wonder if she wore suspenders or holdups !?!?


----------



## AlexC1981 (Jul 26, 2009)

My brother was given the quartz Rotary version for his 18th birthday nearly 30 years ago. It's still mint in box, never worn with the receipt from Ratners! I'll have to get a photo of it up at some point for this thread.


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> Never understood the "cyclops" acceptance. If you source the history you will understand that you are buying into the desirability of a watch designed around a feeble sighted relation of a watch engineer.... !?!? Oh the Glamour !!! ..... I wonder if she wore suspenders or holdups !?!?


 Not at all, I fit Cyclops routinely and have been asked to do so by my friends. They are brilliant and I know for a fact there are many many watch wearers who can't see the date clearly, certainly after the age of about fifty. I bought my tag at 30 long before I needed specs and my eyes were certainly not feeble, it's an obvious improvement to the legibility of the date.

History has nothing to do with it, who cares who invented the pie barm-cake? Or black pudding? Exactly.

Genius


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

Jet Jetski said:


> Not at all, I fit Cyclops routinely and have been asked to do so by my friends. They are brilliant and I know for a fact there are many many watch wearers who can't see the date clearly, certainly after the age of about fifty. I bought my tag at 30 long before I needed specs and my eyes were certainly not feeble, it's an obvious improvement to the legibility of the date.
> 
> History has nothing to do with it, who cares who invented the pie barm-cake? Or black pudding? Exactly.
> 
> Genius


 You can buy a watch with a big date complication and window..... :thumbsup:


----------



## ZenArcade (Aug 17, 2016)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> You can buy a watch with a big date complication and window..... :thumbsup:


 Problem is a big date complication takes up too much of the dial. Speaking as someone who often prefers to buy a watch without a date complication at all because I so rarely use them it is only when wearing my oysterdate I notice how useful the cyclops date is. Very easy to see the date at a glance and the date function doesnt have to take up too much space of the dial to be easily read.

Interesting point on the date just. I had a vintage Tudor one, Rolex case but ETA movement. The Tudor was about £5 - £600 as I remember, a date just at the time (Both bi-metal) about 3K maybe 2.5 without a bracelet. Hell of a mark up for a watch movement.


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> You can buy a watch with a big date complication and window..... :thumbsup:


 I did that for those 'occasions' when a carbuncle might be unseemly.










Remind me to take a better picture!


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

ZenArcade said:


> Problem is a big date complication takes up too much of the dial. Speaking as someone who often prefers to buy a watch without a date complication at all because I so rarely use them it is only when wearing my oysterdate I notice how useful the cyclops date is. Very easy to see the date at a glance and the date function doesnt have to take up too much space of the dial to be easily read.
> 
> Interesting point on the date just. I had a vintage Tudor one, Rolex case but ETA movement. The Tudor was about £5 - £600 as I remember, a date just at the time (Both bi-metal) about 3K maybe 2.5 without a bracelet. Hell of a mark up for a watch movement.


 I am amazed how little choice there is for no-date watches.

For instance a 39mm no date version of the Omega Aquaterra would fly off the shelves given the unavailability of Rolex Oyster Peps....


----------



## WRENCH (Jun 20, 2016)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> I am amazed how little choice there is for no-date watches.
> 
> For instance a 39mm no date version of the Omega Aquaterra would fly off the shelves given the unavailability of Rolex Oyster Peps....


 I'd agree with that.

Also, this










Orient ' president" seems a tad overpriced @£350, when other models in their range with the same day/date function, sell at about a third of the cost. Perhaps 'lookie likeie' ads value.


----------



## Nigelp (Jan 28, 2015)

Jet Jetski said:


> I agree, the Seiko bracelet does look much better, but for how long?
> 
> The datejust narrowly edges the seiko watch, by dint of the cyclops, but that's about it.


 Shirley not :thumbsup: mums the word. Its actually a great gallery and some amazing people. Bunny bunkers love that name.


----------



## IAmATeaf (Dec 4, 2011)

Seeing the two together it's quite remarkable how they are so similar yet so different. They lugs on the Seiko look longer but lug to lug look to be the same, the lugs look longer on the Seiko simply due to the case shape.

I was never a fan of the cyclops, in fact hated it but I've got a DJ without a cyclops and having recently seen a DJ with now wish mine had it but without the cyclops it flies under the radar.


----------



## LongBike (Nov 29, 2016)

vinn said:


> i prefure the seiko just on principle. BUT; now (i learned recently here) it is faked in India ! let us put one next to the above two for our info. vin


 Note really all true ...because Seiko did buy out owned this company and this was their Watch products.


----------

