# Mirage Ii



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

Hi

I bought the Mirage II that Roy had for sale on the last update & as this is my first Mirage chrono' I can't believe what fantastic value these watches are.

I had been deliberating over a III (& thanks to all those who answered my questions about them) but when I saw this with it's acrylic crystal & screwed lugs I had to have it.

This watch is so cooool, from the little zizzing noises the rotor makes to the way it seems to wiggle on your arm as if it's alive when the rotor spins.







This is definitely a keeper.

Does anyone know when O&W stopped making this model & brought out the Mirage III ? Also what is the difference between the Mirage I & II, is it just the hands ?

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

The only difference between the MkI and II is the hands Dave,


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

That's cool cheers Roy.

Do you know when O&W stopped making the Mirage II & introduced the III ? I'm just interested to know as it'll help date mine.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

I think the Mirage III has been out for about 18 months or so.


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

Cheers Roy.

Dave


----------



## COMSAT (Nov 18, 2005)

Hi, I was wondering what is the differernce between the

(i) Mirage Mk III C Chronograph

and the

(ii) Mirage Mk III B Chronograph

which I saw on the internet.

?? CAN ANYBODY ENLIGHTEN ME ??

Thanks in advance


----------



## DaveE (Feb 24, 2003)

On another site, I have seen a Mirage II with day/date and the Mirage I with date only, so maybe there are other differences.

I agree that they are fantastic value. Roy's price on the Mirage II was very good.

I've been toying with the idea of a Mirage III; with its sapphire crystal it is much better value for money than the equivalent Sinn 103 ST which has a high domed acrylic crystal.

Ta

Dave


----------



## Justin (Oct 6, 2003)

DaveE said:


> I've been toying with the idea of a Mirage III; with its sapphire crystal it is much better value for money than the equivalent Sinn 103 ST which has a high domed acrylic crystal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Mirage III is not in the same league as the Sinn 103.


----------



## ESL (Jan 27, 2004)

In what way Justin?


----------



## nickk (Jul 20, 2005)

ESL said:


> In what way Justin?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good question - superficially they are remarkably similar. I'd dearly love to see a side-by-side review (although I'd be quite surprised if anyone had actually bought one of each?). If anyone has seen such an article - or alternatively would care to lend me their 103, and I'll write one







...

If the 103 is in a different league it must be VERY good indeed Justin?

Nick


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

Justin said:


> The Mirage III is not in the same league as the Sinn 103.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I must admit Justin I genuinely would like to know why you feel it's better ?

I really like Sinn watches but to say the 103 is in a different league to the O&W Mirage III does seem to be stretching things a bit.

I don't doubt that the Sinn is a fine watch but it is from what I can see, more expensive than the O&W, shares a Valjoux 7750 movement & on some models lacks the Sapphire Crystal which the Mirage III has.

Also if the Sinn watches I have seen have been representative, I don't really think the Sinn is vastly better in terms of fit & finish (if at all) both having looked good.

I'm not saying that the O&W is better than the Sinn, more that I can't really see how the Sinn is in a different league to the O&W ?

Cheers

Dave


----------



## DaveE (Feb 24, 2003)

ETCHY said:


> Justin said:
> 
> 
> > The Mirage III is not in the same league as the Sinn 103.
> ...


I too am intigued how the Sinn can be in a different league to the O&W. For Â£495 you get O&W Mirage Mk III with sapphire crystal. For the same amount of money, you get a Sinn 103 ST with acrylic crystal. You have to pay much more than Â£495 to get a Sinn 103 with a sapphire crystal. Furthermore, the Sinn 103 ST has a non-ratchet bezel, whereas the O&W has a ratchet bezel. Moreover, the Sinnhas a domed crystal giving a total thickness of 17mm whereas the O&W is 14mm thick. I know whcih I'd rather have for the money

Ta

Dave


----------



## Justin (Oct 6, 2003)

I have owned a Sinn 103 ST SA and still own a Mirage 3. I think if you ask for other opinions of people who have owned both brands they will pretty much tell you the same thing. Most people who don't seem to understand have only seen internet pictures.

You are correct about the height as that was the reason I sold my 103. To solve this, I personally would buy the standard 103 and fit a Â£35 domed (not flat as in the Mirage) saphire crystal. The WR is 200m and why would a pilot need a ratcheting bezel? You would then have a much better watch for not much more money.

Don't forget, this is all IMHO.

Cheers,

Justin.


----------



## DaveE (Feb 24, 2003)

Justin said:


> I have owned a Sinn 103 ST SA and still own a Mirage 3. I think if you ask for other opinions of people who have owned both brands they will pretty much tell you the same thing. Most people who don't seem to understand have only seen internet pictures.
> 
> You are correct about the height as that was the reason I sold my 103. To solve this, I personally would buy the standard 103 and fit a Â£35 domed (not flat as in the Mirage) saphire crystal. The WR is 200m and why would a pilot need a ratcheting bezel? You would then have a much better watch for not much more money.
> 
> ...


Thanks for clarifying that Justin. You are obviously in the ideal position to compare them having owned both. However, in your earlier message you merely asserted that the Sinn was in a different league rather than give any reasons for your opinion. Now we know why you think that.









thanks

Dave


----------



## nickk (Jul 20, 2005)

Justin said:


> The WR is 200m and why would a pilot need a ratcheting bezel?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


and why would a pilot need a WR of 200m...









Thanks Justin - sounds like you're the perfect man to write that comparison review...?

Nick


----------



## Justin (Oct 6, 2003)

Hey, that's no problem Nick. Although there isn't actually the word 'REVIEW' anywhere in my posts, I'll be happy to give you any advice you need on replica, parts bin put together watch manufacturers any time you like


----------



## nickk (Jul 20, 2005)

Justin said:


> Hey, that's no problem Nick. Although there isn't actually the word 'REVIEW' anywhere in my posts, I'll be happy to give you any advice you need on replica, parts bin put together watch manufacturers any time you like
> 
> 
> 
> ...


oooh - that's not a nice thing to say about Mr Wajs! I'm sure he prefers the term 'derivative', if not 'inspired-by'...










I'm thinking 'maybe I really should trade up to the Sinn', and then it occurred to me - what did you go for AFTER the 103?

cheers

Nick


----------



## Justin (Oct 6, 2003)

I now have a Sinn 256 on bracelet as my daily watch. It's a lot more subtle due to the size and beadblasted finish. Also, I have been converted to acrylic crystals. They add a lot of character to a watch so don't be put off by them.


----------



## nickk (Jul 20, 2005)

Justin said:


> I now have a Sinn 256 on bracelet as my daily watch. It's a lot more subtle due to the size and beadblasted finish. Also, I have been converted to acrylic crystals. They add a lot of character to a watch so don't be put off by them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


mmm - s'nice (although, ahem, I've only got pictures on the internet to go on...!)

Much more of a functional look too - like the beadblast finish, and I imagine the bracelet is the usual Sinn thing of beauty. Well worth a pic next time chronos come up on Friday Watch?

Shame it is about half the money again though. Oh well.

cheers

Nick


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

Justin said:


> Hey, that's no problem Nick. Although there isn't actually the word 'REVIEW' anywhere in my posts, I'll be happy to give you any advice you need on replica, parts bin put together watch manufacturers any time you like
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the input Justin whilst I personally still prefer the O&W as I think it's better value & more aesthetically pleasing, I do appreciate your view point.









However I don't quite get what you mean by the above quote from your earlier post ? If this relates to O&W surely now that so few watch brands don't make their own movements etc (I notice the Sinn 103 uses a Valjoux movement) that is a tag that could be applied to the vast majority of watches ?

I would have thought that the important part is that a watch looks good, works well, is nicely put together & offer good value (& if it does all that, isn't that enough ?) If you're going to limit yourself to those firms that make everything themselves (therefore not having to raid any parts- bins) it'll be a short list.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Justin (Oct 6, 2003)

> Shame it is about half the money again though. Oh well.


Nick, I got mine new with 2 year warranty for Â£549

Dave,

What I said was really meant as a light hearted comment, not a dig. I presume the best selling O&W diver's watch is the one that looks most like the Rolex Submariner and the best selling O&W chronograph is the one that looks almost the same as a Sinn 103. It is interesting that the Mirage 3 version I have has identical hands to the Sinn and I think this was the most popular, but this version is no longer available. Perhaps just a little too close to the original maybe.

All the best

Justin.


----------



## dapper (Jun 18, 2004)

Justin said:


> DaveE said:
> 
> 
> > I've been toying with the idea of a Mirage III; with its sapphire crystal it is much better value for money than the equivalent Sinn 103 ST which has a high domed acrylic crystal.
> ...


I think the dial design on the Sinn is more considered than the Mirage & all the visible numerals are intact


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

No worries Justin, I didn't take it as a dig I just wondered what you meant.

Cheers

Dave


----------

