# New To Poljot



## Andy Tims (Apr 13, 2008)

Just got this off TZ-UK & I just can not believe how good it is, for what I paid.










picture from previous owner (I'm crap at watch photography)

The case has a lovely bead blasted finish, the dial is clear, with good lume. If I was being really picky - I'd prefer the date window to be very slightly bigger & the date display to be white on black to match the sub-dials, but hey.

The watch is on a decent quality leather strap, it came in a nice leather official box, with the warranty booklet (plus the cardboard outer) and even the original S/S bracelet, which is also of good quality.

The price - well you guys guess, but it's by far & away the cheapest watch I've ever bought & it's not been off my wrist since I got it.

So my question is, are these things reliable & robust enough to stand up to a bit of stick? From the look & feel I'd guess yes, but looking for feed back from those with more experience.


----------



## chris l (Aug 5, 2005)

Andy Tims said:


> Just got this off TZ-UK & I just can not believe how good it is, for what I paid.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is it a 3133 movement?

If so I'm always gentle with mine, having had a couple fail when pushed hard... the later movement is reputed to be more robust. It may just be the age of mine.

They are amazingly good value though.


----------



## Nesima (Jul 10, 2005)

Bought my first Poljot this week.

Picked it up from the Post Office this morning.

Really pleased, came with wooden box, booklet all stamped up from a German Dealer.

Strela 23 Jewel Chronograph on a leather strap with clasp.

The Chrono buttons are a little more clunky than I had expected, but all hands reset

back precisely, seems to keep good time.

Exactly the same as this one: Item number: 330226931228

Splendid for the money.


----------



## Andy Tims (Apr 13, 2008)

chris l said:


> Is it a 3133 movement?


According to the booklet the movement is a 31681.

It is a manual wind, as opposed to auto, which would clearly have been nicer, but I'm not complaining. Possibly more robust as less to go wrong


----------

