Jump to content
  • Sign Up to reply and join the friendliest Watch Forum on the web. Stick around, get to 50 posts and gain access to your full profile and additional features such as a personal messaging system, chat room and the sales forum PLUS the chance to enter our regular giveaways.

Recommended Posts

This caught my eye yesterday in one of "our favourite" high street stores .

8063974-1490

Citizen NH8381-63L £199 reduced from RRP of £399.

This one, minus the interchangeable bracelet and "peli" case packaging, online, can be had from around £94, from an apparent RRP of £230.

nh8381-12l_1.jpg

So based on RRP, a pretty ordinary bracelet and a plastic box is worth £169 ? Also, the UK bricks and mortar example quotes a five year warranty, whereas the international online sellers quote a one year warranty.

As a matter of interest does anyone own one of these ? :thumbsup:

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This caught my eye yesterday in one of "our favourite" high street stores . Citizen NH8381-63L £199 reduced from RRP of £399. This one, minus the interchangeable bracelet and "peli" cas

I've one of those as well, it was described as "diver style" rather than a diver's watch when I bought it. Solid watch, seems well built which you expect from Citizen, easy to read etc.  

Just as an asides given a few of the older comments unlike COCS certification who are an independent third party testing facility where they put a manufacturers movement through a number of physical t

Just now, sabailand said:

No but i`d like to, thats one good looking watch, the blue strap looks great!

 

Just now, RWP said:

Very nice bargain.   High St Citizen warranty is five years.   Six registered online. :tongue:   I'd like to own one.

In all honesty I thought it was a pretty average watch, no screw down crown, and I found it really awkward to pull out for settling, and no hack function. It's had some decent reviews though.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WRENCH said:

 

In all honesty I thought it was a pretty average watch, no screw down crown, and I found it really awkward to pull out for settling, and no hack function. It's had some decent reviews though.

At 94 it's still good. Nice looker :)  Sounds like the same movement as the Bulova Sea Master.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am always tempted when I see Citizen or Seiko reduced in the various High Street jewellers I window shop at. I would prefer a proper diver though. If they were going for "the look" they might as well include a screw down crown and some water resistance...

Luckily for me I have a very strict habit now of not buying anything that's not on my wish-list and that currently only has three watches on it. I am sticking to it :sadwalk:   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

There certainly is a lot of bezel on there. :) But no screw down crown? What's the water resistance rating? :huh:

Still, a good diver for that price. Must be trying to clear some inventory for new stock.... 

Edited by Chromejob
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Chromejob said:

There certainly is a lot of bezel on there. :) But no screw down crown? What's the water resistance rating? :huh:

Still, a good diver for that price. Must be trying to clear some inventory for new stock.... 

100 meters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, WRENCH said:

100 meters.

That would make it a 'diver style' rather than a true diver which I think has to be rated to a minimum of 200m...also no screw down crown. Orca handset, though.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diving_watch

The above piece on Wiki is quite long, but very interesting, especially the bit near the end about water resistance and the table of what different depth markings mean.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe 100m is the minimum for ISO-6245 certification. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark#ISO_6425_divers'_watches_standard

There's a growing flamewar brewing over on Watchuseek about "diver's watches" and their claim to ISO certification.... One troll is being particularly persistent in his argumentative posts. 

I believe 100m is the minimum for ISO-6245 certification. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark#ISO_6425_divers'_watches_standard

There's a growing flamewar brewing over on Watchuseek about "diver's watches" and their claim to ISO certification.... One troll is being particularly persistent in his argumentative posts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had one of these a little while back, nice looking at a glance design etc but when it's in the hand you cant help thinking (well I did).....if only they'd just gone that little bit further and made it 200m with a screw crown.....and a few other little niggles, lens material and feel of the bezel rotating.... bit of a disappointment really, felt Citizen just missed out on making a great watch but cut corners, such a shame, I'm sure it could have been a very desirable watch if only for a few changes in quality,

Sure it would cost a bit more but it has such a cool design it could have been a modern classic if only the build quality was as good as say an skx

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Just as an asides given a few of the older comments unlike COCS certification who are an independent third party testing facility where they put a manufacturers movement through a number of physical tests and then based on the results of those tests issue a certificate ISO don't actually test watches or any other goods for that matter. It's only a Standard that if a manufacturer conforms to it they can then claim their product meets the particular ISO standard. 

"ISO standards have given us a layout of what needs to be done on every order. We know the standards that need to be met, and we have the tools in place to ensure quality, consistency, and safety. What we do, how we check for quality, and what's required of us is all laid out by ISO. 

ISO certification standards also help keep our products and services relevant. When the standards change, we change along with them. When we work with new customers, we send them our certification details so they know they can expect ISO standards be met"

"Remember, individuals cannot become ISO certified. Only businesses and organizations can. It's also worth noting that ISO doesn't provide the certification. Instead, certification is made possible through third party organizations" 

Any old Tom, Dick or Chinese Benny Hill can claim anything they like but unless it is backed up by proof from independent third party certification it's worthless. 

Edited by BondandBigM
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's something I have thought about as well, but I don't really think there is much difference.

COSC don't check every watch that rolls off the production line. And COSC is only really about time keeping. And only applies to Swiss made watches. Anyone ever hear of a watch fail? 

ISO is an international standard, designed to check the processes and standards in place to ensure a claim about a watch, by let's say, Bremont, for example, who now use ISO and in respect of divers watches, it's more than just about the timekeeping. 

ISO do undertake regular inspections, which I would assume include checking the time keeping of a particular watch, otherwise, I'm not actually sure how they could check that the processes they have approved to satisfy ISO standards, actually work. But it wouldn't surprise me if that wasn't the case. I am sure what they actually do will be in their bumph somewhere. 

And of course, there is a cost to using COSC and ISO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Caller. said:

It's something I have thought about as well, but I don't really think there is much difference.

COSC don't check every watch that rolls off the production line. And COSC is only really about time keeping. And only applies to Swiss made watches. Anyone ever hear of a watch fail? 

ISO is an international standard, designed to check the processes and standards in place to ensure a claim about a watch, by let's say, Bremont, for example, who now use ISO and in respect of divers watches, it's more than just about the timekeeping. 

ISO do undertake regular inspections, which I would assume include checking the time keeping of a particular watch, otherwise, I'm not actually sure how they could check that the processes they have approved to satisfy ISO standards, actually work. But it wouldn't surprise me if that wasn't the case. I am sure what they actually do will be in their bumph somewhere. 

And of course, there is a cost to using COSC and ISO. 

Totally the other way round! COSC is an independent body and each individual movement which is COSC certified is submitted to them  for testing and issued with a certificate. Presumably the movements which don't make the grade are either regulated until they are within tolerances, or used in a non-chronometer watch. ISO on the other hand are a body which just lay down sets of standards for organisations to work to and don't do certification at all. Industries where the ISO is used as a statutory framework will have their own regulatory bodies, and in other areas there are independent certifying bodies companies can use as a guarantee of compliance. In many areas though the ISO is a set of guidelines which people can just use and lay claim to with no more checks or policing than any other product or service claim under trading standards or similar legislation. That's why COSC watches generally don't come cheap, every watch incurs that testing and certification cost, whereas ISO the company basically pay a licence to use the standard.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Perlative Cernometer

Sorry, 2nd attempt. I posted the above by mistake (obviously!) and took too long to complete my reply (36 minutes I think). 

Are you saying that every single movement in a Swiss made watch is individually tested, thousands and thousands of them, when COSC certification is being sought and this is ongoing throughout the life of a particular model? That's quite a task. 

You explain ISO far better than I ever could and whilst I'm extremely cynical about it for things like office management processes, I can see benefits in technical areas. I wasn't aware there were areas where you could 'self-certificate', and would very much doubt that would apply to movements and other data related to watches. I know that a legitimate watch maker would do their own testing in any case, but they would still have to demonstrate to inspectors that they meet the set requirementents needed where the end result would be their version of COSC and inspections are an ongoing process. 

I await being corrected again! :biggrin:

 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Caller. said:

@Perlative Cernometer

Sorry, 2nd attempt. I posted the above by mistake (obviously!) and took too long to complete my reply (36 minutes I think). 

Are you saying that every single movement in a Swiss made watch is individually tested, thousands and thousands of them, when COSC certification is being sought and this is ongoing throughout the life of a particular model? That's quite a task. 

You explain ISO far better than I ever could and whilst I'm extremely cynical about it for things like office management processes, I can see benefits in technical areas. I wasn't aware there were areas where you could 'self-certificate', and would very much doubt that would apply to movements and other data related to watches. I know that a legitimate watch maker would do their own testing in any case, but they would still have to demonstrate to inspectors that they meet the set requirementents needed where the end result would be their version of COSC and inspections are an ongoing process. 

I await being corrected again! :biggrin:

 

ISO don’t have inspectors, they have auditors and turn up with a briefcase, essentially even in a manufacturing environment it’s little more than a paperwork exercise, they don’t actually test anything. It’s completely different to an independent third party testing facility like COSC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BondandBigM said:

ISO don’t have inspectors, they have auditors and turn up with a briefcase, essentially even in a manufacturing environment it’s little more than a paperwork exercise, they don’t actually test anything. It’s completely different to an independent third party testing facility like COSC.

Yes, I took note of what was written above and did add the caveat - as I know little of technical ISO inspections - that I might be wrong on the testing bit. My experience of an ISO inspection (yes I know they are 3rd party) was that they are a pain. But the point is that the processes that, let's say Bremont again, have in place, have to be sufficiently rigorous, or changed as advised or needed, to qualify for ISO 'certification'. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


My understanding is that only the movement is submitted for COSC certification (static tests), at a cost of roughly €100 per movement.

Many top tier manufacturers, Blancpain, PP, VC, IWC, etc, choose not to send their movements outside of their manufactory.  Many of these movements are regulated to a higher level than the COSC acceptance standard.

Interestingly, Blancpain have only ever submitted one movement for COSC certification, the calibre 64-1, which uses the ubiquitous Peseux 7001 as the base ebauche.

:thumbsup:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Caller. said:

@Perlative Cernometer

Sorry, 2nd attempt. I posted the above by mistake (obviously!) and took too long to complete my reply (36 minutes I think). 

Are you saying that every single movement in a Swiss made watch is individually tested, thousands and thousands of them, when COSC certification is being sought and this is ongoing throughout the life of a particular model? That's quite a task.

Yep. As I said that is why a chronometer is usually expensive and relatively speaking there aren't many of them.

On the ISO thing no, ISO themselves do not have auditors, inspectors, nothing like that. They are purely a body to lay out a set of standards to provide a standardised benchmark for people to work from. Plenty of people will have experienced inspections etc to check adherence to ISO standards but these are purely because they need it for local legislative reasons, or for membership of a trade body or similar and the inspections are done by government or trade officials or sub contractors, not by ISO themselves. I don't know why it would be a surprise that people can "self certify" - It's not about somebody independently inspecting stuff, it's about a manufacturer being able to specify the standards they have produced their goods to. Like most claims it's about whether you trust the company not to lie about their products and what happens if they are found out. You think all those "316L" stainless watches have an independent metallurgist testing their cases every so often? No, they just buy in stainless steel from someone they trust (or in the case of the less scrupulous Chinese makers just whoever is cheapest) and bang out their watches unless someone notices that they've been supplied chocolate instead. Take Rolex for example, the "superlative chronometer" thing they do is entirely internal, testing their watches to standards beyond COSC certification but people buy into it because they trust that for that sort of money they are going to take some extra time and trouble. Now having said that I don't know whether Swiss watch makers will have independent inspections or not because the Swiss do take their watchmaking standards very seriously but it will be the Swiss government mandating the checks, not "ISO" as such.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Perlative Cernometer said:

Yep. As I said that is why a chronometer is usually expensive and relatively speaking there aren't many of them.

On the ISO thing no, ISO themselves do not have auditors, inspectors, nothing like that. They are purely a body to lay out a set of standards to provide a standardised benchmark for people to work from. Plenty of people will have experienced inspections etc to check adherence to ISO standards but these are purely because they need it for local legislative reasons, or for membership of a trade body or similar and the inspections are done by government or trade officials or sub contractors, not by ISO themselves. I don't know why it would be a surprise that people can "self certify" - It's not about somebody independently inspecting stuff, it's about a manufacturer being able to specify the standards they have produced their goods to. Like most claims it's about whether you trust the company not to lie about their products and what happens if they are found out. You think all those "316L" stainless watches have an independent metallurgist testing their cases every so often? No, they just buy in stainless steel from someone they trust (or in the case of the less scrupulous Chinese makers just whoever is cheapest) and bang out their watches unless someone notices that they've been supplied chocolate instead. Take Rolex for example, the "superlative chronometer" thing they do is entirely internal, testing their watches to standards beyond COSC certification but people buy into it because they trust that for that sort of money they are going to take some extra time and trouble. Now having said that I don't know whether Swiss watch makers will have independent inspections or not because the Swiss do take their watchmaking standards very seriously but it will be the Swiss government mandating the checks, not "ISO" as such.

Interesting that audits are carried out by subcontractors I never gave it much though, a bloke would just turn up once a year at the last place but on thinking about it previously at another place I worked at all of our U.K. facilities held UKAS accreditation and it was iirc to ISO 1725 and the auditors obviously didn’t work for ISO.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...