Who would win in a fight; SBDX001 v's SKX007?
May 31, 2015 23:09:24 GMT -8
Groundhog66, lordflagpolecrabtree, and 2 more like this
Post by pollythecat on May 31, 2015 23:09:24 GMT -8
This is not really an objective review as such but my feelings about these two watches that occupy opposite ends of the Seiko divers watch experience.
Like a lot of Seikofreaks I had a fair few divers of all types, modern, vintage, quartz, kinetic, mechanical, modified etc. At one point having 50-60 and more including the flippers. In the last couple of years I have sold off a lot of them along with other watch types and consolidated a divers collection comprising of a slew of Seiko contemporary divers. I have a vintage 6309-7040 and 7548 but both are heavily modified the remainder are SKX011, SKX007, Stargate x3, Samurai, Sumo, Shogun, Tunacan.
I had read all the old waffle about the MM300 several times over the years but never aspired to one until recently because I decided it would be a good capping off point for the divers collection. Yes I know there are more expensive but it seemed a sensible line to draw in the sand to me. So after re reading all the SBDX001 reviews I could find on the internet and various forums I still could not convince myself the thing would be wearable on my 6.75 inch wrist, many say it is fine but at the same time remark on the watches bulk. In the end I figured I would take the risk because it is no bigger than the Sumo and that was a known quantity to me.
So from the horses mouth for those wanting to know I can tell the MM300 is accommodated by my wrist but as stated by others (and the specs) is fairly thick but not impractically so, comparable to a 6138 chronograph. Its main drawback is it tends to ride on top of the wrist rather than wrap itself around like the Sumo does so therefore it shows off its thickness rather than concealing it.
I also bought a new SKX007 because one of the other forum members reminded me how good they are in both terms of looks and practicality. So this afternoon I was playing with both the SBDX and SKX
From the side
The stock SBDX bracelet suits the style of the watch head well and looks the part but Seiko made some tragic mistakes with its lack of adjustability for small wristed idiots such as myself. The links are large and there are not adequate removable links on the 6 o'clock side to comfortably center the deployment clasp to the underside of the wrist. This is furthermore exacerbated by the ridiculously large and thick deployment clasp. It may be great for a bruiser with 8 inch wrists but honestly, why on a watch like this, how many professional divers use this watch? It's too fancy and will get knocked to hell.
To work around this annoying problem I swapped the Titanium divers extension clasp for a standard Seiko double locking deployment clasp. I borrowed it of my SARB 017 for the time being but will buy its own in due course. That went part toward solving the issue but to reduce the length of the 6 o'clock side I dumped the large link that fits the clasp and used one from a 22mm wide Oyster bracelet my mate Jim gave me a while back. After grinding it down to 20mm and reprofiling the ends a bit it fitted OK using the MM300 pin and collar system.
Both are good looking watches in my view and the SBDX is better made etc but this is what you expect costing 12 times as much. The SKX does everything well, size is perfect for most people, the Jubilee bracelet is a good a quality as the MM300 and it profiles itself to the wrist due to the small links and it has brilliant adjustability. It can not be faulted for the money.
So I conclude the SBDX is a beautiful fancy thing that is a pleasure to own and wear and in a fight outperforms the SKX, but the SXK is probably more worthy; as a classic tool divers watch that has stood the test of time and is practical to use and wear without the worry of it taking a few knocks; the plucky underdog that everyone roots for. Every Seiko diver watch WIS should get one of both but for very different reasons.
While I was writing this I pondered how good a slightly smaller, thinner version of the SBDX would be, a SKX with higher specification. Then I realised I have one...a SARB059 Alpinist
Like a lot of Seikofreaks I had a fair few divers of all types, modern, vintage, quartz, kinetic, mechanical, modified etc. At one point having 50-60 and more including the flippers. In the last couple of years I have sold off a lot of them along with other watch types and consolidated a divers collection comprising of a slew of Seiko contemporary divers. I have a vintage 6309-7040 and 7548 but both are heavily modified the remainder are SKX011, SKX007, Stargate x3, Samurai, Sumo, Shogun, Tunacan.
I had read all the old waffle about the MM300 several times over the years but never aspired to one until recently because I decided it would be a good capping off point for the divers collection. Yes I know there are more expensive but it seemed a sensible line to draw in the sand to me. So after re reading all the SBDX001 reviews I could find on the internet and various forums I still could not convince myself the thing would be wearable on my 6.75 inch wrist, many say it is fine but at the same time remark on the watches bulk. In the end I figured I would take the risk because it is no bigger than the Sumo and that was a known quantity to me.
So from the horses mouth for those wanting to know I can tell the MM300 is accommodated by my wrist but as stated by others (and the specs) is fairly thick but not impractically so, comparable to a 6138 chronograph. Its main drawback is it tends to ride on top of the wrist rather than wrap itself around like the Sumo does so therefore it shows off its thickness rather than concealing it.
I also bought a new SKX007 because one of the other forum members reminded me how good they are in both terms of looks and practicality. So this afternoon I was playing with both the SBDX and SKX
From the side
The stock SBDX bracelet suits the style of the watch head well and looks the part but Seiko made some tragic mistakes with its lack of adjustability for small wristed idiots such as myself. The links are large and there are not adequate removable links on the 6 o'clock side to comfortably center the deployment clasp to the underside of the wrist. This is furthermore exacerbated by the ridiculously large and thick deployment clasp. It may be great for a bruiser with 8 inch wrists but honestly, why on a watch like this, how many professional divers use this watch? It's too fancy and will get knocked to hell.
To work around this annoying problem I swapped the Titanium divers extension clasp for a standard Seiko double locking deployment clasp. I borrowed it of my SARB 017 for the time being but will buy its own in due course. That went part toward solving the issue but to reduce the length of the 6 o'clock side I dumped the large link that fits the clasp and used one from a 22mm wide Oyster bracelet my mate Jim gave me a while back. After grinding it down to 20mm and reprofiling the ends a bit it fitted OK using the MM300 pin and collar system.
Both are good looking watches in my view and the SBDX is better made etc but this is what you expect costing 12 times as much. The SKX does everything well, size is perfect for most people, the Jubilee bracelet is a good a quality as the MM300 and it profiles itself to the wrist due to the small links and it has brilliant adjustability. It can not be faulted for the money.
So I conclude the SBDX is a beautiful fancy thing that is a pleasure to own and wear and in a fight outperforms the SKX, but the SXK is probably more worthy; as a classic tool divers watch that has stood the test of time and is practical to use and wear without the worry of it taking a few knocks; the plucky underdog that everyone roots for. Every Seiko diver watch WIS should get one of both but for very different reasons.
While I was writing this I pondered how good a slightly smaller, thinner version of the SBDX would be, a SKX with higher specification. Then I realised I have one...a SARB059 Alpinist
