Thanks, Brian.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:
Question for the Seiko 5 owners: Is there any real quality difference between those made in Japan and those made elsewhere?

Darnit, man! You keep asking questions like that, and I'm going to have to buy another "5"!
Empirical evidence and all, you know....

As it goes, I've read a few times that the "K" versions are Malaysian. I'm not sure if that's true, or whether K indicates Korea. Something more to research, I suppose.

I'm interested to know what you find out. The one I'm looking at is a K1.

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky: ...I've read a few times that the "K" versions are Malaysian. I'm not sure if that's true, or whether K indicates Korea.

You've read correctly, although in the "5" line it may be somewhere other than Malaysia; but "K" does NOT indicate "Korea" specifically.

I am unaware of Seiko making watches in Korea at all. They might, but I haven't heard it is so.

Order placed this afternoon:

^^^^

Looks good!

I've worn my new 5 every day since it arrived. Not super-crazed about the band, but I don't find myself complaining about it!

I also ordered a link-removal kit from Amazon, one recommended by watchuseek.com. The previous two Seiko's I had in the 1970's didn't really require any links to be taken out, but I needed them somewhat loose to fit over my Nomex. I had two links removed from my Rolex band by the store I bought it at, but they removed both from the same side, and the watch sat too high ever since.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765: ...I had two links removed from my Rolex band by the store I bought it at, but they removed both from the same side, and the watch sat too high ever since.

Take it back, and have them do it right.

quote:

Originally posted by BrianO:

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765: ...I had two links removed from my Rolex band by the store I bought it at, but they removed both from the same side, and the watch sat too high ever since.

Take it back, and have them do it right.

They told me it was a better fit that way, and I didn't question them. Since then I've lost the directions to the store. And the name. It was 34 years ago.

Although I think I may have kept the links. They're not in the original box, which I still have, but they may be in a box in the back of a dresser drawer that's buried under my stash of 9mm ammo.

It'll do for now.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

Although I think I may have kept the links. They're not in the original box, which I still have, but they may be in a box in the back of a dresser drawer that's buried under my stash of 9mm ammo.

It'll do for now.

I hope you kept the links, because Rolex gets about $50 each for steel links. You don't want to know what gold links cost. Apparently Rolex buys gold at around $4000 an ounce.

Yup! That sounds like Rolex. Luckily mine is the standard steel GMT, so if I ever decide to replace the links I'll only have to pay the lower outrageous price, not the higher outrageous price.

In 1983, my watch cost me $700, which I gladly paid, and it was worth every penny. It still functions properly, although it's in real need of another service. I'm retiring it because I can't afford that service any more, and it's at the point where I'm concerned about getting robbed of it no matter where I go. I'll never sell it.

The watch arrived today, and looks better than the picture. Whoever remarked some pages back that Seiko watches "wear" smaller than their diameter was correct -- it doesn't seem as big as its 41mm diameter would indicate.

It's a hefty SOB, though, weighing in at 5-1/5 oz on a postal scale, while my Rolex GMT Master weighs 4 oz! I like the additional weight.

Pics once I've been able to remove about 4 links ! I think the band was designed for a Sumo wrestler's wrist. I should be able to get it done this evening.

I only had to remove 3 links. Sorry about the soft focus, but I think something's wrong with Photobucket (well, Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!), since the picture is actually sharp as a tack. It gets blurry when I resize from 800 to 400 pixels. Any suggestions?

Tried reloading and reposting it. I think it's a little better now.

(I give up!)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: newtoSig765,

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765: It gets blurry when I resize from 800 to 400 pixels. Any suggestions?

Yes: Don't use Photobucket. ;-)

Normally, UPsizing a photo will result in a blurry and/or jagged image, but DOWNsizing won't. I don't know how Photobucket does it.

(BTW, I'm not seeing a photo; just a Photobucket "Photo not found. CLICK for photos" image.)

quote:

Originally posted by BrianO:
(BTW, I'm not seeing a photo; just a Photobucket "Photo not found. CLICK for photos" image.)

Well, that's even weirder! Do you have trouble with other Photobucket postings or just this one? It shows up for me, of course.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765: ...Do you have trouble with other Photobucket postings or just this one?

I don't know. I just now went back through the previous 10 pages, and I see lots of photos, and yours is the only post with the "Photo not found" message.

Just got my new favorite watch!
1997 Seiko 7T32 1/5 second sweep chronograph Tachymeter.

Basically a Seiko Speedmaster

Looks like it's in pretty mint shape, and the bracelet is handsome, too. Nice find!

It does bear a resemblance to the Omega Speedmaster II, one of my favorite watches. A friend of mine got one shortly after we graduated from high school, and I've always admired it.