A Whiskey Fueled Hot Take, and Seiko Question
Comparing the quality between vintage Seiko divers
I know, I know - two Seiko articles in a row :D
But for real, I was wondering…
Why is there a deviation in ‘quality’ in the late 70s among Seiko Divers?
Like take a look at the 6217, 6159, and 6105. They all feature applied indices, tasteful hands, clean layout, nicely finished cases, unique tropic style straps, stepped crystals, the list goes on and on.
Brando approved of this one
But with the introduction of the 6309, we saw a massive deviation from those aspects of quality.
Now, I’m in no way saying that the 6309 is a bad watch - it’s actually an incredible timepiece that punches way above its weight. BUT, as I’m writing this article, whiskey in one hand, two Seikos in another, I can say with 100% confidence that the 6105 feels better. Comparing these watches, the 6105 just has the feel of a much higher quality product. They’re both incredibly solid, yet one feels refined, and the other feels lesser so.
Does anyone know what happened in the late 1970s to create this disparity? Let me know in a comment if you do, I always love learning more. Maybe my hot take is lacking some crucial info, but again I’m just comparing the feel of two timepieces separated only by a few years in production.
I think the brand chose to go the accessibility route, especially looking at the explosion of success the brand saw in the late 20th Century. They seemed to aim for market domination, and not follow the Swiss in their exclusivity (generally speaking).
Contemplating this idea of Seiko’s quality, it leads me to wonder, what if they just kept going with their ‘higher quality’ divers? Let me explain…
In the 1970s, Seiko brought the Swiss to their knees with quartz. I’m betting that with the sudden rise in quartz popularity, Seiko had a surplus of incoming funds. These funds would’ve allowed them to take the company in any direction they wanted.
Now This Might Just be the Whiskey Talking
So Seiko, in the mid-1970s to 80s, has a boatload of money, they’re a household name, and they’ve got a solid lineage of truly dependable/quality divers.
What would’ve happened if they allocated funds to make their sport range even more luxurious? I feel it would’ve been the nail in a few more Swiss coffins.
All joking aside, if they continued their sport range by introducing and enhancing qualities/models like the 6159 (a high beat diver), the brand would’ve absolutely dominated the market (as if they weren’t already).
What would modern Seiko look like if they followed this path?
The 6105 was by no means cheap back in the day, but considering the SKX and 6105 are apart of the same lineage, and one is way nicer than the other, it really begs the question, did Seiko miss an opportunity? Or was it a calculated move?
The 6105 (left) compared to the 6309 (right) separated by only a few years in production date
The beauty in Seiko is their accessibility, and the fact that they stay in their own lane and perfect their craft. In a world of pretentiousness, its freeing to choose Japan over Switzerland, especially when considering waiting lists and expensive auctions.
The 6105 appeals to a completely different market than the 6309. Price aside, if you’re just getting into vintage, or perhaps want a daily beater, go for the 6309. It’s cheaper, easier to find, and looks pretty much like a modern turtle.
If you want to scream to the world that you chose a Seiko over a sub, get the 6105. It’s an icon that puts other watches above its price point to shame.
Thank you for coming to my sporadic TED Talk, Writing little articles like these are fun, but let me know your thoughts in the comments. Follow us on the ‘Gram if you’re up to it.