46 of 48 people found the following review helpful
Seiko Black and Gold Solar Watch,
This review is from: Seiko Men's SNE054 Stainless Steel Solar Watch (Watch)
I purchased this watch in May 2011 to replace a 24-year old Seiko watch that had started to lose time. I chose this model because I like the precise timekeeping of a quartz watch without the hassle of having to change the battery, although having said that, I know the rechargeable battery probably has a life of about 15 to 20 years. I'm pleased with the appearance of the watch: the black face and gold casing are a great combination; the watch looks classy and stylish, even better than the photos, but it isn't overly showy. The width of the case is just right; not too large but not too small. At about 9.5mm thick, the watch isn't chunky, but I like thin watches and if it was a few millimetres thinner it would be perfect.
The second hand on this watch points exactly at the minute markers as it moves around on the face, which may be a trivial thing but it is an indicator of quality in Seiko's watch-making process.
The watch has luminous paint on the hands and on each of the 12 dots on the number/stroke positions on the face. If the watch is left on a table under a lamp for about 5 minutes, it will glow really brightly when the light is turned off. It fades during the night, but there was still enough glow for me to read the time in the dark when I woke up 7 hours after switching off the light.
The strap provided with the watch is quite good quality and there is no sign of wear so far. Seiko have done a good job on the day/date - it is like a bold font and is quite easy to read. The date is also easy to change. The process to change the date on short months is to pull out the crown one click and turn it counter clockwise (towards you) to advance the date. Assuming that the watch never runs out of charge and stops of course, the day name will never need to be changed.
I'm very pleased with the watch and I'd recommend it to others.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 29, 2012 4:10:18 PM PST
Mark Albert says:
Running a conventional quartz watch for 20 years would require batteries costing at least twice the price of this watch.
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 11, 2012 9:07:42 AM PST
DAVID AMBOKADZE says:
I have more than 10 years old watch and first battery change made about 5 years ago, and totaly 3 batteries changed so far, costing just 2$ per battery :)
In reply to an earlier post on Mar 23, 2013 4:07:23 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Mar 23, 2013 4:32:55 AM PDT]
Posted on Jul 17, 2013 2:06:28 AM PDT
Doris Wright says:
Seems like a thorough review to me. Thank you. I believe I will take your recommendation.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›