When Seiko launched the 300m Marinemaster or 300MM, SBDX001 (on the left of the photo below) back in the year 2000, its sister company, Orient was also working on a professional dive watch. Orient answer was the Orient 300M Pro Saturation Diver SEL0200 (on the right of the photo below). Both are powered by their own in-house automatic movement, made out of stainless steel and capable of mix-gas diving down to a maximum depth of 300 meters.
Below is a table of comparative specifications between the two watches.
As you can see, the Orient has a slight edge in terms of dimensions over the Seiko. Nevertheless, price wise, it is more-or-less similar.
From a dimension perspective, the Orient is more well rounded. Due to the height of both watches, the lug width could make a difference between a 'tall' watch vis-a-vis a 'balance' watch. The 22 mm lugs on the Orient averages out the height issue elegantly. In the photos above and below you just see what I mean.
If there is a choice between a date complication or a power reserve complication, I personally would choose the latter. To me, it is more important to know the state of charge than the date. I therefore would have to give the Orient another star because of its power reserve.
Both watches have some form of graphic art on the case-back. For the Seiko, it is the famous tsunami motif while for the Orient is the brand logo. Equally interesting is the clasp. While Seiko just have its brand stamped on the safety fold-over-tab, Orient has its logo etched on the clasp plate. I find this more appealing.
For more about the individual watches, please refer to the full reviews (links are provided here: SBDX001; SEL0200). Overall, I find the Orient more user-friendly and value-for-money.
Below is a table of comparative specifications between the two watches.
| Specifications | SBDX001 | SEL0200 |
| Movement | 8L35 | 40N5A |
| Complications | 3-hands; date | 3-hands; date; power reserve |
| Strap | Bracelet | Bracelet |
| Dial | Black | Black |
| Diameter | 44.0 mm | 45.4 mm |
| Lug width | 20 mm | 22 mm |
| Lug-to-lug | 50.0 mm | 50.4 mm |
| Thickness | 14.6 mm | 16.9 mm |
| Weight | 210 gm | 220 gm |
| Crystal | Hardlex | Sapphire |
| Bezel Inlay | Stainless steel | Anodized aluminum |
| Base Material | Stainless steel | Stainless steel |
| Water Rating | 300 meters | 300 meters |
| Manufacture | JDM | Made in Japan |
| MSRP | YEN250,000/not sold in Malaysia | USD1,995/sold in Malaysia |
As you can see, the Orient has a slight edge in terms of dimensions over the Seiko. Nevertheless, price wise, it is more-or-less similar.
From a dimension perspective, the Orient is more well rounded. Due to the height of both watches, the lug width could make a difference between a 'tall' watch vis-a-vis a 'balance' watch. The 22 mm lugs on the Orient averages out the height issue elegantly. In the photos above and below you just see what I mean.
If there is a choice between a date complication or a power reserve complication, I personally would choose the latter. To me, it is more important to know the state of charge than the date. I therefore would have to give the Orient another star because of its power reserve.
Both watches have some form of graphic art on the case-back. For the Seiko, it is the famous tsunami motif while for the Orient is the brand logo. Equally interesting is the clasp. While Seiko just have its brand stamped on the safety fold-over-tab, Orient has its logo etched on the clasp plate. I find this more appealing.
For more about the individual watches, please refer to the full reviews (links are provided here: SBDX001; SEL0200). Overall, I find the Orient more user-friendly and value-for-money.
No comments:
Post a Comment