![]() Seiko’s 7s26 movement is a beloved industry workhorse. In our review of the Mako, we discussed some of the alignment and kerning issues with the day wheel, most evident on “FRI.” The Seiko has no such problems.Ĭomparing the two movements is actually interesting because they’re both essentially older Seiko movements (Orient is a subsidiary of Seiko Epson Corporation), so the architecture and specs are quite similar. One area where the Mako fails to compare to the SKX007 is the day/date wheel. The lume quality has also been improved from the classic model. That said, it’s an incredibly attractive design, one that is well matched to the handset and to the overall aesthetic of the watch. The Orient logo and crest are also more ornate than Seiko’s logo, and add further credence to dress diver assessment. The markers are steel bordered, as is the calendar aperture. In contrast, the Mako USA dial redesign is definitely a dressier take on a dive watch. The look is a bit spartan, but it’s also highly effective. There is no extraneous text or branding, just the logo under 12 o’clock and the water resistance rating above 6. The hours and minutes hands are classic Seiko, with a sword shaped hours hand and a stylized arrow for the minutes. It’s highly legible with big bold white markers packed in with Seiko’s incredible lume and laid against a black base. The SKX007 boasts a no-nonsense tool diver look. Dial and HandsĪesthetically, the two dials are incredibly different. In the case of the SKX007, the use of Hardlex adds to the legibility of the dial, whereas the sapphire crystal detracts from it on the Mako due to lack of AR. In the case of the Mako, the crystal also sits a little lower in the case/bezel, so it is less likely to get banged up from daily wear. Between the two, sapphire has the advantage of being far more scratch-resistant. The SKX007 is equipped with Hardlex, Seiko’s proprietary mineral crystal that, according to Seiko, is supposed to better handle scratches. ![]() ![]() One of the biggest selling points of the Mako USA is the updated sapphire crystal. Ultimately, I’d argue that both bezels are well done at their respective price points, and that any preference with regard to action will come from the individual. I also prefer Seiko’s two-tiered groove pattern that allows for a sure grip, as well as the inclusion of a shielded lume pip. That said, I personally prefer the bezel on the SKX007, as the Mako bezel is a bit too stiff for my liking. However, it does have a sort of alternating hard click/soft click as you rotate it, giving it that low-resistance feel one normally finds on lower-end dive watches. In fact, the bezel on the SKX007 is relatively well executed. Before I compare the bezel on the SKX007, I should say that the construction on it is by no means bad. It hits the standard of what we’ve come to expect from a well-built diver for under $1000. ![]() Each click feels solid and sure on the Mako and there is absolutely no back play. The crown action on the Mako is decidedly better than that of the SKX007, which is known for being relatively underwhelming.īoth watches have 120-click bezels, though one might argue that the bezel on the Mako USA is better built. The pusher configures the date function, so it’s more of a necessity to get full functionality out of the movement (more on this later). The biggest visual and structural difference between the two cases is the positioning of the crowns (between 3 and 4 o’clock on the SXK007 and at the traditional 3 o’clock on the Mako) and the addition of a pusher at 2 o’clock on the Mako. So, for the fun of it, let’s compare these two excellent dive watches and see each one stacks up. But if you take into account that an aftermarket bracelet with solid end links tacks on another $60, give or take, then the two watches line up in terms of monetary value. After all, the SKX007 is considerably cheaper, readily available for approximately $160 (the made in Japan version is considerably more) on either a rubber or a stainless steel bracelet. Now, I’m sure you’re thinking that it’s not exactly a fair comparison. So it got us thinking, does the new and improved Mako rival the venerable SKX007? The comments section for that review understandably brought up comparisons to the SKX007, Seiko’s flagship diver and probably the most iconic affordable dive watch currently on the market. At $225, the Mako USA–which comes updated with some higher-end specs–offers some serious bang-for-your-buck value. Last week we took a look at the new Orient Mako USA, Orient’s reimagining of one of their most popular entry-level divers. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |