The Seiko Monster-The Best Deal for a Dive Watch?

November 14th, 2009 Posted in Orient News | 34 Comments | Comment and Win a Free Orient Watch Comment and Win a Free Orient Watch

With the onset of summer, there’s a bigger market for affordable, dependable dive watches. Many dive watches have a lot of similarities and differences. That being said, some of the more popular brands deserve to be differentiated to determine which is the best. In turn, I will compare two popular dive watches; the Seiko Monster and the Orient Mako.

One of the first, if not the first thing people consider when buying a watch is the price. Price can help narrow the selection. The Seiko Monster averages about $200, while the Orient Mako runs about $150, depending on the retailer. Expectedly so, there’s not a big difference between the cost of these 2 watches. So, the comparison will extend beyond the price to dissect the smaller details to determine the superior dive watch.



Not only are they competitive in terms of price, they have many other similarities. I’ve broken the competition down into 3 categories; so, there will be a decisive winner. The categories involve 3 of the most crucial elements to consider when buying a watch:

  • Aesthetic
  • Functionality
  • Movement


Aesthetic

The Seiko Monster comes in three colors – orange, blue, and black. (There was also a yellow dial available under a limited release in the past.)

It has a 41.5 mm case diameter with a 12.5 mm thickness. This diameter is only 1/2mm thicker than the Orient Mako, and it is 1/2mm thinner than the Orient. So, the case sizes are virtually the same dimensions; however, the Seiko Monster weighs more. It doesn’t let you forget you’re wearing a watch. This big, sturdy watch may be out of place at social occasions.

Each watch has a unidirectional bezel. The bezel on the Seiko Monster is more pronounced with scalloped edges and may be easier to maneuver.

With dive watches, a lot of luminescence is necessary because light decreases as you descend in the water and visibility is crucial. And while both brands come in different colors, orange watches tend to be more popular, because orange is the most visible color under water where shorter wavelengths get absorbed. This technique dates back to 1967, when the 1st commercial dive watch appeared; after Doxa Watch Co. did research to determine that orange is the best color.

On each watch face are luminescent hands and markers. The Seiko Monster has bigger markers and more luminescent for a brighter display. The Seiko sports a domed hardlex crystal, which splits the difference between mineral glass (which is what Orient Mako has) and sapphire crystal, which can resist scratches, but is expensive and can shatter when knocked. However, the dome of the Seiko protrudes beyond the bezel, making it susceptible to scratches.

The Orient Mako has a sturdy, stainless steel bracelet, as does the Seiko Monster. The Orient has a screw down crown at the 3 o’clock position, guarded by shoulders, while the Seiko screw down crown is at the 4 o’clock position. This can be beneficial if the crown tends to dig into your wrist; however, you cannot manually wind it, unlike the Mako.

The Mako also has a much simpler face, complemented by the understated design of the bracelet. The Seiko Monster has a much ‘busier’ face.

The winner for aesthetic appearance: The Orient Mako

Seiko’s aesthetic is tied to its functionality. Unless you’re trying to impress some underwater friends, Orient’s appearance is more suitable for a wider variety of occasions, especially on land.

mako-views


Functionality

In this case, functionality is not mutually exclusive from aesthetics. Some aesthetic features exist to enable and augment certain functionality.

Seiko’s aesthetic is tailored to its functionality. Seiko’s all around visibility is better underwater with a bigger face and more luminescence. Also, the hands and markers are all outlined in black, which make it great for on ground visibility as well, as the orange contrasts against the black. Also, its brushed and polished bracelet make it more durable and able to withstand abuse.

Yet, both watches are dependable divers. Both display the ‘Diver’s Logo’, which indicates the ISO6425 standard for waterproofing, legibility, luminosity, shock resistance, anti-magnetism, and band solidity. Both watches are water-resistant up to 200m or 650 ft. The lugs in the bracelet of the Seiko Monster are drilled, which makes it easier to change to a leather band. The Seiko also has a 17mm extension on the bracelet; so, it can fit over a wetsuit.

The Orient Mako has a fold-over push button clasp to prevent it from inadvertently unhooking.

Each model has a day and date indicator and can display that information in Spanish. However, the Orient Mako has an additional button at the 2 o’clock position, which needs to be pushed to adjust the day, while the date is changed by the crown at the 3 o’clock position. The Seiko could be considered more convenient without the extra step.

The winner for functionality: The Seiko Monster



The Movement

The movement of a watch is the mechanism responsible for keeping time. And let’s face it, if a watch can’t keep good time, it defeats the purpose of having one.

Both timepieces have an automatic movement. This means that the watch winds itself with the motion of your arm. The Seiko has an 7S26 automatic movement, and it’s reported to be able to run for up to 10 years without maintenance. Its movement has an economical design and construction. It’s made for performance at a minimal cost, with minimal to no maintenence. It is also a non-hacking movement, which means you cannot stop the second hand; this makes it harder to synchronize or calibrate the watch. The movement is not touched by human hands, unlike the Orient Mako.

Orient Makos have in-house movements. They are installed by Orient professionals, not imported from large suppliers. It takes lots of time and meticulous care to accomplish in-house movements, and they’re quite uncommon among watches. Orient movements do not need batteries; kinetic energy from the motion of your arm gets stored into a spring via a rotor that powers the watch. The specialized in-house movements do not compromise reliability and sets Orient apart from the others.

The winner for the movement? The Orient Mako

picture-8

After 3 competitive comparisons, the Orient Makos work out to be the superior dive watch, and it’s really no secret. The popular demand for Orient Makos is responsible for the 8 versions that come in different band types (including leather) and different face colors, such as orange and black.

It’s a common sentiment from beginners to watch enthusiasts that both of these watches are a great deal for the price. There’s no question that both watches could be sold for more than their asking price. If you’re looking for an affordable, dependable dive watch, you can’t go wrong with the Seiko Monster or the Orient Mako.

Yet, depending on your needs and/or your personal taste, one may be more suitable than the other, but that’s up to you.

  1. 34 Comments | Comment and Win a Free Orient Watch

  2. By George Peck on Jun 27, 2009

    Great Review. One question. The first picture shows a different Orient Watch than the Mako. What is it? I really, really like it, but I don’t think it’s a Mako. At the very least it’s different than the other pictures, which are of the Mako. Also, I would probably put a rubber or silicone strap on a diver instead of a leather strap. I really like the review though. Very insightful.

  3. By Frank In Miami on Jun 27, 2009

    George, the watch on the first photo is model reference number CEM75001M, 45mm case, 200 meter WR diver watch. It is bigger than the Mako.

  4. By Frank In Miami on Jun 27, 2009

    Jordan, very nice comparison. However, let me point out the following:

    - The Mako’s movement is way, way more accurate right out of the box than the Seiko 7S26 movement used in the Monster.

    - The Mako’s movement can not be hand wound or hacked, like the Seiko 7S26, so they are even on that regard.

    - The Mako has a very good lume but the Monster’s is better. Another weakness of the Mako is the hard to turn bezel. Here is another area where the Monster wins hands down.

    - Aesthetically, there is no contest. The Mako is the best “dress” diver there is. I would not wear a Monster to the office. It simply a way too informal watch in a business setting.

    - The Mako’s stainless steel bracelet lacks a diver extension feature.

    But in all and all the Mako is a better proposition. I love my blue Mako with SS bracelet. The watch is absolutely gorgeous and the movement is extremely accurate for a mechanical timepiece.

  5. By james on Jun 27, 2009

    Hi Frank,

    While the bezel is easier to turn on the Orange monster I would hardly consider that a feature (on a diver). On a diver the bezel should be firm to reduce the chance of it moving if bumped. This could result in your dive being significantly shortened and could actually be dangerous when ascending to the surface.

    For everyday use, I suppose an easy to move bezel could be considered convenient. It all depends on how you choose to use the watch.

    Also, although the Stainless steel band does not have a diver extension feature, those who dive often could pick up a rubber band which would eliminate the need to adjust it.

    just my $.02

  6. By Frank In Miami on Jun 28, 2009

    James:

    Points well taken. Again, I would pick the Orient Mako over the Seiko Monster anyday of the week.

    I still contend the bezel of the Mako is extremely stiff right out of the box. Even if you don’t use the watch for diving, I still use the bezel for other timing purposes. I think the rotating mechanism needs to be made smoother, that’s all.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the Mako represents an incredible value and I am happy to own to own such a beautiful and well made watch.

  7. By Kody on Jun 28, 2009

    That is the new orange Mako, it is bigger and looks more like a dress version of seiko monster, very interesting.

  8. By Kody on Jun 28, 2009

    I noticed there is a video for each color of the watch in orientwatchusa
    http://www.orientwatchusa.com/watch.php?id=236
    It looks great even on a smaller wrist size, not sure how heavy it feels. Make it on deal of a day plz :D

  9. By eguy899 on Jun 29, 2009

    your main picture showed a SEIKO Orange Monster next to the ORIENT New Mako (CEM75001M), am I right?

    the following pictures are actually those of the Orient Mako (CEM65001M), correct?

    I am not sure if your comparisons are “fair” to the SEIKO Monster since you are comparing 2 ORIENTS against 1 SEIKO.

    (ps: BOTH ORIENT Makos are now on my wishlist! :) )

  10. By jordan on Jun 29, 2009

    Thanks for your comment, eguy. Though, the specs of the comparison are consistent; only one model of mako is being compared to one model of monster. The pic of the new mako just shows the variaton of the mako’s style, should one’s personal taste be inclined towards a bigger style.

  11. By Indera Sadikin on Jun 29, 2009

    Great review, Jordan.
    The Orient in the first picture is “Mako 2″, successor of the first Mako. I am a fan of both Seiko and Orient, and cannot decide when it comes to choosing between Monster and Mako. This review is really a final push to go for Mako.

  12. By George Peck on Jun 30, 2009

    Is the “Old” Mako going away? I’m really hoping for a “old” Blue Mako on bracelet (CEM65002D) to show up on this site.

    Thanks!
    George

  13. By Frank In Miami on Jul 1, 2009

    I don’t think the “old” Mako is going away anytime soon, considering, it is one of Orient’s best selling models worldwide.

  14. By Benson on Jul 14, 2009

    Are both bezels embossed/engraved? It appears that the Orient’s is just painted.

  15. By George Novak on Jul 17, 2009

    While this could be considered an Orange to Orange comparison in regards to color; I don’t think this is the correct Seiko for the comparison. A better version would be the 6R15
    based Seiko SBDC005. This is a more traditional case design and it more closely matches the Orient. The monster is…. a monster, so it’s design is loved by some and hated by others. Unlike the traditionally designed Orient, it’s asymmetric case and bowled dial is a departure from traditional diver’s watches. And while the 7S26 isn’t hand-built, it has received a favorable review from thepurists.com website. The 7S26 may be robotically machined, but it isn’t outsourced like many ETA movements. To infer such isn’t telling the whole story.
    If one were to compare the Orient Mako to the Seiko SBDC005, you would find two equally well built watches with excellent movements. The case could be made for the Orient, as the Seiko’s movement makes it a much more expensive watch. This means you can have the same styling and comparable movement for much less cost.

  16. By RobG on Jul 26, 2009

    Seiko is chunky, Orient version is a bit more classy and well-rounded. I’d go with the Orient model. We’re in subjective-ville here as personal tastes and style affect the decision.

    The Mako or it’s newer big brother are the 2 I would choose from.

  17. By James on Aug 2, 2009

    I think it is a matter of preference because I own and love my Seiko Monster. I love a watch that is big. My only complaint would be the placing of the crown. I would perfer that it be in the traditional place instead. Thanks for listening.

  18. By Frank In Miami on Aug 3, 2009

    Never been a fan of the Seiko Monster regardless of the value proposition and qualities it brings to the table.

  19. By Paul Jarsuzewski on Aug 9, 2009

    I wish I would have seen the Orient Mako prior to buying my Seiko. I have one Orient watch and it is the favorite of my collection.

    Paul

  20. By John on Aug 21, 2009

    Monsters eat Makos for breakfast.

  21. By Jerry on Sep 27, 2009

    I love both the Mako and the Monster (for the lume, the heft, and the band) but I have to give the nod to the Mako. The Mako is a more versatile wearer, is less expensive, and better regulated. The Mako is vastly more important to the success of Orient than the Monster is for Seiko so there appears to be more care in the assembly of a Mako than in a Monster.

  22. By Jenn @ Beautiful Calling on Oct 22, 2009

    Great review. Though I personally don’t dive, it was easy to see the pros of each watch. Thanks!

  23. By G Kom on Oct 22, 2009

    My only contribution when picking a car is picking the color (okay, I’ll admit I’m exaggerating quite a bit) so I’ll stick to it and pick based on aesthetics: Orient Mako. DH’ll be delighted if I win…

  24. By Rajee on Oct 31, 2009

    Great review. I would love to review it in my blog

  25. By S BARMAN on Nov 1, 2009

    The “Mako” has a simpler, cleaner face.
    The “Mako” is also less expensive than the Sieko.
    Hava a Sieko kinetic watch and the movement required repair after about 2 years of use raising question as to its durability in the harsh conditions in water

  26. By Jason on Nov 17, 2009

    I just bought the blue mako..I can’t wait.

  27. By Garrett McCain on Nov 19, 2009

    This article is completely ridiculous. At it’s best it is inaccurate, and it’s worst it is complete falsehood.

    Orient makes great watches, but OWUSA makes horrible decisions regarding the marketing of their product.

    Shame on you, Branding Brand!

    I seriously wonder if Orient knows what’s going on with this U.S. operation…

  28. By Dave H on Nov 28, 2009

    Hmmmm, I love em both.Orient is classy simple, for formal wear, and Seiko is sporty, leisure & adventure.
    And orange is my fav color.
    I think the Seiko would be better viewing in dive situations.
    Cheers,
    Dave/

  29. By Ed Nawotka on Nov 28, 2009

    Not everyone is physically large enough to look good in a huge watch like the Monster, so the streamlined Mako is my preference – I am an avid diver and would love to try it in the water. If I win, I will.

  30. By Jéjé on Nov 29, 2009

    I think both watches are “cult”. I got a black Mako and I love it. It is a little more dressier than the Monster. One thing is the lume is weaker.The Monster is very hard to beat on that matter. Perhaps It could be improved on the Mako? I’d like that.

  31. By Mauro on Dec 9, 2009

    Hi, I think this review is inaccurate, because if the Seiko Monster is a “true” DIVER’S 200m watch, this is not the case of the Mako, which is only a “Water Resistant” 200m watch.
    A Diver’s watch can be used for scuba diving, where a WR200m watch can be used only for snorkelling or skin diving.

    The aesthetic is not much comparable. The Seiko Monster is beautiful in its own “Monster” style. You absolutely love it or you hate it.

    I don’t like very much the look of the “little” Mako, but I like (and own) its big brother, the Big Mako, which is a watch much more solid and elegant, in my opinion (especially in the black and blue variants).

  32. By Bjorn on Dec 14, 2009

    I stumbled across this review and I’m shocked the the underlying bias isn’t called out by more commenters.

    Really, it’s not much of a review to start with and you come away with … nothing.

    First, to show my own bias, I currently own a Citizen EcoDrive diver as well as a Seiko Black Monster. I dive both as backups. I’ve previously broken a Citizen Promaster Ti diver.

    From first hand experience, the 7S26 movement is extremely tough. So, usability wise, for me the Seiko is proven.

    Second, everyone has to judge ascetics for themselves. I never quite could get over the hands on the Orient. But declaring a winner clear winner on a site owned by the retailers of one of the two “contestants”? Please.

    That sad thing is, I actually came to this site because I had been interested in Orient watches. But I’ll look elsewhere for my next purchase now.

  33. By Royston on Dec 18, 2009

    Hi,
    Thanks for the well-written review. Personally, I think the comparison between the two watches in question is fair. I opine that to compare the Orient Mako with the Sumo is not appropriate as the Sumo is of another league due to its higher price range.
    IMHO, the two watches are attractive in the aspects of aesthetic, functionality and movement; and that’s the reason why we are spending time talking about them! :-)
    They should serve well in different occasions for different people and are reliable because they are produced by companies of strong background in the watch industry.
    I’ve already owned an OM. I am now attracted to the orange Mako!
    So, grab the other piece if you just have one like me :-)
    Thanks for reading.
    Royston.

  34. By Pat on Jan 7, 2010

    I think it’s quite fair to assume the reviewer has very little to no diving experience at all.

    My money is with the OM, hands down.

  35. By Nick on Feb 20, 2010

    The original Orient Mako shown in most of the photos is NOT ISO rated as the article claims. I own both the original Mako and the Orange Monster, and both are great watches, however the article is misleading.

    Also worth noting is that Orient is owned by Seiko,and the Mako’s movement is based on the Monster’s movement.

34 comments | Comment and Win a Free Orient Watch