Military Watch Magazine
Discussion
I'm all for it, probably superficial content with a few inaccuracies and plenty of hyperbole but perhaps a good place to start if you like the idea of issued watches and don't know where to start.
There are a few good books of course, and specialist web fora, but this looks like a good learner set to get you started ('Zero Hour' was a great 'starter' book, sadly out of print now).
If they built the watches to scale and close to the originals then it'd be additional interest to get a better idea of what the originals are like I guess. At a tenner they are a novelty item perhaps, but I wouldn't say you're getting ripped off at all.
There are a few good books of course, and specialist web fora, but this looks like a good learner set to get you started ('Zero Hour' was a great 'starter' book, sadly out of print now).
If they built the watches to scale and close to the originals then it'd be additional interest to get a better idea of what the originals are like I guess. At a tenner they are a novelty item perhaps, but I wouldn't say you're getting ripped off at all.
I'm subscribing to this as well, they're not the best watches, but certainly better than anything I've seen for under £20, and interesting designs too.
Also, it stops me buying more expensive watches every month as I have something new and shiny to amuse myself with.
Worth getting if you're interested in the history of the designs and can stomach wearing a cheapy for a little while.
Also, it stops me buying more expensive watches every month as I have something new and shiny to amuse myself with.
Worth getting if you're interested in the history of the designs and can stomach wearing a cheapy for a little while.
el stovey said:
Sorry I'm a bit lost in this thread, do you have to be able to afford a Patek to buy the £6 magazine watch?
I feel I have been misquoted on this to be fair, I suggested to the watch afficiendos who we're giving the OP a hard time for posting about such cheap crap that because they could afford exquisite timepieces does not mean they have the right to belittle others and they can still enjoy cheaper fun things in life as well, I merely pointed out that I was posting from a position where I was practicing what I was preaching.Oh and I don't like Pateks, too small and gold for my liking.
dom9 said:
Feel a bit bad for the OP here, really! Thought there had been a couple of positive threads on these, recently, on here!?
Hey, for pocket change, how wrong can you go? If you like it OP, all power to you!
Well said. By all means inform the OP that they are not genuine military watches, but no enthusiast should take the mickey out of someone else's collection. It just isn't done.Hey, for pocket change, how wrong can you go? If you like it OP, all power to you!
AlexC1981 said:
dom9 said:
Feel a bit bad for the OP here, really! Thought there had been a couple of positive threads on these, recently, on here!?
Hey, for pocket change, how wrong can you go? If you like it OP, all power to you!
Well said. By all means inform the OP that they are not genuine military watches, but no enthusiast should take the mickey out of someone else's collection. It just isn't done.Hey, for pocket change, how wrong can you go? If you like it OP, all power to you!
AlexC1981 said:
Well said. By all means inform the OP that they are not genuine military watches, but no enthusiast should take the mickey out of someone else's collection. It just isn't done.
That's almost a challenge - to see how awful your collection has to be before people can no longer hold back.On another watch forum - where there is no spite or pah, cheap crap watch comments, they discuss this mag and say the Italian Diver watch in issue 5 is the best so far. (not sure how they have got hold of them already, but there you go).
Ruskie one looks ok. Out in a week or so. Wonder what the situation in Ukraine will be then?
Italian Diver.
Ruskie one looks ok. Out in a week or so. Wonder what the situation in Ukraine will be then?
Italian Diver.
Ok, I'm now the proud owner of a new "British SBS Commando" watch (from Issue 3). This claims to "incorporate many features that are important to combat divers". Two that are conspicuously missing are a rotating bezel and any sign of a water resistance rating.
The fit and finish of the case is similar to what you'd expect from a £10 - £20 watch. It looks ok but feels a little light and doesn't exactly scream durability. There are no material markings on it, but the press-on case back appears to be stainless steel. The body of the case is fairly soft, obviously not stainless, but enthusiastic scraping inside suggests that it's same-colour throughout rather than plated brass, so shouldn't look too scabby as it wears.
The dial has green "luminous look" markers, but the only parts that actually glow in the dark are the hands and the bezel "pip" - which is raised and doesn't look like it'll stay attached for long in use. The mineral glass appears to be fitted using a nylon "I" seal. This will be confirmed later when I'm in the workshop.
The two-layer nylon webbing strap actually feels quite solid and is fully stitched round its edges. It has a stainless steel buckle and is attached to the watch by stainless spring bars.
Removing the case back shows seals to the back and crown, so it should have some level of water resistance. Whether or not it'll cope with the pressure tester, or to what depth, remains to be seen but it looks as good as many of the cheaper 50m watches out there so the lack of a depth marking may simply be saving the cost of testing.
Oddly, my previous guess about the possible movements was wrong. The watch uses a Seiko Epson AL55A movement. That's odd for a couple of reasons. First, it's not the cheapest out there - the PC21 and 2035 have that honour between them. But it's also obsolete, so they've either retained stock from a previous issue or they've bought up discontinued movements at a bargain price. Still, it's a reliable enough movement and is a direct swap iirc for the current AL21 or Y121 if needed. Battery life is 2 years, and there's a Maxell cell fitted, which is good quality.
So, on initial inspection, it seems to be a decent £10 - £20 rrp watch, in a pleasant style if you like that sort of thing, for a £10 asking price.
I'll be down in the workshop tomorrow and see what it takes to break it
The fit and finish of the case is similar to what you'd expect from a £10 - £20 watch. It looks ok but feels a little light and doesn't exactly scream durability. There are no material markings on it, but the press-on case back appears to be stainless steel. The body of the case is fairly soft, obviously not stainless, but enthusiastic scraping inside suggests that it's same-colour throughout rather than plated brass, so shouldn't look too scabby as it wears.
The dial has green "luminous look" markers, but the only parts that actually glow in the dark are the hands and the bezel "pip" - which is raised and doesn't look like it'll stay attached for long in use. The mineral glass appears to be fitted using a nylon "I" seal. This will be confirmed later when I'm in the workshop.
The two-layer nylon webbing strap actually feels quite solid and is fully stitched round its edges. It has a stainless steel buckle and is attached to the watch by stainless spring bars.
Removing the case back shows seals to the back and crown, so it should have some level of water resistance. Whether or not it'll cope with the pressure tester, or to what depth, remains to be seen but it looks as good as many of the cheaper 50m watches out there so the lack of a depth marking may simply be saving the cost of testing.
Oddly, my previous guess about the possible movements was wrong. The watch uses a Seiko Epson AL55A movement. That's odd for a couple of reasons. First, it's not the cheapest out there - the PC21 and 2035 have that honour between them. But it's also obsolete, so they've either retained stock from a previous issue or they've bought up discontinued movements at a bargain price. Still, it's a reliable enough movement and is a direct swap iirc for the current AL21 or Y121 if needed. Battery life is 2 years, and there's a Maxell cell fitted, which is good quality.
So, on initial inspection, it seems to be a decent £10 - £20 rrp watch, in a pleasant style if you like that sort of thing, for a £10 asking price.
I'll be down in the workshop tomorrow and see what it takes to break it
Variomatic said:
Ok, I'm now the proud owner of a new "British SBS Commando" watch (from Issue 3). This claims to "incorporate many features that are important to combat divers". Two that are conspicuously missing are a rotating bezel and any sign of a water resistance rating.
The fit and finish of the case is similar to what you'd expect from a £10 - £20 watch. It looks ok but feels a little light and doesn't exactly scream durability. There are no material markings on it, but the press-on case back appears to be stainless steel. The body of the case is fairly soft, obviously not stainless, but enthusiastic scraping inside suggests that it's same-colour throughout rather than plated brass, so shouldn't look too scabby as it wears.
The dial has green "luminous look" markers, but the only parts that actually glow in the dark are the hands and the bezel "pip" - which is raised and doesn't look like it'll stay attached for long in use. The mineral glass appears to be fitted using a nylon "I" seal. This will be confirmed later when I'm in the workshop.
The two-layer nylon webbing strap actually feels quite solid and is fully stitched round its edges. It has a stainless steel buckle and is attached to the watch by stainless spring bars.
Removing the case back shows seals to the back and crown, so it should have some level of water resistance. Whether or not it'll cope with the pressure tester, or to what depth, remains to be seen but it looks as good as many of the cheaper 50m watches out there so the lack of a depth marking may simply be saving the cost of testing.
Oddly, my previous guess about the possible movements was wrong. The watch uses a Seiko Epson AL55A movement. That's odd for a couple of reasons. First, it's not the cheapest out there - the PC21 and 2035 have that honour between them. But it's also obsolete, so they've either retained stock from a previous issue or they've bought up discontinued movements at a bargain price. Still, it's a reliable enough movement and is a direct swap iirc for the current AL21 or Y121 if needed. Battery life is 2 years, and there's a Maxell cell fitted, which is good quality.
So, on initial inspection, it seems to be a decent £10 - £20 rrp watch, in a pleasant style if you like that sort of thing, for a £10 asking price.
I'll be down in the workshop tomorrow and see what it takes to break it
Brill, thanks very much for the in-depth. I'll post up some pics of my lot when I get home. The fit and finish of the case is similar to what you'd expect from a £10 - £20 watch. It looks ok but feels a little light and doesn't exactly scream durability. There are no material markings on it, but the press-on case back appears to be stainless steel. The body of the case is fairly soft, obviously not stainless, but enthusiastic scraping inside suggests that it's same-colour throughout rather than plated brass, so shouldn't look too scabby as it wears.
The dial has green "luminous look" markers, but the only parts that actually glow in the dark are the hands and the bezel "pip" - which is raised and doesn't look like it'll stay attached for long in use. The mineral glass appears to be fitted using a nylon "I" seal. This will be confirmed later when I'm in the workshop.
The two-layer nylon webbing strap actually feels quite solid and is fully stitched round its edges. It has a stainless steel buckle and is attached to the watch by stainless spring bars.
Removing the case back shows seals to the back and crown, so it should have some level of water resistance. Whether or not it'll cope with the pressure tester, or to what depth, remains to be seen but it looks as good as many of the cheaper 50m watches out there so the lack of a depth marking may simply be saving the cost of testing.
Oddly, my previous guess about the possible movements was wrong. The watch uses a Seiko Epson AL55A movement. That's odd for a couple of reasons. First, it's not the cheapest out there - the PC21 and 2035 have that honour between them. But it's also obsolete, so they've either retained stock from a previous issue or they've bought up discontinued movements at a bargain price. Still, it's a reliable enough movement and is a direct swap iirc for the current AL21 or Y121 if needed. Battery life is 2 years, and there's a Maxell cell fitted, which is good quality.
So, on initial inspection, it seems to be a decent £10 - £20 rrp watch, in a pleasant style if you like that sort of thing, for a £10 asking price.
I'll be down in the workshop tomorrow and see what it takes to break it
Ok, found time to stick it in the pressure tester today, and the results were pretty impressive.
First off, I ran a basic 30m test (effectively splashproof). For those who haven't seen how wet testing of watches is done:
You place the watch in the air space in a chamber that's part-filled with water. You then pressurise the chamber to the required depth and leave it for about 10 minutes.
If there are any leaks then pressurised air will enter the watch, equalising the pressure inside and out. Next, the watch is lowered into the water and the pressure reduced. Any leaks will show up by the air bubbling out the same way it got in.
In this case, the watch passed without any dramas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
I then ran a 50m (swimmable) test, which it also passed without problem. I'm getting quite impressed by this stage. I'm afraid I managed to delete the video of that one, but it was a good test.
Finally, I decided to take it to the limit of my tester (120m). That gave an interesting result. At 110m (that's 160psi pressure) I stopped for a cigarette because hand pumping those things is hard work. It sat there for about 5 minutes, and I was just about to take it that last 10 metres when the glass imploded. Unfortunately, again, I failed to capture it on video because I was planning to film the decompression only. But here's the results:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
That's an interesting result because it means that it was proof at 110 metres! If it had any leaks then the pressure would have equalised and there would have been nothing to break the glass.
The implosion has chipped the dial, bent the hands, smashed the case ring and popped the back off, but you can just see in the video that the watch is still running!
I was planning on subjecting it to a simulated mine explosion after making it leak, but I haven't the heart to now. So, it's going to be given a tidy up, a new glass (thicker than original), case ring, and an honoured place in my collection. For a tenner, I think it's earned it!
First off, I ran a basic 30m test (effectively splashproof). For those who haven't seen how wet testing of watches is done:
You place the watch in the air space in a chamber that's part-filled with water. You then pressurise the chamber to the required depth and leave it for about 10 minutes.
If there are any leaks then pressurised air will enter the watch, equalising the pressure inside and out. Next, the watch is lowered into the water and the pressure reduced. Any leaks will show up by the air bubbling out the same way it got in.
In this case, the watch passed without any dramas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
I then ran a 50m (swimmable) test, which it also passed without problem. I'm getting quite impressed by this stage. I'm afraid I managed to delete the video of that one, but it was a good test.
Finally, I decided to take it to the limit of my tester (120m). That gave an interesting result. At 110m (that's 160psi pressure) I stopped for a cigarette because hand pumping those things is hard work. It sat there for about 5 minutes, and I was just about to take it that last 10 metres when the glass imploded. Unfortunately, again, I failed to capture it on video because I was planning to film the decompression only. But here's the results:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
That's an interesting result because it means that it was proof at 110 metres! If it had any leaks then the pressure would have equalised and there would have been nothing to break the glass.
The implosion has chipped the dial, bent the hands, smashed the case ring and popped the back off, but you can just see in the video that the watch is still running!
I was planning on subjecting it to a simulated mine explosion after making it leak, but I haven't the heart to now. So, it's going to be given a tidy up, a new glass (thicker than original), case ring, and an honoured place in my collection. For a tenner, I think it's earned it!
Variomatic said:
Ok, found time to stick it in the pressure tester today, and the results were pretty impressive.
First off, I ran a basic 30m test (effectively splashproof). For those who haven't seen how wet testing of watches is done:
You place the watch in the air space in a chamber that's part-filled with water. You then pressurise the chamber to the required depth and leave it for about 10 minutes.
If there are any leaks then pressurised air will enter the watch, equalising the pressure inside and out. Next, the watch is lowered into the water and the pressure reduced. Any leaks will show up by the air bubbling out the same way it got in.
In this case, the watch passed without any dramas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
I then ran a 50m (swimmable) test, which it also passed without problem. I'm getting quite impressed by this stage. I'm afraid I managed to delete the video of that one, but it was a good test.
Finally, I decided to take it to the limit of my tester (120m). That gave an interesting result. At 110m (that's 160psi pressure) I stopped for a cigarette because hand pumping those things is hard work. It sat there for about 5 minutes, and I was just about to take it that last 10 metres when the glass imploded. Unfortunately, again, I failed to capture it on video because I was planning to film the decompression only. But here's the results:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
That's an interesting result because it means that it was proof at 110 metres! If it had any leaks then the pressure would have equalised and there would have been nothing to break the glass.
The implosion has chipped the dial, bent the hands, smashed the case ring and popped the back off, but you can just see in the video that the watch is still running!
I was planning on subjecting it to a simulated mine explosion after making it leak, but I haven't the heart to now. So, it's going to be given a tidy up, a new glass (thicker than original), case ring, and an honoured place in my collection. For a tenner, I think it's earned it!
First off, I ran a basic 30m test (effectively splashproof). For those who haven't seen how wet testing of watches is done:
You place the watch in the air space in a chamber that's part-filled with water. You then pressurise the chamber to the required depth and leave it for about 10 minutes.
If there are any leaks then pressurised air will enter the watch, equalising the pressure inside and out. Next, the watch is lowered into the water and the pressure reduced. Any leaks will show up by the air bubbling out the same way it got in.
In this case, the watch passed without any dramas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
I then ran a 50m (swimmable) test, which it also passed without problem. I'm getting quite impressed by this stage. I'm afraid I managed to delete the video of that one, but it was a good test.
Finally, I decided to take it to the limit of my tester (120m). That gave an interesting result. At 110m (that's 160psi pressure) I stopped for a cigarette because hand pumping those things is hard work. It sat there for about 5 minutes, and I was just about to take it that last 10 metres when the glass imploded. Unfortunately, again, I failed to capture it on video because I was planning to film the decompression only. But here's the results:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Yzs8r6t3k&fe...
That's an interesting result because it means that it was proof at 110 metres! If it had any leaks then the pressure would have equalised and there would have been nothing to break the glass.
The implosion has chipped the dial, bent the hands, smashed the case ring and popped the back off, but you can just see in the video that the watch is still running!
I was planning on subjecting it to a simulated mine explosion after making it leak, but I haven't the heart to now. So, it's going to be given a tidy up, a new glass (thicker than original), case ring, and an honoured place in my collection. For a tenner, I think it's earned it!
Impressive.11 out of 10 for a test report that's better than anything I've ever read in Which? magazine!
just a bit peeved I didn't get that one, the SBS - wasn't particularly struck with it. Prob too late to get one now.
These just seem to sell out in a day in the newsagents. Could subscribe I suppose and then cancel when I feel like it?
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff