Will the real Bond NATO please stand up

For some years a sub community of the watch community that I believe is more correctly classified under the King Wang Community have lapped up (like a kitten milk) that a particular colour pattern  of NATO strap was correctly called "The Bond NATO" ... without even questioning anything about it. Such as:

• was it the colours we're told it is (by strap sellers on eBay largely)?
• was it even a NATO or just a strap?

(its a fine line between watch enthusiast / collector and Wanger. A follower of King Wan is largely unimaginative and seeking to be told what they should like but it must be expensive & flashy). 

Like all things in the Kingdom of Wang false ideas are the jewel in the crown. 

This term essentially stems from the movie Goldfinger where Bond is shown wearing a Rolex (extra wanking cred there these days) with a nylon strap. I'm going to cut to the chase here and show an image from Goldfinger which shows clearly that which is "thought to be" the Bond NATO is not correct. So in Goldfinger, right at the start, we have Bond emerge from the water in SCUBA gear and infiltrate a place (of purveyance?) and begin setting some explosive charges on some drums.

He checks the time and you can see dimly and fleetingly his strap (which doesn't properly fit his watch). Indeed in that fleeting glimpse it does indeed seem like its a match for the classic Bond NATO which we all know and love. Its understandable from this scene that the view of it being black and grey is a reasonable one because its dark and you only get this fleeting view.

However when you see the next scene in the bar we see him check the time, just before the explosions go off. 

This shot reveals two things 1) its not a NATO and 2) actual colours: it appears to be black with green and very fine red lines either side of the green, but appearances (on VHS or worse) can be deceptive. (as an aside this shot shows just how bright the old radon based lume was). 

Thus to believe the Bond NATO view as its been presented is to have not paid much attention during Goldfinger and to have simply gone with first image as seen on a freeze frame on your VCR (remember them?) and ignored the later one.

Now the image here is taken from a frame of my (now quite old) Bond DVD (NOTE, not Blu-ray HD) which isn't actually a remaster. Perhaps on older TV's it would be less clear than this ... helping perpetuate the myth (which is actually a relatively recent phenomenon and perhaps exploding more as watch wankers soaked up the mythology needed for their official blazer badge).

I am not the first to be observing this mistaken identity (far from it) as this site (here) makes plain. The purpose of this post is to 

1. add another voice to that call
2. further my King Wang series (which started here) where (for some) wanking takes priority over reality

From the Rolex magazine (2005): 

In Goldfinger, Sean Connery as James Bond wears a Rolex Submariner [Reference 6538] as pictured below, on a Regimental belt strap. Many people say Sean Connery wore his 6538 Submariner on a NATO strap. This is not true. There has NEVER been a James Bond movie in which James wears a NATO. 

Note that the strap that Sean Connery wears has 9 stripes total consisting of Dark Navy Blue, Dark Olive Olive and fine burgundy stripes. The most interesting part of this story is that Daniel Craig was recently seen wearing and talking about his Rolex 6538 that he wears on a NATO strap.

Oops ... 

They go on to say:

... The strap Sean Connery is wearing is a Royal Scots government strap, and its formal colour names are: Peony Red, Gosling Green and Oxford Blue. The Royal Scots, also know as "The Royal Regiment" is the oldest British Army Regiment. It was founded in 1633 by Sir John Hepburn by a Royal Warrant from King Charles I, who recruited 1200 men in Scotland. On March 28, 2006, the Royal Scots merged with other Scottish Infantry Regiments to become The Royal Regiment of Scotland.

Which is very befitting of Connery who was a Scotsman (and it was his personal watch).

But are we correcting this or is the mainstream just going with the wrong facts? I say the latter ... Indeed some sellers are now aware of this and are selling a "Vintage" (King Wang?) version of the Bond NATO

So the King Wang of the "proper" appearance of the Bond NATO can't be changed now (because the knob on the end prevents the hand coming off) and there is now a Vintage Bond NATO strap. 

Sigh

but what about NATO?

The funniest thing about this is not only (as Rolex Magazine mentions) has no bond ever worn a NATO strap, its that NATO Strap hails from much later in history (1973 actually) than the Goldfinger movie while Goldfinger was released in 1964, so without a time machine its pretty hard to imagine they had a NATO strap.

Its probably too late to stop this with the tide now fully in, but in the interests of preventing even more wanking about this...

I thought this post may play a small part.

Best Wishes

PS: Today (10/09/2021) it came to my attention that subsequent to the writing of the Rolex Magazine (2005) that Omega has taken on the mythos with their Seamaster range and added a Bond NATO (not the Traditional) into their range. Let me cite their product literature:

It's fitting that an ex-naval commander would choose a Seamaster. In SPECTRE, Bond wears two. The OMEGA Seamaster 300 SPECTRE Limited Edition with rare lollipop seconds hand and black and grey NATO strap; and the OMEGA Aqua Terra 150m: a striking watch with a blue dial that recalls OMEGA's rich maritime heritage and Bond's naval background.

But no mention of it being a Bond NATO strap ... just black and grey NATO ... 

So lets look at the Bond Films:

 Dr. No (1962)
From Russia with Love (1963)
Goldfinger (1964)
Thunderball (1965)
You Only Live Twice (1967)
Casino Royale (1967)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969
Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
Live and Let Die (1973)              <<<NATO strap invented
The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
Moonraker (1979)
For Your Eyes Only (1981)
Never Say Never Again (1983)
Octopussy (1983)
A View to a Kill (1985)
The Living Daylights (1987)
Licence to Kill (1989)
GoldenEye (1995)
Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
The World Is Not Enough (1999)
Die Another Day (2002)
Casino Royale (2006)
Quantum of Solace (2008)
Skyfall (2012)
Spectre (2015)                        <<< First Bond to wear a NATO
No Time to Die (2021ish)

Pretty clearly a Bond NATO isn't a thing isn't it ... So to me its cash in on the false premise and make it truth. Perfect marketing opportunity created for you.

Personally I think Chrissie summed it up well here

ouhh ...

making my work watch visually workable

 A little while back I bought a Seiko 5 (SNK805) as a dabble back into analogue watches after a few years in digital / training watches. Keeping with the practical view I was attracted also by a fully mechanical watch which I could wear as a daily driver. However it turned out that while I liked the watch for many reasons I found that seeing the time (especially when just taking a quick glance) was a more deliberate effort of "reading the time" rather than the decades honed ability to "see the time" (more or less instant recogntion of where the hands are). 

This lead me to buy another watch which was more practical as well as a bit more smart casual where I could see the hands better. I now wear that watch as my daily driver and this nice SNK hardly comes out of the box, except when I'm working and so its become my work watch (or beater as the A Merry Cans like to call it ... in their usual curious way {a beater here is a category of wanker}).

However even then it took a moment if I wasn't wearing glasses (such as when working on my motorcycle electricals) mostly the problem was being clear about which hand was which, as both hands are quite similar in shape ...

In sharp enlarged screen size like this its mostly pretty clear which hand is which, but with diminishing close vision (exacerbated in lower light or wearing sunglasses) it took too much attention (or putting on my glasses, normally reserved for reading) it came out more like this

I've left this smaller to make it more obvious. As it happens the aging process gets our eyes eventually even if you started out needing glasses.

I wanted something which was not absurdly arty meaning something which would normally be fitted onto a watch, and found this replica of a Citizen Divers watch hands (a picture of which I found on the net).

Divers watches (before they became the domain of "never been diving watch wankers") are  the very essence of practical and with a high requirement of unambiguous clarity of reading; which I thought was quite suitable.

The hands arrived and I did a quick lay over of them to see how it looked.

It ticked all my boxes.

Now I understand why there may be some aesthetic objections to this but I'd like to say that the very nature of a field watch is practical and functional, so it is sort of a highly specific "Jewellery" category. 

With the hands now fitted it looks like this

Which has grown on me substantially in the last few days that its been there. Not only is it highly legible without my glasses but adds a classic 70's look to a watch which tries to look like military field watch. The large size of the paddle which is the hour hand instantly draws your vision to wards it and then the minute hand. Which is just what I wanted.

Some other win win aspects of this are that while the minute hand is visible to me its far less visually significant, which is EXACTLY what I have always wanted out of a watch. Indeed I've often considered a one hander such as this UNO

which is the ultimate in uncluttered reading if you ask me. Entirely sufficient to know the important stuff like: 

• what hour it is,
• is it on the hour near or just past the hour.

Stuff like minutes are the stuff of schedules and train time tables (because lets face it one has to be at the Airport much earlier now). For time critical stuff of course I rely on my phone now too.

This however is a great compromise because you can have a minute hand to pick out that if you wish (and on a smaller dial like this that's a significant bonus)

The Down Sides

The astute will have noticed that my SNK now no longer has a second hand. This was not (at first) an aesthetic choice because I was sort of slavishly reassembling my watch. I had decided to refit the original second hand (because I liked it) and unfortunately munged it up on reassembly

I discovered that it was very difficult to coordinate the (low priced) bench press type that I used to refit the hands and now believe that I would have been better off with a simple hand tool where I could feel things and use my depth perception to better place the hands. The hour and minute hands went ok, but the accuracy needed for getting the shaft down this hole meant that it was a no go. Rather than risk damage to the watch movement I just removed the second hand and left it.

I don't really feel that a second hand brings much to the table on such a watch particularly when "hacking" (or the ability to perfectly set the minute hand and second hands together) isn't present (but you can sort of do it). The only other useful function of the second hand is to show you its working.

Given that its an automatic (without hand winding) if I pick it up and the time is wrong then part of resetting and winding (before I put it on) will be to check the rear mechanism through the display back

So while its an accident I think I prefer it this way. 

What it looks like to me in daily use is like this:

I can see the grass clearly without my glasses, but not my watch (just like the above). But even like this you can see the time even if you can't read the numbers.

Takeouts

things I've learned from this:

• modding a watch is dooable but you need to have patience and preparation
• cheap tools are going to give you grief
• modding a watch can with a little planning and shopping around make a watch you like better.
• take your time, expect some small setbacks

Lastly I recommend this blog post.

Happy Modding :-)

harvest

I've been waiting for the good angle and light on this one, didn't get the light I'd have wanted but I think I'm ok with what nature provided.

I'm pretty sure the farmer is too.

I'm also still pretty happy with my Sony A7 and a humble selection of lenses which are in the main manual focus Canon FD series lenses from the 1970's

:-)

recovering space on my phone

 I've had this Oppo phone for some time now (like 2016) and its been a trooper, I purchased it with a smaller amount of storage memory 16GB because it had an SD card slot which I could put in anything I liked (and currently have 128GB in there) and could put my bulkier media, douments and camera images onto that (which I also think is a better safety strategy).

Recently however its been giving me messages that it was running low on storage and I tried various things like:

•  moving files (there weren't many) over to the SD card
• clearing cache on all apps (wasn't really much in there)
• removing a few bulkier apps that I don't use much (Uber, AirBnB ...)

but to no avail, it was always nearly full and I at most gained a GB

It transpired that I needed to do a transfer over to my "spare" phone (identical model and spec) which I'd bought used in excellent condition for $50 a year or so back (for Justin Case), so I did a backup of all settings, apps and data onto the SD, transferred it and then restored.

My apps were all there BUT one important thing became clear, I had a shit ton more space

like what the actual ... ?

My only rational explanation for this is that there must be a shit ton of crap thats up in "protected" areas of the phone (this phone is NOT rooted) that somehow were taking up space. Candidates for this could include many things but for instance:

• every time an app is updated the downoladed APK file may be kept somewhere and never deleted
• each OS update may do the same
• apps may be stored in "deltas" allowing roll back  but the developers were too lazy to manage that (so they're all there)
• log files (as I've found a few ones such as the full log of every OTG connection (date, data transferred and whatnot) I've ever done

Previous explorations of the state of storage in SD 0 has always looked pretty much like this:

with that data (this is a current view) nowhere near being sufficiient to explain the contents of the entire system being what it is, the visible material adds up to under 400MB, yet its reporting that 4.14GB is used (which must be all the installed apps).

So...

if you have a phone with a compact amount of storage then maybe a backup, full factory reset and restore will help you out too.

Hope that Helps

work watch

 Spent yesterday getting the bike back together again after a long hiatus, essentially (working backwards from getting it running) the  regulator bit within the rectifier regulator died resulting in:

1. destroying the battery
2. with the battery now out of the way destroying the engine immobilizer (happily not the fuel injection system)
3. thus stopping the bike

So with all that now finally assembled and going, I sat back to enjoy my handy work and thought "I'll take a picture of my favourite Seiko 5 watch" (I have 2 other Seiko 5s which are bigger thus getting in the way when working) and only then noted the coincidence of alignment of the hands

of course no less predictable than the alignment of planets, but then that sort of fascinates me too.

responding to changes and emergencies

I'm quite fond of philosophy that doesn't rely on "magic plot devices" such as "god will help" ... I prefer instead to see things from the perspective of "all humans have strength and dignity" (well except malignant narcissists manifest large in politicians like Trump et al).

So whatever your facing humans have faced it before and the Stoics formulated some philosphy around this common experience. For everything we face today humans have faced for thousands of years before.

Marcus Aurelius is one of my go to philosophers (and was of course once a Roman Emperor)

the parable of bob

 yep

a beauty from the past

 A while ago I ummed and ahhhed about buying a particular watch, a 1965 (see PS) Seiko Sportsman, one of the first movements (or calibres) that Seiko made themselves (they were using Swiss movements for a while).

after a bit of thought I decided to buy it, but the seller had sold it some hours before. So I just went my own way.

Then they contacted me and said they buyer had returned it, so after a bit more thought (I'd already decided I wasn't really in need of another) I decided to buy it; and in so many ways I'm glad I did.

Its totally nothing like modern watches, in fact its simply beautiful for a humble price of €170.

not only it is it simple uncluttered and clear to read, but its actually amazingly thin

the body weighing under 26g ... yes, that's like half the weight of my SNK805 and thinner too (of course its NOT an automatic, so points to the SNK there for jamming in that additional mechanism.

Speaking of which...

And this seems to fit this data.

The dial size is almost exactly what modern watches are, which makes it easy to read, but the weight is simply wonderful, light on the wrist and very easy to wear.

My intention is to make this a "dress watch" for at its age its done the hard work of a functioning business watch for an executive, probably some daily wearing of some lesser paid office workers and finally left in a drawer.

So a time piece from a time before I existed (to be fair I doubt much of who is me existed in when I was one). I'm happy to be a custodian of it for a time.

PS: given the data from the back the year (only the last digit of it) is represented by one of the following serial numbers leading digits.

I'm just unsure which so given the movement, its either a '66 or a '65 as I understand things. However the top line code produces a weird result:

more as it comes to hand.

PPS

Ok, I got a reply from a Seiko enthusiast which suggests that 661990 is also written (perhaps later as their code evolved?) as 66-1990 as its movement (noted above) is a type 66 (apparently A or B are not distinguished. This clarifies that its a Feb 65 manufacture.

And it got a clean and lube recently too

works lovely now

another example of perioperative management of INR around a small procedure

I needed to have a little surgery to remove arthritis from my toe, so this being a peripheral surgery where bleeds were less likely (because of bloodless surgery possible on peripheral limbs and thus less life threatening) I perhaps took a little slacker approach on my management of  Anti Coagulation Therapy (ACT , aka warfarin).

Its just a day after hospital, so too early to talk about outcomes, but it feels like everything went well so far.

So my plan was to replicate what I did in my previous surgical procedure (which btw has a much higher risk of fatal bleeds) but perhaps act a little more conservatively on the cessation of ACT 

My procedure was slated for PM on Friday the 16th, accordingly my plan was this:

• half dose evening (regular dose time) for evening before procedure
• no dose on the evening of the procedure (after it)
• resume dose following day (evening)

Given what I found I probably should have reviewed more closely what I identified in the previous situation and gone with zero dose the evening before as well ... perhaps half the day before that.

A few more data points before the 16th would have been good, but it would seem that my INR didn't shift much (or was higher than 3 on the 14th 15th and I didn't know) as a result of the half dose and indeed rise after surgery.

Further I'd suggest that the small rise in INR despite the significant drop in dose suggests that if I had simply continued that its possible my INR may have gone higher (to perhaps 4) in the period soon after surgery. Something best avoided. So next time (I hope not, but probably there'll be) I'll monitor daily (to get data) and reduce dose to half earlier and withhold the day before the surgery.

Either way now is still a good time to have a reduced INR during post operative healing, so I'll be steering towards INR = 2 for the next week

why I'm not (quite) a watch collector

I'm one of those strange creatures who doesn't suffer badly from nostalgia. Recently this watch was posted for sale...

Its a beautiful watch and in its time ground breaking.

However there have been improvements in watches and in so many ways modern watches are actually better; I mean Seiko has not advanced as a company by making worse watches ... to me this is exemplified by the SRPE range and in my  61K1 model. It came with a NATO (perhaps to save money, I don't know) but I quickly discovered  that such straps are (in my view) best in the era of watches when they were made for slimmer, lighter, smaller watches. I know balance plays a part in wrist feel of the watch, more so than outright weight. So I thought I'd try this budget bracelet out on my 61K1, it looks great (but has some fit issues) and importantly feels great and nicely balanced now.

I see however that many people are highly fond of the 60's watches which had bubble style crystals, perhaps because it looks retro.

Well to me Retro is good when retro is better, and I can say that in my experience having grown up with bubble crystals / glass I can say that when I got a watch in the  70's (a digital) with a flat face I was 100% a convert. My Sports 100 simply would not have lasted this time if it didn't have a flat face and I can honestly say that in the vast majority of viewing angles is superior to see the time. Its actually hard to photograph (because it hard to see without orientating the watch to actually show them) what 30 years of hard use as the only watch I wore has done

In practical daily use bubbles get smacked a lot more (because they protrude more). Bubbles come from limitations in design and manufacturing capability ... so actually this technology is inferior to the flat crystals we now use.

Of course people buy watches for other reasons than practical, and the spectrum of "practical instrument to decorative jewellery", and while I lean towards the former there is of course an element of the latter.

So because of this leaning towards the practical I also know that watches will get marked in usage (as seen above), and its always the first obvious mark which attracts attention. This leads to (in my observation) anxiety in one's preshuss (jewellery) coming to harm ... which sort of obviates the goal of it being practical.

Now I have good friends who are sort of collectors as they have a selection of watches, these folk in the main work in professional inside roles (not like say a diver or a construction engineer where their watches will not come to harm) where their watches are like other items of their daily dress. Just like choosing a pair of shoes (I only have a few of them too) for the day the watch is like getting dressed.

So with that out of the way I appear to be becoming a collector of sorts with this addition to my set of watches:

From 1972, which has a bubble glass and is definitely more a dress item than a daily driver. It will however get worn.

But a collector is one who seldom puts on their watch (often having many to choose from) to go out and do stuff ... or if they do they have what is now charmingly called "a beater". I knew beater as another meaning for too long to have that displaced by this usage.

a reflection on the past

 Back in 2013 I wrote this post when testing a few lenses (old and new) on camera systems old and new. There I pondered the following:

So compared with keeping 35mm neg and micro4/3 (NB going to the Sony A7) I would

• rationalize bodies and lenses (being able to use the 35mm lenses on both systems)
• but still need to carry a 35mm film body for high contrast work

and still need to spend a bundle on the A7 (and more or less be only getting a small advantage?).

These words came back to me in recently taking this photograph with my A7 and the Samyang 35mmf2.8 lens:

I took this with my A7 (bought about 2 years back now) which at once shows the beautiful contrast capacity of modern (and well priced) optics and the still difficult limitations for those of us who like to shoot into the sun. 

Difficult because instead of seeing the sun in the sky we see  only a blown out nuclear blast effect where the sun is to our eyes. I'm reminded of this with these photographs which clearly show the disc of the sun without blowout around them:

and

Of course I moved to the A7 because:

• increasingly colour film development was becoming vexed
• my excellent Nikon film scanner used a comms technology which was becoming obsolete (and required me to keep ancient hardware going to keep it going (or VMWare))
• moving around required me to risk getting that system damaged (its pretty sensitive gear after all, with precision moving parts)

So I've had to "join the future" and give up what I once had, pretty much we all have.

Crops and Sun

Sometimes, the world is beautiful

 

well, often actually

a better look at my SRPE Seiko(s)

All this started with my (relatively) recent purchase of a Seiko 5 SNK series, but as I had trouble reading that face I found myself wanting the simplicity of Divers watch face, but didn't really want the extra bulk and bezel of the Divers. This led me to find the SRPE 61K1 (or "dress KX) and that's been a really nice step into what is essentially a new class of watch...

Hybrid of Dress and Diver

I was drawn to the Sports 100 (featured here) not just for its (still) beautiful orange face, but for its easy to read dial, which is pretty much part of the DNA of a Divers. So while I didn't want the super chunky type of Divers watches back then I was doing enough surf swimming, snorkelling and occasional diving that a light divers which looked good in a suit at work was important.

Watches are of course a type of Jewellery and so we choose something which we feel reflects something of ourselves which we'd like to communicate in our dress. So as I've always been an outdoor type a divers or similar watch follows the character of me. However at work and in my other social life I don't want to have something which is a big chunky notification (and often a bit inconvenient).

This leads me to find the SRPE series an excellent middle ground (and interestingly not dissimilar to the watch made famous by Marlin Brando in Apocalypse Now (link to Hodinkee) which (at the request of the Director) had the bezel removed to make it look less gaudy).

... of course the crown is at the Seiko classic 4O'clock not the 3O'clock of the Rolex.

For a watch which cost me far less in todays dollars than my Sports 100 did back in the 80's its  hard  to be more pleased with a watch.

As I mentioned in that video, the thickness is greater than my Sports 100. This image is my SNK Seiko 5, the SRPE then my Sports 100

Both it and the 61K1 are beautiful and while I paid more for the 61K1 the 65K1 has become my daily wear.

shimming the axle

 I've noted when undoing my axle that there is too much play for my taste (less is better) when the axle takes the forces of the motor torque (in order to power foward).

So I've added a shim of 0.3mm Aluminium Flashing to wrap around the axle to not only take up that, but move the future damage to that shim not keep letting the axle chew out the fork.

So, for the interested,  here's a video on that

Enjoy

Cash Strapped Straps

 I finally got the straps for my two new Seikos and after farting about with a few band (all cheapies) lashed out (nearly a month ago) for this pair which I thought would suit the characters of these two watches nicely

The Green SRPE65K1

SRPE61K1

Each band was under AU$20.

They've made the watches feel nicer on and more balanced. I'm pretty pleased with the outcome. I still have the NATO's or straps if I feel the desire to move back or just have a change, but I am pretty sure that aside from the black one (which might get a steel bracelet) the brown and the green is pretty good on the Budget Alpinist, and much better than the cheapo strap shown in that post.

I somehow still feel weird about having two almost identical watches, but there it is

The Seiko Budget Alpinist (and perhaps term coined?)

 Some time back I purchased the Seiko SRPE61K1 which is dubbed the Dress KX by some and did a quick review (here), however while searching for it a model appeared which I'd not heard of before (well and I'm no watch watcher) which was cheaper than the 61K1, the SRPE65K1 AU*4 

Which I was tempted by but kept on with the search of the 61K1 which I thought was significantly more lustrous with its sunburst dial.

After I had the 61K1 for a while I found that unlike my other watches that lovely dial was in some lights making it hard to see where the hands are. Great if you're after a time piece you like to admire for a bit but annoying when trying to find the time at a glance. So I thought it actually be easier to read the green one (there was a charcoal option too) in some lights and thought "oh what the hell" and bought it.

Having already struggled with the NATO band (which I like for comfort but which puts the watch further away from my wrist thus exacerbating the feeling of weight) I thought I'd try a brown strap and ordered one on eBay too.

I've had the watch for a while now and been using it variously with the standard NATO and a green plain strap which I discussed here:

and generally feels nicer than the NATO for the above mentioned reason. 

However a brown band arrived in due course (coming from China on a slow boat) and when I fitted it I was pretty instantly of the view that it made the watch look like an earlier model Alpinist (but of course without the hands or that compass rotating dial). 

I noted that Seiko have recently bumped up which are now more expensive and over AU$1000 now for the Alpinist. So in many ways at AU$360 for this 65K1 (and just $10 for that leather strap) I think that for all but the collectors this watch is a bargain.

I liked this so much that I fished around for something a bit more interesting and found this:

Which has become the default band.

Some time back now I also bought a green strap (well and another too) for my Seiko Sports 100 which I thought I'd try on this guy which I didn't think suited it as much as either brown leather strap. 

I hope you also found value for the video tip above which shows not only my other nylon fabric strap but also an advantage for slimmer wristed people in putting the buckle down.

:-)

Hanging off my wrist

Regular readers of my blog may notice that I recently decided to re-start wearing a watch; however this is a little misleading because my break without a watch has been perhaps less than it seems. So its from this standpoint I'm left wondering:

Why are watches so thick and heavy now?

Of course I started wearing a watch in school in the 70's because it was important to know the time and (hard to imagine for kids today) we didn't have phones. In the 80's I bought this watch: 

which I wore pretty much daily in conditions which would perhaps horrify the Rolex Watch Snob Set (distinct from just people who own a Rolex because to them its the same effective price this watch was at $200 when it was released in 1979 and they happen to like them).

Some time in about 2005 I stopped wearing it because simply the battery ran out and being over seas at the time (and having a mobile phone) didn't really need to.

It could be argued that I didn't have a watch again until May (but that would not be strictly true) this year when I bought this nice little Seiko 5 because I wanted a fully mechanical watch (which were sort of out of fashion when I bought the Sports 100 above).

its worth mentioning that while both have "analogue dials" the little Seiko 5 is fully mechanical:

not an electronic hybrid of gears to drive the hands with electronics to keep the time (Quartz), with merely mechanical hands (because digits are another argument all together).

(*the above taken when I changed my battery after being inspired to get it going as a result of enjoying the Seiko 5)

I liked the Seiko 5, but gradually found that without my glasses on and in lower light  I simply struggled to find the time on it (because the hands were too similar in size and shape). Partly this was because the hands are small and partly because the face is just a bit busy without clear indicators of the positions at the quaters. I found myself wanting the simplicity of my older Sports 100 dial where the face was clear of distractions and the primary 12, 3, 6 and 9 (compass) points were clear. Soon enough YouTube had (through the few searches I had made to find which Seiko 5 because there are quite a few in that range), pushed up the SRPE61K1 (called the Dress KX in that review) to me and suddenly I found the watch I was looking for

A lovely dial (and btw, I still love the metallic orange of the Sports 100 that I've had now for around 35 years) that's uncluttered and by the shapes easy to see the time.

It has a sort of "nod" to the style of a divers watch, while not being as utilitarian and doesn't waste space on the rotating bezel, which I don't really need.

Fairly quickly however I became aware of "hey, this things heavy" and feels bulky, which although I'd had a (pseudo) Diver for most of my time I found that indeed it was thicker and heavier than my Sports 100 ... now I'm sure that was a marketing aspect of the watch back in 1979 when it was first released, but it came as a discovery to me (some 40 years later) just how advanced this watch actually was back then.

Measurements

The differences feel more than appear, but as best as I could I tried to photograph it in a way to explain this difference, the order is the SNK, the SRPE and the much older Sports 100 "diver":

So relative to the aged Sports 100 (bottom of course) the SRPE "KX" is nearly 30% thicker while the SNK is only about 13% thicker (and I must say didn't feel significantly different on the wrist). Indeed due to its nice nylon strap felt lighter.

Weights

The scales tell an interesting story, these figures are watch alone (straps removed)

Watch	Weight (g)
Sports 100	62.55
SNK805	47.24
SRPE61K1	59.68

Which explains why the SNK felt so light but the KX and the Sports 100 are actually more similar, which leads me to ask myself "why does it feel heavier"? 

Balance is the reason

The answer is found in the balance of the band and the watch, for the watch does not sit alone on your wrist. Now at the moment the Sports 100 has a metal bracelet, which makes a difference compared to the light weights of the nylon straps on the other two watches. Basically it balances out the blob of the heavier watch.

The bracelet on the Sports 100 weighs 33.64g, which is almost the weight of just the Seiko 5 watch, which comes with a nylon strap that weighs a mere 14g - bringing watch and strap to 61.32g or lighter than just the Sports 100 watch.

With a thicker and heavier watch this feeling exacerbated when putting it on. You can feel its heavier, but its the balance and smooth fit (shit, its been on my wrist for over 20 years, you can be sure its had some minor metal bending to fit) means that its weight is not as watch imbalanced and so sits more evenly weighted (and doesn't tend to hang on a band that weighs a small fraction of the watch.

Worse, the KX came with a NATO strap which is not only lighter but causes the watch to sit above not only the strap, but two layers of it, and therefore a few mm further up than the other watches.

Don't get me wrong, the NATO feels comfortable and distributes the weight, but I know when I change it out to the green strap I bought to experiment with on the Sports 100 it feels "better". Now it makes me feel that NATO straps make more sense on lighter thinner watches. Which interestingly is how watches were (generally speaking) "back in the day the NATO spec was drafted" as this blog makes clear. (an image I poached from that)

These watches however are all pretty similar, the 5 is 42.7mm the Sports 100 is 43.7 and KX is 44mm, this small difference is not actually surprising because I typically shun bigger ostentatious watches.

So where does this leave me. 

Well for a start it leaves me with two really nice watches (a third if I count my old faithful running again now) and significantly informed by the journey.

I bought the Seiko 5 because I wanted a "gentle in" to a new watch (in case for instance I lost interest) and was actually initially "inspired by a friends post on Facebook of a nice  military replica field watch. I also had another friend who collects (a little) WW2 era field watches and being more of an outdoor person wanted something more along that line.

Below you can see the two new Seikos side by side with the price (in Australian dollars) each cost me. This shows how little difference there is in time telling area vs just a bigger bit of steel in the case. 

Given that the 5 comes in all manner of configurations, it occurs to me now (if there was such a thing as a watch shop anymore{certainly not out here}) I could have done some window shopping and perhaps bought something between the two in the Seiko 5 range with a dial a bit more like the KX, but mostly they're divers and so probably its just better that I have this pair.

Well, actually its not that easy, because while I very much like the anthracite sunburst lustre of the KX above in some light its a bit hard to read (because of those lovely spectral reflections on the Sunburst dial making the hands disappear). So as lovely as it was to look at I felt I wanted something I could tell the time on easily ... which if you recall was what turned me away from the little green field watch.

As it happened while searching for the SRPE61K1 (which were getting thin on the ground on eBay) I found a a few related ones that had more plain dials, such as the SRPE65K1 with a green dial but otherwise the same. As I like green and already had a 20mm strap from the previous experiment on putting a strap on the Sports 100, I had strap for SRPE65K1 when it arrived. 

As it happens this has become my daily driver (although not with this strap) because:

• its easier to read the time (the glossy reflections do occasionally get in the way)
• looks a bit more dressy than the SNK, but not over the top
• feels good with a leather strap

I've ordered a couple of steel bracelets for both and will no doubt show them here, but I think that I'll be using the grey gloss face (probably with a steel bracelet) for when I want a dress watch and the green one for other times.

For the curious the model numbers are:

• SNK805K2 (the smaller Green Seiko 5)
• SRPE61K1 (the "Dress KX")
• SRPE65K1 (the latest addition)

and of course the Sports 100 from the 1980's, don't expect any additions to this for some time because I don't want to become a collector

PS: but I did buy this beauty.

:-)