The Ocean family has expanded once more, with the introduction of the Titanium 500 Premium. Opting for a original design rather than a homage, the only link to the Ocean range is the case and bracelet. It’ll cost you €590 / £455, so a fair bit pricier, but you do get a lot more for your money. Namely; full titanium case and bracelet, ceramic bezel insert, better lume, and a custom decorated rotor on an attractive movement.

Let’s take a closer look to see if it’ll harm, or add to, Steinharts’ reputation. 

The specs

• Diameter: 42mm
• Height: 13mm
• Lug to log length: 50mm
• Weight: 140g
• Crystal: double domed sapphire
• Bezel insert: ceramic
• Lume: Superluminova BGW9
• Case and bracelet material: titanium
• Movement: Soprod A10-2 with custom rotor

The case

The main characteristic of the case is the fact that it’s made of satin titanium. The satin finish is unusual, but visually pleasing. It’s a sort of cross between brushed, blasted and matt. It’s also fairly dark, and seems to be a little susceptible to marks.

Sized at 42mm in diameter, with a 50mm lug to lug length and height of 13mm, it’s a perfect match to the Ocean 1 and in my eyes a fitting size for a diver. Given the size, the lightweight properties of the titanium come to the fore when you consider the total weight of the whole watch including the bracelet: a mere 140g. That’s a pretty impressive 50g lighter than the steel Ocean 1.

The screw-in stainless steel exhibition caseback features the movement and custom rotor beautifully, but more on the Soprod A10-2 later.

The sapphire crystal is double-domed, which means that its domed on the top and underneath. The reason behind this is to negate any distortion the top dome usually has, so the dial remain legible at very tight angles. It has a double anti-reflective coating on the underside that provides a splash of blue if you get the angle right.

The unidirectional bezel boasts a ceramic bezel insert. The markings are accurately drilled out, and are filled with Superluminova BGW9. This lume is an upgrade to the usual Ocean 1 lume and you can certainly tell. It’s strong, bright, and charges quickly. It’s also used on the dial.

The screw-in crown’s definitive attribute is the Steinhart logo deeply engraved in the end. The grip is decent too, providing great purchase to smoothly unscrew it thanks to the solid thread. 

The water resistance rating is alluded to in the name, that being 500m. To fit that rating in an average size case is good, as sometimes they can be far too thick and unsightly. As far as I can tell, the only alteration from the standard Ocean 1 to increase the rating is the domed crystal.

The dial

The dial is a modern take on the classic Ocean 1 – Steinhart call it a “modern sports watch”. I definitely see what they mean.

Ditching the mercedes hands a for more rugged, chunky alternative, the Titanium 500 certainly has shed the homage status of the Ocean 1. There’s no applied elements at all, with everything printed directly onto the matt black dial. The printing across the dial is flawless and precise. The date window at 6 doesn’t have any sort of border to it either, just bevelled edging to make the hole neat.

The hour markers are simply painted lume: Superluminova BGW9, to match the bezel insert. Again, the lume is impressive thanks to the higher grade used.

I like the turquoise / blue splash of colour provided by the seconds hand and the “Titanium 500” label in the lower half of the dial. The deep rehaut also features this colour for the numbers at each 5 second interval.

As a watch that’s intended for serious diving, its primary goal is to be legible. This it is, thanks to the bold and bright hands and hour markers against the deep, dark dial.

The bracelet

The bracelet is the same satin titanium as the case, although I’ve noticed that it’s an ever so slightly different shade, and this has been reported on by a few people. I assume it’s because the cases and bracelets are made separately and then paired together so you’ll never get exactly the same. It doesn’t bother me, but it seems to be something that you’ll have to be aware of upon ordering.

It’s 22mm wide at the lugs, reducing down to 20mm at the buckle – a nice, decent size to suit the case. It’s a doddle to resize thanks to the screw pins, which glide in and out. The buckle has micro adjustment holes so you can get it fitting perfectly. When it’s sized right, it wears so well: light and comfortable.

I have noticed that after a month or so of wear, the bracelet is picking up a few little marks here and there. It seems to be that the satin finish isn’t quite a hard wearing as I would have hoped. Everything else about the build quality of the bracelet is great though; the machining is good, with no sharp edges, and it all fits together well.

The buckle is a match the bracelet in terms of colour, and feels durable and reliable when being used. It features the Steinhart logo deeply etched on the top locking flap.

The movement

The movement picked by Steinhart to power the Ocean Titanium 500 is the Soprod A10-2. It’s another equivalent to the ETA 2824, such as the Sellita SW200. It’s more expensive than the ETA equivalent because they make lower quantities and it has a higher level of finishing.

What you’re getting is still just as good though: Swiss Made, automatic, hacking second, hand winding, 25 jewels.

It’s also a more decorated movement, with blued screws, and pleasant peerage to the bridges. I also really like the custom golden Steinhart rotor – it makes it look very luxurious.

Final comments

Considering what you get for under £500, I’m happy to say that the Steinhart Ocean Titanium 500 is excellent value for money. There’s only one or two negative point I’ve been able to find about it, which is that the titanium finish seems to be easy to mark, plus the sight variation in shading between the case and bracelet.

I’m struggling to think of another watch that offers this much for the same price though. Swiss Made, a Swiss automatic movement with a custom rotor, 500m water rating, titanium case and bracelet, ceramic bezel, and great lume: all compelling reasons why this watch is worth every penny. You also get the usual decent Steinhart build quality.

What I’d love to see now, is a steel equivalent at an even cheaper price point. I feel that would be an even better watch as it’ll eradicate most people’s concerns with the titanium. Let’s hope.

But in the meantime, the Steinhart Ocean Titanium 500 is still a great watch.

The post Steinhart Ocean Titanium 500 Premium Watch Review appeared first on 12&60.

The case

Although the Ocean 1 is a homage to the Submariner, the case size is more for the modern man, being slightly larger. It measures 42mm in diameter, 13mm high, with a 50.5mm lug to lug length. In addition to this, it weighs in at around 170g (up to 190g if you have a larger wrist than I do, as the extra bracelet links will add onto the weight) so it is a pretty decent, impressive and heavy chunk of steel on your wrist. It demands immediate attention due to it’s size and obvious excellent build quality as soon as you set eyes upon it.

The case has a brushed finish on the top and bottom, with polished sides. This configuration follows on into the bracelet too, so the whole watch looks very refined. Personally, I also think this is very sensible and practical as having a brushed top rather than a polished top means it’s more resilient to any scratches or knocks. Having the polished sides keeps it looking smart and separates the case well.

One of the key things to notice with the case of the Steinhart Ocean 1 is the notoriously flat lugs. Looking at the watch side-on, you’ll notice that instead of sweeping down to hug the wrist, they go more or less straight out, with only a small down turn. This doesn’t really effect those with a flat wrist, but it does mean that if you have a round wrist which isn’t over 7 inches it can be uncomfortable and not fit that well.

The bezel is a classic Submariner style, as you’d expect. At 12 is has a lume pip within a triangle, and it has the usual first 15 minutes fully marked up with 1 and 5 minute markers. After that, it has a bar and a number alternating for every 5 minutes. The steel insert of the bezel is stuck in, which means it can be a bit of a pain to replace (take a look at our guide) but if you’re careful, and don’t bash your watch, hopefully you won’t need to. The printing is all accurate, with no marks or sloppiness apparent. The grip is good, nice and deep and well machined. It’s not sharp or uncomfortable to use. The action and feedback of the bezel when you rotate it is very satisfying, and sounds out a reassuring click at every one of it’s 120 positions. It feels like it has very high quality mechanics behind it. It is smooth and easy to use, rather than stiff and scratchy.

The screw-in crown is just as well machined as the rest of the case. Being brushed stainless steel, it looks very neat and functional. The thread feels good, reassuring you that you won’t be able to thread it easily. The grip is deep, and provides a very good level of purchase to unscrew the crown and manipulate the movement. It has the Steinhart logo raised in the centre of the end. I really like the design of the Ocean 1’s crown, as usually the logo of the watch would be either etched or embossed on the end of it. But this is a little different, having a lower matt level with the logo raised on top of it. A great design feature which is perfectly executed – it shows incredible attention to detail, which I love.

The crown guards protrude quite far, offering a good degree of protection to the crown itself. They extend smoothly from the side of the case and are elegantly designed and carried out.

The screw-in caseback is completely brushed stainless steel, to match the back of the case. It’s most prominent feature is the deep engraving of a Trojan riding a seahorse, an obvious reference to the Steinhart Ocean 1 being a divers watch. It has a high amount of detail and is engraved with excellent precision. Surrounding it is the various watch specifics, such as the name, depth rating, and the fact that it is a Swiss automatic, has a sapphire crystal, and is stainless steel. Not all completely necessary, but they’re done in a way that doesn’t overpower the caseback and also with great precision.

Sitting in top of the case is a thick sapphire crystal. You can tell this by tapping it: if it’s a high pitched “chinck” then it’s either a mineral crystal or a very thin sapphire. On the Ocean 1 however, it’s a nice deep thud, reassuring you that this isn’t going to get damaged very easily. Although there is no mention of it’s thickness in the spaces, I am led to believe that it is about 3.5-4mm thick. The crystal is flat, so it has no distortion at any angle. It is very slightly raised from the outer edge of the bezel, so you will have to be careful not to knock it.

There is a colourless layer of anti reflective coating situated on the underside. So you can’t see it reflect any sort if colour (blue usually), but rather it just does it’s job quietly with no flamboyance and reduces a large amount of reflections.

Another aspect of the sapphire crystal is the date magnifier, also known as the cyclops. This is positioned at 3, directly over the date window. It is glued onto the top of the crystal, as you can actually remove it if you don’t like it by heating up the crystal, which loosens up the glue. It’s application is spot on, not wonky or out of alignment. It magnifies the date pretty well, working at around a 1.5x magnification.

Due to it being a dive watch, it has the impressive rating of 300m / 30ATM water resistance, which means you can definitely dive with it. Overall, an excellently made case, which is very refined.

The dial

The Steinhart Ocean 1’s dial imitates the Rolex Submariner to a high degree. It has that class and timelessness about it.

The dial is a deep black, with a matt finish. Black dialled watches always look smart, and the Ocean 1 is no exception.

The main feature of the dial for me is the applied hour markers. Exquisitely made, they consist of a polished stainless steel surround and a lumed centre. At 12, the hour market is a tall upside down triangle. At 6 and 9, it’s a long thin rectangle. Everywhere else, it’s round. They are all extremely subtle, not too deep. But they are absolutely flawless. Even looking at them extremely closely you can’t see any marks or any misalignments – they’re perfect.

Of course, another key feature is the classic Mercedes hands. The Mercedes symbol used on the hour hand has no real significance, apart from the fact that it is a good design to hold the lume material… And looks cool. There was no affiliation between Rolex and Mercedes resulting in this design. The hour hand widens slightly, and then turns into the round Mercedes symbol. Following that, it has a relatively small arrow point tip. The minute hand again widens out first, and becomes a straight baton, with an arrow tip. And finally, the second hand is a very thin line of steel, with a lumed circle at the equivalent length of just past the Mercedes symbol on the hour hand, and has a small round counterweight on the bottom end.

The hands, just like the hour markers, are all polished stainless steel with lumed centres, and are immaculately made. Everything is just so clean and a crisp, it really is hard to find anything wrong with the dial.

The lume used is Super Luminova C1. It has proved to be strong and long lasting, as well as being able to charge quickly. It glows a bright green and is also located in the pip at 12 on the bezel.

Next, we move on to the date window and wheel. This can tend to get a little distorted due to the magnifier on top of the sapphire crystal. But, it’s nice to see that it, like everything else, it is well done, and offers a clear view of the date. Although you can’t really see it, the border to the date window has subtle inner bevelling, so it’s not just a plain square cut out of the dial, it’s a little more refined with a nice touch of finishing.

The printing on the dial is all very accurate and precise, with no marking or smudging at all.

The general appearance of the Steinhart Ocean 1’s dial is tried and tested thanks to Rolex, so it is extremely easy to read and a timeless design. And although it can be classed as relatively simple, it is very well executed – and again, high quality for the price.

The bracelet

The bracelet is 22mm wide for the whole length. Usually on a bracelet the buckle would be slightly thinner, but this isn’t the case on the Ocean 1. This gives the bracelet a very chunky feeling as it has decent width for the whole length.

The links are all brushed on the top and bottom, and polished along the sides, matching the finishing of the case. All the links are impeccably machined and are super smooth. There are no sharp edges so this results in a very comfortable wear.

The end links joining the bracelet to the case are very well shaped, fitting together with great accuracy. No wiggle or gaps.

The buckle is functional but I feel that it could be a little beefier to match the rest of the bracelet. The top is folded steel, which feels a little light when it’s open. When it’s closed you can’t really tell, but even so it would have been nice if it was a little more heavy duty. That’s the only negative comment about the whole bracelet really. The finishing on the top of the buckle is brushed steel and is high quality as is the rest of the watch.

The elbow joint in the buckle is nicely machined and well crafted. It’s completely polished and feels high quality. The movement of the joint is smooth. It’s also handy that the buckle has four micro adjustment points, but no divers extension.

The top flap (the double lock) is all polished creating a pleasant contrast of finishing. It has the Steinhart logo deeply etched into it which is a nice design cue and keeps it interesting. I like how the top flap isn’t just a plain flat tab, but rather it has a slight triangular bottom to it, again keeping things a bit interesting. One thing I do notice with this locking flap is that sometimes it can be hard to open, it feels as if it’s a little too tight. Not that that’s a big problem really, as it means that it’s going to be extra secure on your wrist.

All links have screw-in pins which makes altering the bracelet very easy. All you need is a thin technical screwdriver to take them apart, rather than a link removal tool.

Many people regard the Steinhart Ocean 1’s bracelet as excellent for the price, and I’m happy to agree with them.

The movement

The movement used in the Steinhart Ocean 1 is the excellent ETA 2824-2. A true workhorse movement, it is used by a great amount of Swiss Made watch manufacturers to provide them with a robust, simple and dependable automatic movement.

Even with the clamp-down the Swatch group are exercising over the availability of ETA movements, it’s good to know that Steinhart are still managing to get a supply. Who knows how long it will last for though. No doubt soon they’ll have to change movements – but for now that’s nothing to worry about.

The 2824-2 is a well specced movement, having all the usual functions. It’s a high beat movement, running at 28.8k bph (8 ticks per second) offering a very smooth sweep of the second hand, with no stuttering or wobble evident. It also has hand-wind capabilities, a hacking second hand, and the normal approx 40 hours power reserve.

The time keeping has proved to be excellently reliable and accurate, as you’d expect. The movement also feels reassuringly study and well made in the hand whilst adjusting – another demonstration of the quality and construction of the ETA 2824-2.

Final comments

The fact that you can get a watch like this for €350 is incredible. It’s just so well made and highly specced – you really can’t go wrong. The only two minor points really are the ever-so-slightly thin buckle (which is still very secure) and the lack of ingenuity in the design. But these are very minor. The fact that it is a direct homage to the Rolex Submariner means that it’s a bit of a “marmite” watch – you either love it or hate it. But, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s still a great watch for the money.

So yes, I’d highly recommend a Steinhart Ocean 1, just like all the others who have got one – and if you find a better Swiss Made diver for less then please tell me!

The post Steinhart Ocean 1 Watch Review appeared first on 12&60.

Both have iconic looks borrowed from Rolex (the Steinhart more so than the C60), both are very well made and are higher quality than the price lets on.

In this article we will be comparing the Steinhart Ocean 1 and the Christopher Ward C60 Trident to see which is better, in both looks and build, and which would be most suitable for you.

Specs

Steinhart Ocean 1
Price: €350
Movement: ETA 2824-2
Case diameter: 42mm
Lug to lug length: 50mm
Lug/strap width: 22mm
Weight: 190g
Water resistance: 30 ATM (300m)

Christopher Ward C60 Trident
Price: £510 (with stainless steel bracelet)
Movement: Sellita SW200-1 / ETA 2824-2
Case diameter: 42mm
Lug to lug length: 46.6mm
Lug/strap width: 22mm
Weight: 189g
Water resistance: 30 ATM (300m)

The case

For me, the biggest difference between the cases on these watches are the lugs. The flat lugs on the Ocean 1 means it wears very flat, whereas the C60 has a much more angled and sweeping design. These hug the wrist more resulting in a more comfortable wear.

Both cases are the same diameter at 42mm, although the lug to lug length is quite different due to different designs – the Ocean 1 being 3.4mm longer, at 50mm rather than 46.6mm. Doesn’t sound like much. But it actually makes quite a difference. This means that if you have a rounded wrist, the C60 will most definitely fit you better. If you have a flat wrist, as I do, the Ocean 1 will fit you fine. It just means that those with smaller, rounder wrists may find the Ocean 1 a bit hard to get along with. It gives the appearance of sitting quite high on the wrist which many have voiced concerns with.

The machining of the case on the Ocean 1 I feel is ever so slightly more refined and seems of higher quality, thanks to the time Steinhart have had to hone their skills in this department. After all, they have been making this watch for many more years than Christopher Ward have been making the C60.

The crown guards are different shapes and sizes too. The guards on the Ocean 1 are rather abrupt and pointy, protruding almost the whole depth of the crown. The C60’s are thicker, but don’t protrude out as much, only half the depth of the crown. To me, I prefer the design of the C60’s crown guards, but I think the Ocean 1 will do a better job at protecting the crown if the side of the watch was struck.

The finishing on both watches are very good, but I think the Ocean 1 just wins out. The choice of finishing on each side is actually opposite, with the Ocean 1 having polished sides and a brushed top, and the C60 having brushed sides and a polished top. For the sake of durability, I believe the brushed sides of the C60 are better suited as they are more likely to get marked, so a polished finish such as on the Ocean 1 will show these up more prominently.

The bezel

Personally, I prefer the aesthetics of the C60’s bezel. The main thing going for it is the fact that the outer edging is much thinner than on the Ocean 1. This makes the watch face look larger, as the black is followed through to a larger area. I also prefer the slightly more modern font used on the C60.

But, the thicker edging on the Ocean 1 results in a much better grip for using and rotating the bezel. The grip is much deeper and more pronounced, it’s easy to spin it when required.

I also find the action of the bezel on the Ocean 1 to be superior, giving a much smoother rotation. It feels like it has higher quality mechanics, as it’s more accurate and gives a nicer clicking noise as you turn it.

The crown

Both watches have a screw-in crown, which is required for divers watches like these. The crown on the C60 is polished, whereas on the Ocean 1 it is brushed, giving it a more tool-like appearance. Both have sufficient grip from the toothing, but the Steinhart feels better in the hand and easier to change the time and date. Both have the logo embossed on the end, although I prefer the finish of the Ocean 1 and how it has a matt surround to the raised logo.

The smaller sized crown of the C60 means that it doesn’t jut out of the bottom of the crown guards – so it fits much more snug to the case. The Ocean 1’s crown sticks out of the bottom of the crown guards if you’re looking at it bottom-on.

Both are clearly very well machined and have a very reassuringly thick thread, to ensue no cross threading. To me, I think the Ocean 1’s crown is more aesthetically pleasing and works better overall.

The caseback

The caseback on both watches are screw-in, which is needed for the 300m water resistance they share.

The C60 has a trident icon etched into the case back, and the Ocean 1 features Poseidon riding a seahorse. The Ocean 1 caseback has deeper etching, which in turn makes it feel slightly higher quality. I think that the C60 is a better design though, and stands out a bit more due to the fact that it is polished. It scratches easily though if you have the bracelet which is something you have to watch out for.

The bracelet

The Ocean 1’s bracelet is completely brushed stainless steel, bar the edging, whereas the C60 has a completely polished centre link. This makes it look great, but obviously it is also more prone to scratching and any hairline scratches you may acquire will be more visible.

Both bracelets are same width at the lugs, being 22mm wide. Both bracelets reduce in width at the buckle end, but the C60 reduces slightly more, being 18mm compared to the Ocean 1’s 20mm.

This makes the Ocean 1’s bracelet feel chunkier. Whichever one is better for you depends on what kind of watch you like. Chunky? Or the slightly more refined?

Both bracelets are extremely well made and perfectly machined. All the links fit together with great precision. The Ocean 1 is easier to resize due to it’s screw-in links.

I prefer the clasp on the C60, as it has release buttons. I have found the double locking clasp on the Steinhart to be a bit uglier, and also quite hard to take off sometimes too. It would prove to be more secure, but the C60 is still very secure – I haven’t had it pop open on me ever.

The dial

The dial is probably one of the biggest differences between these two watches. The Steinhart is a very obvious dedication to the Submariner, whereas the C60 is more unique.

The main difference is the dial itself – the Steinhart is a flat matt black, whereas the C60 has a distinct wave pattern reminiscent of the Omega Speedmaster. Being a sucker for textured dials, I personally prefer the C60 in this regard.

Both watches have very high quality applied hour markers, with lumed centres and polished stainless steel surrounds. The 12 hour marker is different, with the C60 having a double baton (which I prefer), and the Ocean 1 having an upside down triangle. The quality in this regard is incomparable, both watches are flawless in their execution and I love applied hour markers so we’re all good here.

The date window is another large difference. Firstly, the position. The Ocean 1 has it in the classic position at 3. The C60, on the other hand, has it at an unusual position at 4. For some, this is a bit of a turn off as it isn’t your normal position. But I don’t mind it at all. The Ocean 1

The hands are also very different. The Ocean 1 goes for the classic Rolex Submariner mercedes hands, whereas the C60’s have a more unique design, with an onion hour hand, sword minute hand and great looking Trident-themed second hand.

The lume on the Ocean 1 is superior to the C60. All Christopher Ward’s have disappointing lume strength, so it’s not particularly hard to beat it.

The movement

To be completely honest, there is nothing between these two when it comes to movements. The C60 uses a Sellita SW200, whist the Ocean 1 is powered by the classic ETA 2824-2. For some people, they may prefer the ETA, due to its long history and the fact it is used in many other luxury brands. In a technical perspective, they are both very similar – due to the fact that the SW200 is actually based upon the ETA. Sellita used to make movements for ETA in the past, so they are certainly very good and experienced at making good, dependable movements. They both share the same specs, 28.8k bph, automatic, 42 hour power reserve, hacking seconds, and Swiss Made. The only thing setting them apart is the fact that the SW200 has one extra jewel.

Christopher award decided to go with the Sellita due to the fact that ETAs are getting increasingly more difficult for companies not within the Swatch group to get a hold of. I’m very surprised that Steinhart are still managing to get them, and even more surprised that their prices haven’t gone through the roof being that the demand to availability ratio is getting harder and harder. Good for them, and even better for the customer. Who knows, maybe one day in the future Steinhart will have to change their movement when ETAs are no longer available outside Swatch.

Final comments

It really is hard to determine a “winner”. In fact, I don’t think there is one. Both watches offer exceptionally good value, even if there is £200 difference.

Go for the Steinhart Ocean 1 if you’re more budget conscious or if you want a full on homage to a Rolex. I say this because not only is the Steinhart the cheaper option, bit they also keep their value incredibly well, mainly because they are always selling faster than they are making them so they’re usually out of stock. Second hand Ocean 1’s don’t come up for sale very often, and when they do, they usually go for as much as a new one costs.

Some people are also out there for a pure homage to a Rolex Submariner. There’s nothing wrong with that. I’ve recently been bitten by the Rolex bug, and if you haven’t yet, chances are you will one day, no matter how much you deny it. Obviously if this is what you’re after, the Ocean 1 is perfect. From afar, it would be very hard to determine the difference between it and a Submariner. Only until you could spot the logo (or for the super keen the bracelet width and clasp) would you be able to tell.

But then on the other side, people don’t like the idea of a watch trying to be something else. If this is you then you should go for the C60, especially if you like something a bit more unique, and want to have the reassurance of the outstanding customer service and 5 year warrantee Christopher Ward provide (compared to the 2 years with the Steinhart).

Having them both side by side, there’s nothing setting them apart – they’re both great watches and I love them both.

But, I need to make a decision. Unfortunately.

The watch I am more likely to keep is the C60 Trident, but not because of any of the reasons above. It was my first real quality Swiss Made diver and has been with me a number of years (and still looks great), so I suppose it’s a little more special to me. If this wasn’t the case though, I just don’t which one I’d choose!

The post Christopher Ward C60 vs Steinhart Ocean 1 Comparison appeared first on 12&60.

The case

First thing you notice is the bezel. It is very bold and attention grabbing with it’s unusual minute markers all the way around. It has a good thick scalloped grip surrounding the outer edge, providing perfect grip and is aesthetically pleasing. It is well machined and is not sharp or hard on the fingers whilst rotating the bezel.

Within the bezel is the domed sapphire crystal, which in itself is slightly raised – giving a two-layered effect. First a steep angle, then the lovely sweep of the dome. There is great double anti-reflection coating on the underside. Helped with the dome this is extremely effective to stop most reflections.

The 42mm stainless steel case is brushed on the top, and polished on the sides and back. It is very well machined and impeccably finished. This is most likely due to the length of time these cases have been manufactured for. They have had plenty of time to refine and hone the quality and finish of the case!

One thing which is a slight downside with the case is the extremely flat lugs. Rather than arcing in toward the wrist, they follow the line of the case straight out, giving the whole watch head a very flat appearance. This results in the watch head sitting very flat on the wrist, the top and bottom almost “sticking outwards” from the wrist. Many people have expressed their concerns with this. If you have wrists smaller than 7″, it would be a big issue. I just about get away with it, with my slightly larger than 7″ wrists. So anything larger than that would definitely be fine.

The screw-in crown is very nice, due to the great looking touch of the Steinhart logo being a major feature. The matt engraving around the logo is very deep and perfectly done, and really makes the logo stand out. The grip is good, thanks to the deep indentations all the way around the crown, which aren’t too sharp.

The crown guards fit snugly around the crown if you are looking at the case crown-on. Looking at the watch face-on, the crown guards extrude quite a far way out, resulting in maximum protection for the crown itself, yet do not appear to be overbearing from a design standpoint.

The screw-in case back has again, nice a deep etching. It has a seahorse with what appears to be a trojan on it’s back, and all the details around the outside edge. I am quite surprised to find that Steinhart have decided to omit the serial number on the Ocean Vintage Military.

The dial

The dial is all very flat with the deep matt black colour and texture drawing your eyes and all light in. Obviously with its vintage inspiration, the colours are all “aged”.

The super luminova vintage lume hands are well made, and are polished stainless steel with lumed centres. The hour hand is a fat sword, the minute hand is long and straight with a point, and the second hand is a very thin point with a small lumed arrow head on the tip. The lume is quick to charge and has reasonable strength.

The hour markers are not applied, but rather are blobs of lume on the dial. Personally, I prefer applied items on a watch face, which the Ocean Vintage Military has none, but it is understandable due to the fact that it is a direct homage to the Rolex, which didn’t have any.

The Steinhart logo is printed in the top half of the face, and in the bottom half there is a 1 in a circle (referring to the Steinhart Ocean 1 line, which this is a part of), a depth rating of 660ft = 200m and automatic. The depth rating stated on the face is actually incorrect, as the watch is rated to 300m, but rather refers to the rating of the original Rolex it is based on. Now that’s dedication! Underselling your specs to stay true to the watch you are based on!

The two important words “Swiss Made” are in their usual position at foot of the face. There is a white minute track around the outside of face, very well executed and subtle enough not to be overbearing. With all of the printing on the face of the Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military, the perfect white text contrasts well with the matt black dial.

The bracelet

The bracelet has often been one of the most talked about features of the Steinhart Ocean range. It is 22mm wide the whole length and sure is hefty!

It is also excellently manufactured. The solid end links fit perfectly to the case, and all links link together extremely well and move smoothly. Each link has a brushed top and bottom, and polished sides. This breaks up the surfaces nicely, and the brushed top means that it is more likely to last before ugly hair line scratches start to appear. The bracelet is also a doddle to adjust, thanks to the very well made, sturdy and dependable screw-in links. The links are all finished so well, there is no sharp edges or corners anywhere. They are also very well shaped on the underside, hugging and fitting the wrist in a way that results in a very comfortable wear on the wrist.

The clasp is something that I am not as keen on though. It is brushed on the top and polished on the sides to match the links. The top locking flap is completely polished, with the Steinhart logo deeply etched onto to top side of it. This top flap can be very hard and awkward to open up. Although this is good from a security stand point (as in it’s not going to pop open by itself any time soon), it can be annoying from a wearability standpoint.

The elbow joint of the clasp also feels very high quality and looks great to match, being highly polished. The only other thing I dislike is the thin moulded steel used. Although it looks ok whilst wearing it, it can feel a little cheap whilst exploring it with your fingers, as Steinhart have seemed to use quite thin steel.

The movement

Within the Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military is the bulletproof ETA 2824-2 Swiss Made automatic movement with 25 jewels, which runs at 28.8k bhp (8 ticks per second). It has a extremely smooth second hand movement as you would expect. It winds quickly by the bi-directional winding rotor (which means it doesn’t matter which way the rotor is spinning, clockwise or anti-clockwise, it still winds the watch). It has the average automatic movement two day power reserve. When you pull the crown out to either hand-wind the Ocean Vintage Military or set the time or date, the movement feels very sturdy in the hand, not flimsy at all. This gives you reassurance that you won’t break something inside by just changing the time (which has happened to me before with a cheap Chinese watch).

Final Comments

It would be unfair to compare the Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military to the original Rolex 5517 Mil-Sub, which fetch in the region of £100,000 nowadays. Rather, this is a modern watch, based on a timeless classic, which deserves to be compared to its contemporaries.

In this regard, all of the Steinhart Ocean range are amongst the best affordable divers available today. The classic design, well made case and bracelet, ETA automatic movement, Swiss Made, all for around €350 is very impressive. I think the OVM is a good choice for those who want something a little different to the standard Submariner look. The great thing about it though is the history and story behind the 5517. Sure it’s basically a direct copy of the original, but of a watch hardly anyone will know about and which is more expensive than the great majority of people can afford!

I would highly recommend his watch to someone to whom the design appeals to, which after all is the main question here. Do you like the looks of it or not? This is the only thing to consider, as it’s a winner by all other counts.

The post Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military Watch Review appeared first on 12&60.

The case

The case of the Ocean Vintage Military seems to be slightly better finished and machined than the C60 Trident. This is most probably because the Ocean line has been going for quite some time, as Steinhart used to be related to Debaufre, Robert and Grovana. (Source here) This would allow them a longer time to refine and improve the case.

The lugs of the Steinhart are very flat, whereas the lugs on the C60 trident are more curved downwards. This results in the C60 fitting on the wrist much better, as the OVM (with its long lug to lug length) sits very flat on the top of the wrist, rather than hugging and going around it (as the C60 does).

The crown on the OVM has a nicer feel to it whilst unscrewing it, and the engraving on it looks and feels higher quality than the C60. I also prefer how the crown guards are angled more and hug around the crown more on the OVM.

Whilst the case back on the C60 is a nicer design, the engravings aren’t as deep or feel as nice as the OVM. The logo on the OVM case back is so much deeper than the (better looking) trident on the back of the C60, as is the text.

Both watches have a sapphire crystal, as you would expect. The C60 has a slightly raised flat crystal, and the OVM has a lovely domed crystal, which is also slightly raised. Both have reasonably effective anti reflective coating on the underside – although the Ocean Vintage Military slightly wins this one, it is a tiny bit better at removing reflections (this will also be helped by the domed crystal rather than flat).

The dial

The dials on both of these watches are pretty opposite – the OVM is very matt and flat, whereas the C60 is full of texture and has applied items, giving it greater depth. Deciding what is better is merely a personal choice of what you prefer – in my case, I love texture, so I prefer the look of the C60’s dial, with the wave texture, applied hour markers and great date window. I still appreciate and love very much the simplicity and flat design of the OVM however, but the dial indeed is very flat – matt dial, no applied hour markers (they are blobs of lume) and no date window. The C60 is a more original and unique dial too, whereas the OVM is a homage to the Rolex Submariner 5517 Mil-Sub.

Both sets of hands are flawless and great looking in their own right. I really like the shapes of them all, very well thought out and designed to be the perfect sizes.

The lume on the OVM is by far the more superior, it doesn’t take a lot to charge and when it does, it shines pretty bright. The lume on all Christopher Wards have sadly been one of the worst parts of all of their watches, they don’t last or charge very well at all.

The bezel

The bezel of the OVM has a much nicer and refined movement and feel to it. It also has a better grip running around the outside edge. Both bezels have a triangle at 12 with a lume pip within. Both lume pips are flawless, the OVM being slightly more raised than the C60. In a design point of view, I probably prefer the more subtle look of the C60. The OVM is a bit harsher with the markers running every minute all the way through, and the more aggressive font.

The movement

Steinhart still guarantee an ETA 2824-2 movement in the Ocean Vintage Military. The C60 has either that same ETA movement, or the Sellita equivalent – the SW200. Some people may think that the SW200 is inferior to the classic tried and tested ETA, but this is not the case. In fact, Sellita were contracted to build many of ETA’s movements, so chances are, the ETA found in any watch could have been built by Sellita. I personally don’t mind either way, especially being that the C60 has a 5 year guarantee on the movement. As long as it runs at 28.8k bph, and is accurate to around 10 seconds a day, what more do you need?

The bracelets

Both bracelets on the OVM and the C60 are fantastic. Both solid end links fit the cases perfectly. I personally prefer the links of the OVM, but prefer the clasp of the C60.

The links on the C60 are a highly polished link – which is easy to scratch. The completely brushed links (apart from the outside edges) of the Steinhart mean that it will look new much longer. I also prefer the way the bracelet on the OVM stays wider, rather than getting a lot narrower like the C60.

The clasp on the C60 is much easier to use, and feels higher quality.

Conclusion

These are both truly stunning watches for the price. If you went for either one, you wouldn’t be disappointed. I have found that the resell value of all Steinharts are amazing – so if you were thinking of buying a watch that wouldn’t depreciate much at all, and that you could sell on for a similar amount, then the Ocean Vintage Military is the one to go for. It also seems to be the more refined and better finished of the two, mainly because of the age of the Ocean range. But, if you’re not so bothered about the money, and can afford the extra £100- then I would say that the C60 just about pips it. This is mainly because it offers more to the wearer and buyer – such as 5 years warrantee, applied hour markers and a great date window, lovely patterned dial, and a more unique design. That’s MY personal choice, but obviously everybody’s different, and have different views on what makes a watch more valuable to them. I have had my C60 Trident for over a year now – and even now, every time I look at it, it still blows me away. But that’s not saying that you should go for it! It’s up to you, and which one YOU prefer.

The post Comparison: Steinhart OVM vs Christopher Ward C60 Trident appeared first on 12&60.

Firstly, what else am I gonna say, apart from this is huge. By far the biggest watch I have ever seen or owned. But saying that, I don’t actually notice it on my wrist too much. I suppose being titanium it is relatively light for the size of it.

It is an accurate homage to the original Beobachtungsuhr (B-Uhr) watches that were supplied to the Luftwaffe pilots in the 40’s. It even has “Fl. 23883” on the side and caseback which I believe was the original model numbers.

The titanium is of good quality and nicely machined. I like the titanium buckle too, with a nice deep “Steinhart” engraved. I know the strap isn’t to everybody’s taste, but I actually really like it! It is really thick, but it is also super soft and comfortable.

The lume is great – much better than the lume of my Christopher Ward C60. It’s cool because if you look at it in daylight you would never think that all of the markings on the dial are lumed.

ETA 2824 movement. Sturdy as usual, nothing new to report there! Winds nicely. The watch does not have a screw in crown, so like the C8 you just twist it to wind straight away, or just pull it straight out to set the time. The crown is plain with no logo or markings, just the standard ridges for grip. Nicely machined though.

My final impressions: I have grown to like it more and more. New, these are currently going for 430 euros = about £340 gbp. I probably wouldn’t have bought one new, but this one went for a price that I couldn’t resist. It has definitely given me food for thought, and I have wanted a pilots watch for a very long time… and this has definitely satisfied that urge! I personally would prefer the C8, as I’m not too sure about sterile dials. It will definitely stick around for a while though. (until I want to try out a different style watch, that is!)

Anyway, onto some pictures!

The post Steinhart Nav.B-Uhr Vintage Titanium Review appeared first on 12&60.