Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Seiko Gen1 vs Pulsar Gen1

  1. #1

    Default Seiko Gen1 vs Pulsar Gen1

    which one would you prefer to collect, and why? thanks in advance,

  2. #2
    Moderator dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Blighty
    Posts
    6,061

    Default

    slimline vs chunky.

    well the seiko gen 1 was a military only model..

  3. #3

    Default

    I have both and I would say the Seiko Gen 1 is a nicer watch. Mechanically, it's a high quality 15 jewel movement and I believe the Pulsar in a non-jewelled movement. I prefer the styling of the Seiko with the tri-compax register layout, plus the crown and pushers being in opposite corners.

    With the Pulsar you gain the feature of a date display which is important to some and it's a larger size which many will prefer. The centre second hand is the running hand and the chrono second is in a sub register which I always thought was a bit weird. I've posted a recent pic of my ones. It doesn't really show the size difference but the Pulsar certainly wears a lot bigger, mainly due to the thickness.

    Smiths 0552 1968
    CWC G10 1984
    CWC RN 1994
    CWC SBS 2001
    Seiko Gen 1 RAF 1984
    Seiko Gen 2 RAF 1993
    Pulsar Gen 1 RAF 2008
    Leonidas GSTP Pocket Watch

  4. #4

    Default

    seiko is nicer/better but is way more expensive

    pulsar is a cool watch at good value price

    Mark L

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    75

    Default

    The Pulsar gets wrist time because it's a nice modern size and has great presence. But if forced to keep just one, I'd keep the Seiko because it's got the better quality, history, and balanced dial layout.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •