[Review by boyfriend]: Full disclosure: I returned this watch, as it wasn't something I really needed in my collection. That said, it's a fantastic piece, especially for the price. The dial has a classic aviation aesthetic, the size is just right, and the chronograph function works perfectly.
Aesthetics and finishing: this watch, in classic Seiko fashion, has a beauty and a finishing quality that is commonly seen on watches double or sometimes even quadruple the price. While visible portions of the case are uniformly polished rather than a mix of finishings, it's done well. The dial does have a flatter appearance than some other chronographs, like the SNA411, but it's a $100 watch and an EXCELLENT value for the money.
Functionality: As with any decent quartz watch, timekeeping is effectively perfect. The chronograph function is what sets this apart from other quartz movements, in my opinion. With the chronograph activated, the center seconds hand ticks once per second (no sweep unfortunately), but the sub-seconds subdial whirls smoothly at one full rotation per second - stopping with a precision of 1/20 of a second once finished - and it's a ton of fun to watch.
The watch also features a quartz version of a "rattrapante" function, similar to a lap time - pause the chronograph to take a note of the stopwatch, and then resume timing to watch it quickly "catch up" to where it would have been without the pause, allowing you to take several split timings at once.
If you can afford to spend more, I very much suggest taking a look at a mechanical chronograph or the sweep-second quartz movement of the Seiko SNA411 Flightmaster, but this is an excellent choice of watch for the price, and trounces other choices on the market that are over a hundred dollars more expensive.
Add a debit or credit card to save time when you check out
Convenient and secure with 2 clicks. Add your card
Featured items you may like
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
From the manufacturer
Reviews with images
Some accurate data on the watch!
NOTE: THIS IS THE SAME WATCH AS THE SNDC33:The only difference is a different color dial and band. Otherwise identical. Do not let the detail information fool you, almost all of the details listed on Amazon site for the SNDC31 are inaccurate…period!ACCURATE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT:Case Diameter: 40.6mmCase with crown: 43.2Case Thickness: 10.1mmLug to lug: 46.3Weight w/ band: 59g or 2.08 Oz (+/- 1g)CHRONOGRAPH MEASUREMENTS/FUNCTIONS:12 O’clock eye: Measures 1/20 second6 O’clock eye: Measures Minutes & Hours (two separate hands)9 O’clock eye: Measure real time secondsLarge second hand: Measures timed secondsTHE BAND:It’s red. Sort of an oxblood color as some have mention. I’m not crazy about it! Just be aware, there is nothing “brown” about it.THE DIAL: The dial is recessed at the edges which gives a classy and more manicured design. I can read it fine. I do not have as much trouble with the main dials as some have reported. The problem is with the lower eye on the chronograph, which has 2 dials that are subsequently tiny and not the best contrast. It’s hard to read in any light. Stupid since the 1/20 window is relatively easy to read, and it’s the most useless feature on the watch for most users.DIAL AND HAND ILLUMINATION:The has 4 tiny dots that retain light from an external light source for a very short time. This is almost functionally useless. At night I never use this at all. The amount of time the hands retain light is meaningless. The hands are large and well illuminated for…a few minutes. After 5 to 10 minutes out of a bright light source you can no longer see the hands. This was a gimmick in 1965. Today it’s a crude useless technology to make you feel better about not having a backlight, which all analog watches should include today! Kudos to Timex for Indiglo. There is so much organic fluorescing tech and material available today…no excuse.CHRONOGRAPH BUTTONS:They are easy to push. Too easy to push. I am constantly hitting the chronograph button with the back of my hand when my wrist bends, stopping my chronograph. This is constantly happening and very aggravating. It needs a larger crown or chronograph buttons that are stiffer.CHRONOGRAPH EYES:The eyes are listed above as far as their functions.Be aware: The top eye for 1/20 second spins wildly, but only for a period of time then it stops, even though you’re still timing. I assume to reduce battery drain, which is a good idea. I think having it run all the time is stupid and a waist of battery power. In fact it’s a function that most people will NEVER use. Please give us that window for measuring hours or some other function Seiko! They should scrap the 1/20 window and move one of the lower dial hands up to that window. This is logical and practical.THE WEIGHT:The weight on the Amazon site of 1.28oz, is flat wrong. The weight is the same as the SNDC31. It is just over 2 ounces. This is still light for a chronograph, but nothing special. Most chronographs in this class are between 2 and 2.5 ounces, with a non-metallic band.QUALITY:The quality from materals, finish, design aesthetics, etc. seem about what you would expect for a watch around $100. It’s noticeably better than a timex weekender! As far as how it will hold up? I cannot say.PACKAGING:A minor point, but the packaging was nice, hard box, much nicer than the timex weekender which comes in a cheap cardboard box with a plastic holder on the watch. Much more protective and with Amazon, USPS and UPS shipping, you’re going to need it.Conclusion:I like this watch. There are things I wish they had done differently, but for a watch around $100, it’s as expected. If I had known this was the same watch as the SNDC31, I would have opted for the black dial and black band. The description led me to believe that this was a different watch and was considerably lighter than the SNDC31. It is not. The one I got came already opened. I know this because the small plastic pc that you remove from the crown was missing. Otherwise everything looked ok. It has a classic look. Looks are subjective, but I think the red band looks somewhat feminine, but it does look dressy which I like. Again, realize you have the option for a black and white version in the SNDC31 or change the band to a darker band, as many have done. The size is reasonable for a smaller wrist. The thickness is much less bulky feeling than a watch like the timex weekender. The dial contrast is not bad, but the bottom chronograph I cannot read without reading glasses. It is too small really considering the useless larger 1/20 sec dial is completely readable for me. This is one of the smallest and lightest choronograph watches I could find. If that’s what you’re after, you have very limited choices under 41mm. So, in that case I would consider it on that basis alone for a smaller wrist. Good luck with your decision, I hope this helps you.
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States on July 2, 2019
Aesthetics and finishing: this watch, in classic Seiko fashion, has a beauty and a finishing quality that is commonly seen on watches double or sometimes even quadruple the price. While visible portions of the case are uniformly polished rather than a mix of finishings, it's done well. The dial does have a flatter appearance than some other chronographs, like the SNA411, but it's a $100 watch and an EXCELLENT value for the money.
Functionality: As with any decent quartz watch, timekeeping is effectively perfect. The chronograph function is what sets this apart from other quartz movements, in my opinion. With the chronograph activated, the center seconds hand ticks once per second (no sweep unfortunately), but the sub-seconds subdial whirls smoothly at one full rotation per second - stopping with a precision of 1/20 of a second once finished - and it's a ton of fun to watch.
The watch also features a quartz version of a "rattrapante" function, similar to a lap time - pause the chronograph to take a note of the stopwatch, and then resume timing to watch it quickly "catch up" to where it would have been without the pause, allowing you to take several split timings at once.
If you can afford to spend more, I very much suggest taking a look at a mechanical chronograph or the sweep-second quartz movement of the Seiko SNA411 Flightmaster, but this is an excellent choice of watch for the price, and trounces other choices on the market that are over a hundred dollars more expensive.
A Great First Watch and Outstanding Quartz Chronograph
Reviewed in the United States on July 2, 2019
[Review by boyfriend]: Full disclosure: I returned this watch, as it wasn't something I really needed in my collection. That said, it's a fantastic piece, especially for the price. The dial has a classic aviation aesthetic, the size is just right, and the chronograph function works perfectly.Reviewed in the United States on July 2, 2019
Aesthetics and finishing: this watch, in classic Seiko fashion, has a beauty and a finishing quality that is commonly seen on watches double or sometimes even quadruple the price. While visible portions of the case are uniformly polished rather than a mix of finishings, it's done well. The dial does have a flatter appearance than some other chronographs, like the SNA411, but it's a $100 watch and an EXCELLENT value for the money.
Functionality: As with any decent quartz watch, timekeeping is effectively perfect. The chronograph function is what sets this apart from other quartz movements, in my opinion. With the chronograph activated, the center seconds hand ticks once per second (no sweep unfortunately), but the sub-seconds subdial whirls smoothly at one full rotation per second - stopping with a precision of 1/20 of a second once finished - and it's a ton of fun to watch.
The watch also features a quartz version of a "rattrapante" function, similar to a lap time - pause the chronograph to take a note of the stopwatch, and then resume timing to watch it quickly "catch up" to where it would have been without the pause, allowing you to take several split timings at once.
If you can afford to spend more, I very much suggest taking a look at a mechanical chronograph or the sweep-second quartz movement of the Seiko SNA411 Flightmaster, but this is an excellent choice of watch for the price, and trounces other choices on the market that are over a hundred dollars more expensive.
Images in this review
Reviewed in the United States on August 2, 2019
Reviewed in the United States on September 2, 2019
NOTE: THIS IS THE SAME WATCH AS THE SNDC33:
The only difference is a different color dial and band. Otherwise identical. Do not let the detail information fool you, almost all of the details listed on Amazon site for the SNDC31 are inaccurate…period!
ACCURATE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT:
Case Diameter: 40.6mm
Case with crown: 43.2
Case Thickness: 10.1mm
Lug to lug: 46.3
Weight w/ band: 59g or 2.08 Oz (+/- 1g)
CHRONOGRAPH MEASUREMENTS/FUNCTIONS:
12 O’clock eye: Measures 1/20 second
6 O’clock eye: Measures Minutes & Hours (two separate hands)
9 O’clock eye: Measure real time seconds
Large second hand: Measures timed seconds
THE BAND:
It’s red. Sort of an oxblood color as some have mention. I’m not crazy about it! Just be aware, there is nothing “brown” about it.
THE DIAL: The dial is recessed at the edges which gives a classy and more manicured design. I can read it fine. I do not have as much trouble with the main dials as some have reported. The problem is with the lower eye on the chronograph, which has 2 dials that are subsequently tiny and not the best contrast. It’s hard to read in any light. Stupid since the 1/20 window is relatively easy to read, and it’s the most useless feature on the watch for most users.
DIAL AND HAND ILLUMINATION:
The has 4 tiny dots that retain light from an external light source for a very short time. This is almost functionally useless. At night I never use this at all. The amount of time the hands retain light is meaningless. The hands are large and well illuminated for…a few minutes. After 5 to 10 minutes out of a bright light source you can no longer see the hands. This was a gimmick in 1965. Today it’s a crude useless technology to make you feel better about not having a backlight, which all analog watches should include today! Kudos to Timex for Indiglo. There is so much organic fluorescing tech and material available today…no excuse.
CHRONOGRAPH BUTTONS:
They are easy to push. Too easy to push. I am constantly hitting the chronograph button with the back of my hand when my wrist bends, stopping my chronograph. This is constantly happening and very aggravating. It needs a larger crown or chronograph buttons that are stiffer.
CHRONOGRAPH EYES:
The eyes are listed above as far as their functions.
Be aware: The top eye for 1/20 second spins wildly, but only for a period of time then it stops, even though you’re still timing. I assume to reduce battery drain, which is a good idea. I think having it run all the time is stupid and a waist of battery power. In fact it’s a function that most people will NEVER use. Please give us that window for measuring hours or some other function Seiko! They should scrap the 1/20 window and move one of the lower dial hands up to that window. This is logical and practical.
THE WEIGHT:
The weight on the Amazon site of 1.28oz, is flat wrong. The weight is the same as the SNDC31. It is just over 2 ounces. This is still light for a chronograph, but nothing special. Most chronographs in this class are between 2 and 2.5 ounces, with a non-metallic band.
QUALITY:
The quality from materals, finish, design aesthetics, etc. seem about what you would expect for a watch around $100. It’s noticeably better than a timex weekender! As far as how it will hold up? I cannot say.
PACKAGING:
A minor point, but the packaging was nice, hard box, much nicer than the timex weekender which comes in a cheap cardboard box with a plastic holder on the watch. Much more protective and with Amazon, USPS and UPS shipping, you’re going to need it.
Conclusion:
I like this watch. There are things I wish they had done differently, but for a watch around $100, it’s as expected. If I had known this was the same watch as the SNDC31, I would have opted for the black dial and black band. The description led me to believe that this was a different watch and was considerably lighter than the SNDC31. It is not. The one I got came already opened. I know this because the small plastic pc that you remove from the crown was missing. Otherwise everything looked ok. It has a classic look. Looks are subjective, but I think the red band looks somewhat feminine, but it does look dressy which I like. Again, realize you have the option for a black and white version in the SNDC31 or change the band to a darker band, as many have done. The size is reasonable for a smaller wrist. The thickness is much less bulky feeling than a watch like the timex weekender. The dial contrast is not bad, but the bottom chronograph I cannot read without reading glasses. It is too small really considering the useless larger 1/20 sec dial is completely readable for me. This is one of the smallest and lightest choronograph watches I could find. If that’s what you’re after, you have very limited choices under 41mm. So, in that case I would consider it on that basis alone for a smaller wrist. Good luck with your decision, I hope this helps you.
The only difference is a different color dial and band. Otherwise identical. Do not let the detail information fool you, almost all of the details listed on Amazon site for the SNDC31 are inaccurate…period!
ACCURATE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT:
Case Diameter: 40.6mm
Case with crown: 43.2
Case Thickness: 10.1mm
Lug to lug: 46.3
Weight w/ band: 59g or 2.08 Oz (+/- 1g)
CHRONOGRAPH MEASUREMENTS/FUNCTIONS:
12 O’clock eye: Measures 1/20 second
6 O’clock eye: Measures Minutes & Hours (two separate hands)
9 O’clock eye: Measure real time seconds
Large second hand: Measures timed seconds
THE BAND:
It’s red. Sort of an oxblood color as some have mention. I’m not crazy about it! Just be aware, there is nothing “brown” about it.
THE DIAL: The dial is recessed at the edges which gives a classy and more manicured design. I can read it fine. I do not have as much trouble with the main dials as some have reported. The problem is with the lower eye on the chronograph, which has 2 dials that are subsequently tiny and not the best contrast. It’s hard to read in any light. Stupid since the 1/20 window is relatively easy to read, and it’s the most useless feature on the watch for most users.
DIAL AND HAND ILLUMINATION:
The has 4 tiny dots that retain light from an external light source for a very short time. This is almost functionally useless. At night I never use this at all. The amount of time the hands retain light is meaningless. The hands are large and well illuminated for…a few minutes. After 5 to 10 minutes out of a bright light source you can no longer see the hands. This was a gimmick in 1965. Today it’s a crude useless technology to make you feel better about not having a backlight, which all analog watches should include today! Kudos to Timex for Indiglo. There is so much organic fluorescing tech and material available today…no excuse.
CHRONOGRAPH BUTTONS:
They are easy to push. Too easy to push. I am constantly hitting the chronograph button with the back of my hand when my wrist bends, stopping my chronograph. This is constantly happening and very aggravating. It needs a larger crown or chronograph buttons that are stiffer.
CHRONOGRAPH EYES:
The eyes are listed above as far as their functions.
Be aware: The top eye for 1/20 second spins wildly, but only for a period of time then it stops, even though you’re still timing. I assume to reduce battery drain, which is a good idea. I think having it run all the time is stupid and a waist of battery power. In fact it’s a function that most people will NEVER use. Please give us that window for measuring hours or some other function Seiko! They should scrap the 1/20 window and move one of the lower dial hands up to that window. This is logical and practical.
THE WEIGHT:
The weight on the Amazon site of 1.28oz, is flat wrong. The weight is the same as the SNDC31. It is just over 2 ounces. This is still light for a chronograph, but nothing special. Most chronographs in this class are between 2 and 2.5 ounces, with a non-metallic band.
QUALITY:
The quality from materals, finish, design aesthetics, etc. seem about what you would expect for a watch around $100. It’s noticeably better than a timex weekender! As far as how it will hold up? I cannot say.
PACKAGING:
A minor point, but the packaging was nice, hard box, much nicer than the timex weekender which comes in a cheap cardboard box with a plastic holder on the watch. Much more protective and with Amazon, USPS and UPS shipping, you’re going to need it.
Conclusion:
I like this watch. There are things I wish they had done differently, but for a watch around $100, it’s as expected. If I had known this was the same watch as the SNDC31, I would have opted for the black dial and black band. The description led me to believe that this was a different watch and was considerably lighter than the SNDC31. It is not. The one I got came already opened. I know this because the small plastic pc that you remove from the crown was missing. Otherwise everything looked ok. It has a classic look. Looks are subjective, but I think the red band looks somewhat feminine, but it does look dressy which I like. Again, realize you have the option for a black and white version in the SNDC31 or change the band to a darker band, as many have done. The size is reasonable for a smaller wrist. The thickness is much less bulky feeling than a watch like the timex weekender. The dial contrast is not bad, but the bottom chronograph I cannot read without reading glasses. It is too small really considering the useless larger 1/20 sec dial is completely readable for me. This is one of the smallest and lightest choronograph watches I could find. If that’s what you’re after, you have very limited choices under 41mm. So, in that case I would consider it on that basis alone for a smaller wrist. Good luck with your decision, I hope this helps you.
Images in this review
Top reviews from other countries
Cesar Martínez
Muy buen producto, con gran calidad.
Reviewed in Mexico on June 17, 2020
Cesar Martínez
Reviewed in Mexico on June 17, 2020
El cristal es resistente, no es para traerse como un G Shock, pero tuve una caída en bicicleta y aguanto bastante bien, ni un rasguño.
Images in this review
Alberto
Otiimo prodotto, veramente bello, Venditore consigliato al 100%
Reviewed in Italy on October 7, 2020
Alberto
Reviewed in Italy on October 7, 2020
Non aggiungo altro e non vedo l'ora di riacquistare di nuovo un altro prodotto...
Images in this review
Düse
Schicke SEIKO Markenuhr zu einem günstigen Preis
Reviewed in Germany on November 21, 2019Arun Kumar Tirumala
Happy with this purchase!
Reviewed in India on January 24, 2019