First Look: Seiko SBBN017 Tuna

Upon taking my new Tuna out of the box, my first reaction was, "Oh my God, this thing is small!" My impression remained as I put it on my wrist and looked at it in the mirror. But then I placed it next to my Orient M-Force and, comforted, said to myself, "Okay, this plays like a 46mm, not bad. You can relax."

The rubber strap is very comfortable. I love the toolish dial, the big lume circles. I can't wait to get my Super Oyster bracelet because I believe that will upgrade the look considerably.

Final thoughts before I dash to pick up my girls at pre-school: I think the Seiko Sumo, about half the price, delivers the most bang for your buck if you're looking for an upscale toolish diver.

Having said that, I can't imagine selling my Tuna. It represents my new aesthetic and I imagine my liking for the watch will grow and grow.

Update:

I'm wearing it to work. The more I wear it, the more I love it even though I notice it plays on my wrist like a 44-45mm watch. This size impression can be accounted by the fact that the dial is surrounded not just by a thick bezel but a shroud. I actually like the size. Very toolish. The giant lume markers have soaked up the sunlight are are shining brilliantly. My watch tastes have officially changed.

Related articles

After the Dust Settles, the Watch Collection Should be at 12

I Hope This Super Oyster II 22mm Universal Bracelet Is a Good Fit for the Seiko SBBN017 Tuna

My Seiko Tuna SBBN017 Is in Limbo

First Look: Molarity Diver 02

Buying My Grail Compelled Me to Sell a Huge Part of My Collection

Comments

[Angelo]

The first photo (showing the thick profile) screams quality. The stainless has a pure look. It's substantial and I'm sure the weight is "just right." As for playing big: The photos can be misleading, but it appears to be a generous size to me. The bezel compared to where the band connects---seems to make it look large enough to draw positive attention without looking oversized and silly. I think when the stakes are this high---i.e. the price of admission to wear this watch---the real value is in how it feels more than how it looks. Truth be told, Invicta any number of manufacturers can make some nice looking watches. But as a complete package----the precision of the machining, the materials, the balance, the lume, the durability and look of the crystal----the ergonomics of the watch----taken as a whole, I consider this the "feel" of the watch and like a premium car, looks are important but driving is believing. This looks really good----and as the wearer, you are the one who can tell us how it feels on the wrist.

[herculodge]

Good analogy, Angelo. I feel I've moved from a Nissan to a Mercedes in the wristwatch dept. Feels good on the wrist, a keeper for sure.

[jonnybardo]

Awesome watch, Jeff. As I said via email, your size preference will likely re-calibrate the more of your oversized Invictas are sold.

I had that experience with the Orient Revolver, which before the summer felt perfect in size. When I caught Invicta Fever it seemed too small, but my sensibilities have re-acclimated and it seems just right.

Its good to remember that a 45mm bezel is, in the history of watches, even recent decades, quite large. The fact that Invicta calls a 50mm watch "mid-size" is a joke and completely outside of any other barometer. A "mid-size" watch - even in today's context - is probably 40-43mm, with 44-47mm being "large" and 48mm+ being "extra-large."

My sense of your watch trajectory and tastes is that the Tuna is perfect for you. Its a rubicon.

p.s. As an aside, I wouldn't call the Sumo a "toolish" diver - its what I would call a "dressy" diver, whereas the Tuna is toolish.

[herculodge]

Jonny, I stand corrected on the Sumo. Indeed, it's dressy. My Tuna and Sumo are my kings, for sure, both close in bezel size and in my estimation perfectly sized. Right now I like the Tuna so much I'm not looking over my shoulder for That Next Great Watch. I'm wearing it.

[jonnybardo]

Good to hear - enjoy that feeling for as long as it lasts!

It will be interesting to see if you get into a Tuna-Sumo back-and-forth, with no other watches getting any wrist time.

[herculodge]

I have six in rotation: Tuna, Sumo. M Force orange and black, Black Monster, second gen; Depthmaster

[jonnybardo]

Did you get your new Sumo?

[Angelo]

Very curious to see how the Tuna will look with a metal bracelet. I have to say----I like the looks of that band. I like the way the black of the band seems to continue into the black face of the watch...almost as though the black is one piece and you're looking through a porthole. I guess the stainless band though---while it might detract from the "sport" aspect of the watch---will play heavy on the luxury side---an upgrade in that regard. You should run before and after photos when the change is made. Will you be taking it in to a jeweler for this, or is it easy to replace the band without scratching anything?

[jonnybardo]

I replace all of my own bands and straps, Angelo. It is quite easy although you have to take care not to scratch the lugs. Some watches are easier than others and the Tuna looks quite easy because it has the little holes.

The Tuna looks good anyway you look at it. Jeff's is making me want to get one. He and I were wondering if I would be vicariously satisfied through his purchase, and I'm not sure that I am. It is still on my wishlist. Actually, the Orient Saturation Diver, Seiko Tuna and Sumo would make an incredible trinity of Japanese divers.

[Angelo]

Jonny: This watch needs to get continuing coverage here from Jeff. There's too much riding on this to be a one-time post and he moves on. First, he invested a lot of money in this one----and the value equation will be to at least have some fodder for the blog, more than on previous watch or radio purchases. That aside, this goes beyond buying a watch and I think it can apply to a lot of things----power tools, unusual and pricey kitchen appliances, expensive navigation devices----almost any elective purchase that's considered a luxury. What I'm getting at is----I want to know how much joy Jeff gets out of this and for how long. This was the one he really wanted but was expensive enough, that it couldn't be an impulse buy. He weighed the pros and cons and mulled it over before making the leap. After a failed first attempt with a jive turkey seller---the second one was the charm and the watch arrived. Impressive out of the box (after adjusting to the sub-Invicta size) and it sounds like everything he hoped for during the first day of wearing it. It's sure to get a lot of wrist time before other watches rejoin and a true rotation begins again. If this can quench the thirst for a long time----9 months, a year or more----I will consider it a big success. If Jeff gets the itch to buy another pricey watch---let's say as a Christmas gift to himself, 2013, I will be shaken up. Because I too make purchases that are big financial decisions---and I think the story of this watch might be something to tie back to my own future purchases as far as satisfying the consumer desire for something great (true satisfaction or temporary happiness followed quickly by more emptiness). And then on a different level----it's a Seiko watch. It's a "better" more expensive Seiko watch. But will the lesson be that yes, you get what you pay for---he'd make the same purchase all over again? Or, will the lesson be, it's great----but a Seiko for a few hundred less would make him just as happy/satisfied and he'd have the money for something else. Also, it will answer the question----buy one that's really expensive and no more purchases for a year or more----or settle for $400.00 watches and obtain three of them for continuing enjoyment of "the chase" and more rewards, even if they aren't as great. Lots to write about (and read about) with this watch and lots to think about too.

[herculodge]

Here's an update of my Tuna: The Super Oyster bracelet arrived and I don't like it, so I'll switch (rather than send back to Hong Kong) with my Molarity, which has the far superior Super Engineer. What bugs me is that the Engineer and Oyster cost the same but the former is so much better: build quality, weight, overall look and feel. I'm shocked. My Tuna deserves the best. Also, with all the tempting watches out there, I like my Tuna so much I feel like NOT getting any more watches. Why add competition to my Tuna and Sumo? That's the mentality an upscale watch like the Tuna has given me.

[jonnybardo]

Ultimately there's no reason to get more watches unless you want to. If the Tuna satisfies you, ride that for as long as you can. I would be very surprised, however, if the craving for a new watch never showed up again...the question is when. Will it be three months? Six? A year? It will be interesting to see.

I can tell you that when I got my OSD, I went on a three month watch hiatus. But then I caught Invicta Fever and that transformed (thankfully) back into Japanese divers and micro-brands. I'm feeling less desperate for new watches now, but as I sell watches over the next couple months, I will probably buy a couple watches before the year is out. As I said, my hope is to get to a place where I buy, at most, one new watch per season. That seems healthy for a watch enthusiast.

[Angelo]

Same lug width on those two watches? As for adding competition, here's one thing to contemplate: An occasional pleasure purchase of a trendy Invicta or something else (low hundreds) will not even be competition for the Tuna---but can energize the hobby for you---keep things interesting----sort of a booster/jump start every now and then. And when you get tired of the fashion watch, you sell it off, sort of like you have been doing. Major League Baseball teams have an "Ace" starting pitcher. They usually have a second guy in the rotation who is very, very good (sometimes better than the Ace of other staffs). Then there is 2-3 others who all bring different things to the table---might be a knuckleballer in there once in a while. Or a veteran who has lost speed, but is still crafty enough to win some games and be a mentor to the other pitchers. The point is, the slack is taken up by some others who aren't the "ACE" that your tuna is. And yes----sometimes a team has one or two pitchers (the best ones) who stay in place for many years while the other 2-3 positions in the rotation keep changing from year to year. And often, that prolongs the careers of the best guys---having that energy behind them that keeps other teams off balance. Somewhere in there is an analogy that nudges you to buy a new watch once in a while and sell others.

[jonnybardo]

I like your thinking, Angelo, partially because I'm a baseball fan and grok your analogy quite well. It works.

Perhaps the problem is when we want every "pitcher" to be the "Ace". In a five-man rotation, occasionally you have two ace-caliber pitchers - the Diamondbacks of about ten years ago come to mind, with Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling. But without stretching the analogy too far, I think the main point is that if we take away the need for every starter/watch to be an ace, it allows the others - #2-5 in the rotation - to be valued for what they do bring.

I also like your idea of having a treadmill of fashion watches and other affordable watches. The only problem, at least for me, is that my palate has developed and its hard to "go back." Its hard for me to want to wear a watch that doesn't feel like, say, at least a $400 watch. Its not that I don't like less expensive watches, its that its hard to wear them when I have nicer pieces available (this is why I'm curious to see how much Jeff wears his Black Monsters, as they are similar to the Tuna is style, but not as high quality).

(BTW, Jeff, it seems like I lost another post)

[herculodge]

My 11 watches provide plenty of bullpen help. This evening my first gen Black Monster will list on eBay. It just can't stand up to the gen 2 and the Tuna. Time to sell it.