watchaholic wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 5:48 pm Seems to me it makes no difference how the camera is oriented, he is trying to relay something he sees with his naked eye. It looks unacceptable to me. Which is too bad it’s a nice watch. If that is acceptable to CW and within tolerance, CW needs to tighten their tolerances. JUST MY OPINION.

Thank you

The small pip looks perfectly alligned between the 3 and the 0, so either that bezel is a click off, or its optics? how is it on the 12 side, just as bad?

NigelS wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2023 9:05 am

abeardsley2020 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2023 8:06 am . . . . but they are still sending the watches out with misaligned inner steel rings. . . . . it’s clear looking at it. I’m just really disappointed.

I would be too. For a Seiko Diver that might be just about acceptable on the outer bezel...

If you look at the watches on the CW website, they're all different.
Difficult to say whether or not it's the dial print and indices that are at fault, or the bezel ring. The are definitely minor discrepancies between the printed dial indices and applied markers in some cases.

mvlow wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 4:38 pm I just took a look at one of my CW's this morning and noticed the 12 O'Clock triangle is no longer aligned at 12, but is now between the 10 and 11 O'Clock markers. It also appears the date is slightly off as it says the 24th, when it is actually the 9th. I'm wondering if I should contact customer service to see if they will give me a new watch?



IMG_5198.JPG

And I think you'll find that there's a great big patch of darkness across the dial affecting the hands. Say, some of mine look like that when I take photos of them - the camera picks up detail which the eyeball can't even detect. Shameful.

@MarkingTime you say there's a website?

For balance, I've just checked a few pics of Submariners and they are not much better in some cases. Omega seem much better, but still not perfect. The only way to get perfection, or close, would be to sample more watches and cherry pick the one least offensive to your eyes.

MarkingTime wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2024 8:01 pm For balance, I've just checked a few pics of Submariners and they are not much better in some cases. Omega seem much better, but still not perfect. The only way to get perfection, or close, would be to sample more watches and cherry pick the one least offensive to your eyes.

Can you post a few head on pics of 6 digit Submariners and current Seamasters that are not correctly aligned?

Thanks.

Neil

This sort of thing? They're not bad, but not perfect, likely as not, nothing like this will be except by chance.

...and the Seamasters, I don't know if these are new enough, but the point is illustrated.

One last Sub.

^^^The Seamasters are way off - in those pics.

The Submariners less so. But still technically off.

I do though wonder that considering the number of folk that indicate they can’t read the time on certain watches, they would ever notice an off bezel.

Things that matter - like shipping watches with sticking reverser wheels are more annoying.

Neil

That green sea master seems to have the 12 triangle slightly off to the right, and the 30 marker off to the right. Is what we are looking at?

If so that can only be explained as a parallax error I think.

The design of the C60 300 Pro dial and bezel, is such that it would be very difficult to get it perfect, that's three separate components, all with their own manufacturing tolerances. I would think it more likely that it was the dial indices that are displaced ever so slightly, as the inner and out bezel markers align quite well.
There is also the small amount of movement possible when casing the movement and dial assembly. The stem acts as a locator, but will be ever so slightly flexible allowing a small amount of rotation etc.
Basically, it's a case of adjusting ones expectations, because if CW binned all the watches that were not perfect, they'd be a damn sight more expensive than they are now.

JAFO wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2024 10:05 pm That green sea master seems to have the 12 triangle slightly off to the right, and the 30 marker off to the right. Is what we are looking at?

If so that can only be explained as a parallax error I think.

I shouldn't over think it. Almost nothing is perfect, especially mechanical watches.

Within tolerance of CWs integrity. Pity that it is not only the response of a general CW representative but MF himself. Embarrassing.