62, 83, 66, 61, 63, and 7000/6R series movement quality comparison? - Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum – Japanese Watch Reviews, Discussion & Trading
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-24-2019, 07:47 PM   #1 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: England, U.K.
Posts: 67
Points: 5 (+)
Default 62, 83, 66, 61, 63, and 7000/6R series movement quality comparison?

How do Seiko's basic movement series compare in quality to each other? I have read that the 6220, the basic hand-winding member of the 62 series family, was a cost-reduced and slightly larger version of the 3140 Liner movement. Was the cost-reduction just in terms of the quality of finishing, or did it negatively affect the quality of the movement's functioning?

I have also read that the 62 series automatic movements were simplified over time (e.g. from calibre 400 to calibre 6206) in order to reduce the number of parts and hence save cost. Was this simplification also a good thing in terms of the movement's function, neutral, or was the cost-saving a negative thing?

My assumption is that the 61 series is an improvement on the 62 series in every way, for example with its higher beat-rate (and gaining hand-winding capability), but is my assumption correct?

For example, the 6245/6 and 6215/6 19,800 vph movements were capable by design of being accurate to the Grand Seiko standard of 1966 of -3 to +6 seconds per day (as found in the 62GS), and I assume could perform even better than that nowadays with modern lubricants - would the design of the 6106C or 6119 at 21,600 vph (more comparable than the 36,000 vph members of the 61 series, since higher beat-rate helps with time-keeping, so trying to control as much as possible for beat-rate, in order to only extract the effects of the design) be capable of the same?

I know the 6106 and 6119 would only have been guaranteed/adjusted to be within probably -15 to +25 seconds per day at the time they were made, but is the basic design capable of performing better than the best 62 series of -3 to +6 seconds per day, if it were to have more careful adjustment? (Of course, the 36,000 vph members of the family were capable of up to +/- 2 seconds per day, but I am guessing that those movements likely had more design tweaks to help them achieve that than the 21,600 vph members of the family).

Along the same lines - calibre 460 was capable of -3 to +8 seconds per day in 1963 - would a 6220 be capable of the same or better?

Was the 61 series an improvement on the design of the 83 series in every way?

The sense I seem to get is that the 63 series movements are a cost-reduced version of the 61 series movements. Is this correct, and again, did the cost-saving negatively impact the movement's function or not?

For example, leaving out the 36,000 vph members of the 61 series, and just comparing the 21,600 vph members of the 61 and 63 series movements - how does a 25-jewel 6106C, or a 6119 (from what I can find, they were later replacements for the 6106, but topped out at 21 jewels instead of 25 jewels), compare with a 23-jewel 6349? (I know the number of jewels themselves don't necessarily make a difference to the quality of a movement in themselves, but I'm using them as an indicator of how much investment/money Seiko put into the specific movement and also how high its positioning is in Seiko's line-up, and hence as a kind of proxy for quality.)

How do the 6106C, 6119, and 6349 compare with the ultimate development of the 7000-series movements that Seiko use today, the 28,800 vph 6R20/1/7 series, in terms of quality?

Extending this to the 7600 and 6600 series of movements - the sense I seem to get is that these were lower-cost movements, with the 6600 sort of a lower-cost version of the 6200 series, being thicker, but being also smaller in diameter, and hence was used in high-end, 21-jewel 6660 form in some dress watches, which could be smaller in diameter than the 6220 movements, and hence more suitable for dress watches. How does a 6660, the highest-end version of a lower-end movement, compare with a 6220, a lower-end version of a standard/higher-end/not-low-end movement, in quality?

I am not so concerned with features, e.g. hacking (and hand-winding), day and date quick-sets, etc., since some movements from the same family have them and others not, so I see them a bolt-on, modular add-ons. I am more wondering about the performance and quality of the movements themselves in terms of their time-keeping - accuracy, precision, consistency, resistance to/speed of recovery from the effects of positional change, etc.

Last edited by huangcjz; 10-25-2019 at 12:44 PM.
huangcjz is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-24-2019, 10:01 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Spilled Fluids's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 808
Points: 45 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huangcjz View Post
How do Seiko's basic movement series compare in quality to each other? I have read that the 6220, the basic hand-winding member of the 62 series family, was a cost-reduced and slightly larger version of the 3140 Liner movement. Was the cost-reduction just in terms of the quality of finishing, or did it negatively affect the quality of the movement's functioning?

I have also read that the 62 series automatic movements were simplified over time (e.g. from calibre 400 to calibre 6206) in order to reduce the number of parts and hence save cost. Was this simplification also a good thing in terms of the movement's function, neutral, or was the cost-saving a negative thing?

My assumption is that the 61 series is an improvement on the 62 series in every way, for example with its higher beat-rate (and gaining hand-winding capability), but is my assumption correct?

For example, the 6245/6 and 6215/6 19,800 vph movements were capable by design of being accurate to the Grand Seiko standard of 1966 of -3 to +6 seconds per day (as found in the 62GS), and I assume could perform even better than that nowadays with modern lubricants - would the design of the 6106C or 6119 at 21,600 vph (more comparable than the 36,000 vph members of the 61 series, since higher beat-rate helps with time-keeping, so trying to control as much as possible for beat-rate, in order to only extract the effects of the design) be capable of the same?

I know the 6106 and 6119 would only have been guaranteed/adjusted to be within probably -15 to +25 seconds per day at the time they were made, but is the basic design capable of performing better than the best 62 series of -3 to +6 seconds per day, if it were to have more careful adjustment? (Of course, the 36,000 vph members of the family were capable of up to +/- 2 seconds per day, but those movements likely had more design tweaks to help them achieve that than the 21,600 vph members of the family).

Along the same lines - calibre 460 was capable of -3 to +8 seconds per day in 1963 - would a 6220 be capable of the same or better?

Was the 61 series an improvement on the design of the 83 series in every way?

The sense I seem to get is that the 63 series movements are a cost-reduced version of the 61 series movements. Is this correct, and again, did the cost-saving negatively impact the movement's function or not?

For example, leaving out the 36,000 vph members of the 61 series, and just comparing the 21,600 vph members of the 61 and 63 series movements - how does a 25-jewel 6106C, or a 6119 (from what I can find, they were later replacements for the 6106, but topped out at 21 jewels instead of 25 jewels), compare with a 23-jewel 6349? (I know the number of jewels themselves don't necessarily make a difference to the quality of a movement in themselves, but I'm using them as an indicator of how much investment/money Seiko put into the specific movement and also how high its positioning is in Seiko's line-up, and hence as a kind of proxy for quality.)

How do the 6106C, 6119, and 6349 compare with the ultimate development of the 7000-series movements that Seiko use today, the 28,800 vph 6R20/1/7 series, in terms of quality?

Extending this to the 7600 and 6600 series of movements - the sense I seem to get is that these were lower-cost movements, with the 6600 sort of a lower-cost version of the 6200 series, being thicker, but being also smaller in diameter, and hence was used in high-end, 21-jewel 6660 form in some dress watches, which could be smaller in diameter than the 6220 movements, and hence more suitable for dress watches. How does a 6660, the highest-end version of a lower-end movement, compare with a 6220, a lower-end version of a standard/higher-end/not-low-end movement, in quality?

I am not so concerned with features, e.g. hacking (and hand-winding), quick-set, etc., since some movements from the same family have them and others not, so I see them a bolt-on, modular add-ons. I am more wondering about the performance and quality of the movements themselves in terms of their time-keeping - accuracy, precision, consistency, resistance to/speed of recovery from the effects of positional change, etc.
There are likely 7016 answers to your 6309 questions.
You will have to be more specific as Seiko makes/made watches aimed at different markets and different focus groups.

In the end, it's all about profitability. Generally, Seiko has sought to decrease cost of production while maintaining a reasonable level of product quality and performance. Keeping that in mind, you can see that there is no quantitative comparison from one generation to the next.

As an example I would say that a good running 6309 is no better time keeper than a current model 7s26 or 4r36.
But then we are only comparing entry level to mid level to top tie watches.

Also Seiko time keeping specs are written by lawyers and are extremely conservative so they are not a real indicator of performance for an individual watch.

For the vintage collector, it is probably more important to just acquire examples from all calibre groups
__________________
______________________________________________
Wear your water resistant watch where others fear to swim!
Spilled Fluids is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-01-2019, 03:04 PM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: England, U.K.
Posts: 67
Points: 5 (+)
Default

To make a tl;dr summary of the comparison match-ups:

3140 vs. 6220
Cal. 460 vs. 6220
Cal. 400 vs. 6206
6216 vs. 6119/6106
8325 vs. 6119/6106
6349 vs. 6119/6106
6119/6106 vs. 6R20
6349 vs. 6R20
6660 vs. 6220
huangcjz is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-01-2019, 04:08 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
zeke441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 4,085
Points: 368 (+)
Default

Google is your best friend.
__________________
"A man that wears a watch shows that being on time is important"
Pops - 1979 when he gave me my 1st real watch.

Seiko Saviors
zeke441 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-01-2019, 04:15 PM   #5 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: England, U.K.
Posts: 67
Points: 5 (+)
Default 62, 83, 66, 61, 63, and 7000/6R series movement quality comparison?

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke441 View Post
Google is your best friend.


I have read all I can find on-line about this, and included what information I have found in my post already, for example about the 6206 being a part-reduced version of the cal. 400 in order to save on cost, and that the 6220 was a slightly larger version of the 3140 Liner movement that saved on cost by having lower finishing, but I have not read people making direct comparisons of these movements in the way that I am asking about in terms of their performance and quality. Was the reduction in finishing quality of the 3140 when it became the 6220 purely cosmetic, or did it affect its performance and quality as well? Was there any difference in the finishing of the pivot holes in the plates to save cost, etc.? Those are the sorts of questions that I am asking. People don’t seem to have compared different generations of the movements over time.

Last edited by huangcjz; 11-01-2019 at 04:24 PM.
huangcjz is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum – Japanese Watch Reviews, Discussion & Trading forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:05 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.