S. Coifman Watches

[benjamming]

Do S. Coifman watches have much quality, accuracy, reliability to them? Or is it a case where the pre-1950's (or whatever date) are good, but the recent (last decade) are throwaway garbage? Is it where it's obvious that when they were built in x = great, but now built in y = stay away? I'm pretty ignorant about watches...obviously. Ha!

 

[Elkins45]

It's a legacy brand that has been resurrected by Invicta, which is generally not a well-regarded brand. I looked at a few on their website and they all appear to be low cost quartz movements. As far as accuracy and reliability goes they are probably as good as any other <$100 quartz watch, but for similar money you can find better watches from Citizen, Seiko or even Casio and Timex.

 

[CharBaby]

I like the vintage look of the S.Coifman watches even though they also have some modern looking watches.
However they are inexpensive quartz watches by Invicta and are okay for those who don't know nor care. They look nice on the wrist and when you're dressed up but there are better quartz watches out there and even some with automatic movements instead of quartz for not much more money

I like the INVICTA of old(pre-quartz crisis). I don't own any of those however I do have several Invicta's from the early 90s when they were making their comeback and were using decent Swiss mechanical/automatic movements. Invicta had even been improving their quality of many of their watches with better crystals and movements up until(the early-mid 2000s) when they lost their soul with the stuff they're producing today.

Not that Longines is the watch maker that they once were however, I am more of a Longines guy because my father wore a Longines & Hamilton when they were their own companies. I have a soft spot(fondness) for the things that Dad owned/wore.

 

[Vil_Riker]

It's interesting how you can buy a perfectly good looking $40 watch that will last a very long time.

 

[4WD]

It's interesting how you can buy a perfectly good looking $40 watch that will last a very long time.

Or pay 10X that (everyone in the family) and have to charge daily

 

[Elkins45]

Or pay 10X that (everyone in the family) and have to charge daily

That’s not a watch: that’s a wrist computer.

 

[Elkins45]

It's interesting how you can buy a perfectly good looking $40 watch that will last a very long time.

The Casio MDV-106 is widely considered to be one of the best bargains available today. For $50 you get an extremely rugged watch rated to 200 meters.

https://www.amazon.com/Casio-MDV106B-2AV-MDV-106B-2AVCF-Blue/dp/B083VMFR4C/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1QBJN7NX05X1D&keywords=MDV-106&qid=1690294941&sprefix=mdv-106%2Caps%2C123&sr=8-1&th=1

 

[Vil_Riker]

Casio might be the best overall value in watches.

Or for a few dollars more for this Rolex tribute, apparently highly rated, with automatic mechanical movement, too.

https://www.amazon.com/BENYAR-Automatic-Mechanical-Stainless-Resistant/dp/B08PFLRDV3

 

[Hermann]

One of the best selling watches in the $100 range is the Invicta 1953 series that came out about 4 years ago. They are a no date Subbie homage with an Seiko NH-35 movement. Classy watch for a 100 beans. Very well received by the watch community.

 

[Vil_Riker]

One of the best selling watches in the $100 range is the Invicta 1953 series that came out about 4 years ago. They are a no date Subbie homage with an Seiko NH-35 movement. Classy watch for a 100 beans. Very well received by the watch community.
View attachment 168823

Yes, good watch and a good movement.

 

[CharBaby]

One of the best selling watches in the $100 range is the Invicta 1953 series that came out about 4 years ago. They are a no date Subbie homage with an Seiko NH-35 movement. Classy watch for a 100 beans. Very well received by the watch community.
View attachment 168823

Yeah, any Pro Diver automatic is a bargain.

 

[vavavroom]

Not in regard to the OP's question but because diver's watches have been dredged up: Those looking for a reliable diver's watch should ensure the watch is a certified diver's watch od that it meets DIN standards. Anybody can claim 'water resistant to x bar/x feet but they can't just slap on ISO certs or DIN standards.

ISO 6425 is for water resistance and incorporates ISO 1413, which covers shock resistance, and ISO 764 covers resistance to magnetic fields. That's the gold standard in dive watch certs to look for.

There are also DIN 8306 uncertified standards for water resistance (DIN 8306), shock resistance (DIN 8308), and resistance to magnetic fields (DIN 8309).

 

[Hermann]

Not in regard to the OP's question but because diver's watches have been dredged up: Those looking for a reliable diver's watch should ensure the watch is a certified diver's watch od that it meets DIN standards. Anybody can claim 'water resistant to x bar/x feet but they can't just slap on ISO certs or DIN standards.

ISO 6425 is for water resistance and incorporates ISO 1413, which covers shock resistance, and ISO 764 covers resistance to magnetic fields. That's the gold standard in dive watch certs to look for.

There are also DIN 8306 uncertified standards for water resistance (DIN 8306), shock resistance (DIN 8308), and resistance to magnetic fields (DIN 8309).

Very few folks use these "dive style" watches for diving. They mostly use dive computers. I do use the timing bezel on mine for walks, which is also old fashioned, with a FitBit on the other arm. Although the watch I showed does have real dive cred. Saw a test where it went past the 660 ft pressure test in a chamber. The crown assembly's sturdy feel is among the most reassuring IME. The crown simply has no wobble. Mine keeps as good of time as my Omega Seamaster 300m.

 

[vavavroom]

Very few folks use these "dive style" watches for diving. They mostly use dive computers. I do use the timing bezel on mine for walks, which is also old fashioned, with a FitBit on the other arm. Although the watch I showed does have real dive cred. Saw a test where it went past the 660 ft pressure test in a chamber. The crown assembly's sturdy feel is among the most reassuring IME. The crown simply has no wobble. Mine keeps as good of time as my Omega Seamaster 300m.

The point of diver's watches is reliable water resistance, not specifically limited to diving per se. Whether I go surfing, swimming, or snorkeling, I need a watch that won't fail. As for diving, a diver's watch is generally used as a backup. As for 100 m desk diving watches, you even take a chance by going for a dip in the pool or by taking a shower. Whatever suits you is fine as long as you realize the limitations and appropriateness of the gear. Also, the water resistance rating refers to static pressure resistance - slow immersion vs forceful immersion like when jumping into the water or when moving your arms rapidly through the water. That's why water rsistance ratings by depth alone mean little.

WR 30 m is splash water resistant- do not immerse
WR 50 m is slightly better and maybe good for a short surface swim in cold water, not hot water like when you take a shower, not jumping into the water
WR 100 m is the minimum for swimming and a little snorkeling, and for jumping into the water from the poolside.
WR 200 m is minimum for an ISO-certified Diver's watch. WR 300m and up is better. If you go scuba diving 300m and more is best. If you do saturation diving you want a diver's watch with a helium escape valve or the crystal might pop off.

The watch I have been wearing for water sports for the last 10 years is 1,200m water resistant. Redundancy is always good. Crown gaskets and caseback gaskets get replaced every 3 years along with a service. The cheaper option is to buy a Casio Frogman. It should be serviceable. Many surfers and people who do watersports use them. You are still looking at over $600. even though it's only a Casio.