 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Fri Jun 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Gonzales, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 592 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Scuba Steve wrote:KenC wrote:Great review.................but I still don't care much for the Ocean7..and Steve's comment about "....when the assembler put them together, they just grabbed out of the box without attention to maintaining the order...", is a perfect example of why. 1) That is a piss poor approach to quality control, and 2) it doesn't say much about customer service either. They may be good watches, but since I 1st saw their Forum, the arrogance of the product's manufacturer simply turned me off....they didn't try to sleazily hide the fact that they were using the SW200 (like Bathy's did), but they are certainly willing to make "mis-statements" about it!
Give me ENZO every time, Mitch and Ocean7 just don't hack it for me! jmho
You do realize that the LM-3 and the Enzo's are made by the same person/manufacturer correct? They are basically the same watch. Do you think this is the only company that assembles the same way? What the heck does assembling watches in numeric order have to do with quality control? I have to strongly disagree about any arrogance. They are the most open and forthright company I have seen yet. Can't say that about many either.
Then we can agree to disagree....a sub-contractor will enact quality control standards commiserate with those demanded by the contractor, and no, I do not think that it is the only company that assembles that way. So, if I were to accept the theory that "2 wrongs make a right", then I guess their quality is okay. As to "What the heck does assembling watches in numeric order have to do with quality control?", the correct process in producing an LE is to produce them in sequential numerical order and then number them as such if numbering is done during production. If numbering is done after assembly/production, then they should be numbered after the fact in the same fashion.
I stated it was a great review review, and I gave my opinion based on my knowledge and experience with collectables and Limited Editions. I also formed an opinion based on perception of posts I have read involving the O7 owner...short of meeting him personally, perception is reality.
Ahh, OK, I see where you are coming from. Just though I would add that the LM-3 is not an LE watch. Only the LM-1 to date is a LE watch. The LM-3 was originally scheduled to have the SW-200 movement and it was stated publicly. The company then secured ETA movements for the initial production which was announced publicly. The SW200 movements were then used for the LM-2 which was publicly stated. I have to say that Mitch is very open and upfront with answers to questions.
I can see where you are coming from though. If the company states they will use either ETA 2824 OR SW200 in a watch it will be hard to sort out which run of watches might have either unit if there are non-sequential serial numbers. I will add that this indeed was discussed in their forum and each run of the watch will have an identifier code in the serial number to identify the run. This would allow one to identify the specifications of their watch.