Steinhart is a familiar name to those of us who have been interested in affordable watches over the last several years. When we were first getting into this world, their watches offered a lot of bang for the buck, and looked good too, as they were largely homage watches or recreations of classic styles, like fliegers and marines. Steinhart also manages to do something few other brands are able to, and seemingly with no great explanation as to how, which is offer Swiss made automatic movements in watches that often cost under $500. What they lacked in originality, they seemingly made up for in style and low prices.
With that said, it’s been a few years since we last reviewed a Steinhart watch. To this day, our review of the Ocean Vintage Military (OVM) remains one of our most read articles and watched videos. The Rolex Mil-Sub homage watch just oozed style, and while controversial, as any homage watch is, was just too much fun to ignore. Plus, the watch it was based on is so rare and goes for so much at auction that an homage to it is hardly hurting sales. If anything, it celebrates the watch it was based on, telling its story to a new era of collector. Needless to say, the OVM became a huge cult hit and was, for a time, always sold out. Since then, Steinhart has released plenty of watches, many of which we’ve mentioned the release of, but none to my knowledge has reached the status of the OVM.
Well, when Steinhart released the Ocean One Titanium Premium 500, the team here all felt that this could be their next hit. This time, instead of being an homage to a specific Rolex reference, the watch went its own direction. The case became titanium, the water resistance claims a depth of 500m, and the dial plays with the sub-layout but is its own thing (or close enough). Clearly, it’s a play at the Tudor Pelagos, but rather than being a look-alike, they made something with similar stats and concept. Both being a modernized play on the Submariner.
More over, it was simply cool looking. Homage watches are fun, but honestly in the years we’ve been doing this, I’ve lost interest in them. More and more micro-brands have popped up with unique visions and stories, creating a marketplace of great watches… for my money, I’d rather buy something unique. So, I was glad to see Steinhart veering away from pure homage. Sure, it has a sub feel, many many watches do, but it wants to be its own watch, and I can get behind that idea. Plus, in true Steinhart fashion, it’s under priced. Featuring a Soprod A10, ceramic bezel and of course titanium case and bracelet, the OTP (it needed an acronym with such a long winded name) comes in at around $540. Knowing a bit about what things cost, that’s a crazy price. The question is, did they cut corners elsewhere to achieve it?
Spot on review Zach! So close to the target, but …
I wish Steinhart would put a ceramic bezel with cut-outs on the entire Ocean One line. Perhaps not the OVM….although that could work well too. The current ceramic bezels with the printed numbers reflects a glare that make that hide the markers and numbers and generally lacks that extra touch of quality. It would certainly increase the price but I think Steinhart fans would be glad to pay a little extra for this feature.
Ceramic bezel for scratch resistance, paired with pretty much the softest grade (grade 2, right?) of a very soft metal for case/bracelet… Idk. Makes no sense.
Anyways. I tried an all-titanium watch (tempest commodore, iirc it was featured on w&w sometime ago), and, well.. the titanium is just too soft (it was a used piece, and frankly the insides of lugs were straight-up chipped and carved like putty).
I have a commodore, and it’s held up quite nicely. Chipped lugs? Unless it was abused in the extreme I can’t see it. That said titanium is not steel.
As for the watch this is the only offering from steinhart even remotely interesting with the revamped selection in the ocean line. I was disappointed to see the ocean red and ovm undergo poorly thought out design changes.
Maybe it was, as you say, abused in the extreme. All I know is, I bought a used Commo and it had f***ked lugs. That’s the long and short of my trying-out a titanium watch.
Sorry to hear that. IMO it’d be worth trying one new and deciding then if you like titanium or not….I’ve also noticed over time minor scratches tend to heal themselves.
Forgetting the few obvious flaws, this is an outstanding value for a watch with all these specs. It’s a beater that will take quite a beating and still bring pleasure to the lucky owner. As far as the bracelet is concerned, forgetaboutit! It’s beautiful on leather! The only thing I really don’t like is the blue “Titanium 500.”
Public Service Warning: Steinhart bracelets are known primarily for their flaws. Aside from the fit and finish issues identified in this article, they frequently come with a built-in design flaw that is difficult, and, depending on your wrist shape, sometimes impossible to correct: http://forums.watchuseek.com/f275/reducing-curve-ss-bracelet-672858.html. People have been having this problem for years, and Steinhart hasn’t done anything about it–my Ocean One purchased last year had the same issue.
Aside from that, my Ocean One is OK, but I have to say that the overall fit and finish on the case are much better on my Squale 20 Atmos, which is in roughly the same price range and has the same movement in it. Look at Squale’s offerings very carefully first if you’re tempted to buy this watch. In my opinion, they just do a better job than Steinhart, and for not much more money.
Based on this review, it really sounds like the finishing on the bracelet could be a deal killer for many. I’d considered it for a weekend beater, but perhaps I’ll look elsewhere. I do like the design, though, and am glad they went away from a straight homage on this one.
The finishing looks so cheap. $540 for a low quality homage watch is so overpriced. Great review.
I personally have this watch for a month. It’s a beauty and is very well built. Finishbis very good. The titanium is grade 5…not as scratchy as my seiko sportura titanium i had for 17 years…. it became my daily driver watch and its great on the wrist. The only thing bad with it is the bracelet lock. They could have done something better. It keeps real good time and I’m happy. All you idiots replying to the review without even touching the watch should first try it on the wrist and then make remarks . otherwise shut up.
I love it.
“should first try it on the wrist and then make remarks”
Oh, okay. Will you sponsor the watch being sent from Steinhart to all our homes, or should we all ask Steinhart to send out a demo version ourselves? Not quite sure how the whole concept of trying-out-in-person an online-only watch works, tbh – care to elaborate?
As far as remarks go… well, what about Zack’s remarks, in the review, that he had after trying, videographing and photographing the watch? He did, after all, also remark that the finishing looks cheap.
I read this blog regularly to read reviews from experts like Zach. If we don’t believe him, so why we read his reviews.
There are 2 probabilities.
First, your watch comes with a good quality. So it means Steinhart prepare a crap to get their product reviewed (I can’t believe it, they should choose the best). It means no quality standards.
Second, your ability to assess the quality is so bad as you are not an expert. If you think you are better than Zach, you should be a watch blogger and stop wasting your time reading this blog (I am sure that there will be no readers)
Great, just what the world needs…… another derivative Steinhart. Their design depart mustn’t be that busy. I mean, even the name Steinhart is daft. Sounds like it was thought up by a 9 year old……
Well… it shows how stupid you are..it’s the founders family name.
My dear chap, I’m well aware that it is the name of the fellow that started the company. A company that doesn’t really appear to be capable of original thought. They merely copy other peoples designs (IMHO). Furthermore your comment on my alleged stupidity merely highlights your lack of class and breeding, rather like Steinhart watches really. In addition ,to a native English speaker the name Steinhart does sound rather daft and somewhat contrived regardless of the origins.
Your last name is a slang for male genitals.
I know, were-as I suspect you are one.
“were” ??? My dear chap, you should learn to spell before you cast aspersions.
What exactly have you invented or bestowed on this planet of ours, besides your remarkable wit? What will the world remember of the great Phillip Johnson compared to this very successful watch company?
“this very successful watch company” – that I can not argue with.However, it appears to me that this success seems to be largely based on other peoples’ designs……
As for my legacy, I care not as I will be dead. Sic Transit Gloria.
The inherent ‘softness’ of titanium may be the root of much of the perceived trouble mentioned by the reviewer.
Lovely watch. I fail to understand the problems so many have with Steinharts offerings. They make good watches and follow established forms with updated technology. Good business sense I’d say.
I do hope this model will be available in all steel.
Love mine; really like the matt titanium finish. The photos show the extent of the “issue” of finish pretty well: negligible – light playing off angles. This watch really floats my boat and will look great on a range of straps.