The Invicta Pro Diver 8926 vs. The Seiko “Orange Monster” SKX 781K: A Battle of the Titans! By: John B. Holbrook, II October 15, 2002


I’ve been looking forward to this exercise for quite some time; a comparison between one of Seiko’s premier dive watches, and Invicta’s famous 8926. My goal was to analyze both watches to determine which one was the all around better watch. Throughout this comparison, I have tried to maintain as much objectivity as possible. In instances where personal opinion and bias cannot be avoided, I will state as such.

Before I begin, I can tell you that this comparison was much more difficult than when I envisioned doing it, prior to owning the Seiko. I knew it was a good watch(see my review of the SKX781K HERE ) because EVERYONE who owns it seems to like it, but could it really compare to the legendary 8926? (See my 8926 review HERE Having owned it for a few weeks now, I can testify to the fact that it is a close match between these watches. Let’s compare the various features, specifications, and qualities of these two magnificent time pieces.

Here is a pic of these two mighty watches as they square off to do combat!



COST

This is perhaps the biggest significant difference between the two watches. The 8926 can be purchased from a variety of sources with a delivered price of about $100.00 – sometimes less. The SKX781K is a somewhat rare watch than can only be purchased outside of the United States – most seem to be coming from Singapore. The watch itself is running about $150.00, but plan on spending at least $15.00 above that for shipping for a grand total of $165.00.

WINNER: Invicta 8926



MOVEMENT

The Miyota 8215 movement found in the Invicta 8926 and the 7S26 movement found in the Seiko SKX781K are both excellent movements. Together, these two movements make up a sizable portion of the automatic wrist watches in the world. So which one is better? Many argue that the low beat speed of the Seiko in house movement makes it more robust than the Miyota movement. However, the 8215 has been around for nearly 20 years longer than Seiko’s 7S26 and long term reports are quite favorable. In terms of functionality, the two are quite similar. Both are 21 jewel automatic movements, and both lack the coveted “hacking” ability to stop the second hand for precise synchronization. The bi-directional rotor of the 7S26 enables this movement to be quite efficient in the automatic winding department. While the rotor on the 8215 only spins in one direction, it does have the ability to be hand wound; a strong feature which is lacking in the 7S26. The 8926’s ability to be hand wou! nd really gives it a leg up when comparing these watches.

WINNER: Invicta 8926



ACCURACY

Now that I’ve had the SKX781K for a few weeks of break in, I thought it would be a good time to do an accuracy test over a week’s period of time. This was by no means a scientific test, but rather what I like to call a real world test. Instead of testing the accuracy by consistently storing the watches crown up, or crown down, etc., I simply wore and stored the watches as I normally would in every day use. Sometimes the watches were in my watch box, and sometimes I would put one of the two watches on my winder. It simply depended on my wear pattern. I did however make certain that each watch was fully wound every 24 hours. Also note that my 8926 is a two year old watch that has been constantly running during that time.

DAY 1
Invicta: -12
Seiko: +8
DAY 2:
Invicta: -0
Seiko: +7
DAY 3
Invicta: -8
Seiko: +8
DAY 4
Invicta: -6
Seiko: +3
DAY 5
Invicta: -5
Seiko: +8
DAY 6:
Invicta: -6
Seiko: +6
DAY 7:
Invicta: -7
Seiko: +7

TOTAL VARIANCE FOR THE WEEK
Invicta: -44
Seiko: +47

Both watches performed admirably over the course of the week, and not that far off from COSC standards (-4/+6 seconds per day for two weeks will earn your watch a certificate). They also performed much closer to one another (in terms of pure variance) than what I expected. Of course, my little accuracy test is hardly scientific and really shouldn’t be used in any sort of definitive interpretation.

In the end, both watches could run for a week and be less than a minute off. So, I consider them equally accurate.

WINNER: Tie



BRACELET

No doubt, both of these watches have exceptionally good bracelets; better than many watches costing hundreds of dollars more. The Invicta bracelet has been praised by even Rolex Submariner owners for its quality. The Seiko bracelet is noticeably bigger and thicker (appropriate for the larger case size of the Seiko). Neither one is a hair puller. Downsides? The Invicta bracelet has a polished center link which is something of a scratch magnet. While the Seiko bracelet is going to be a bit more scratch resistant with its brushed finish, the link pin collars are an absolute pain in the backside to work with when resizing the bracelet.

WINNER: Tie



CLASP



Not really much of a contest here. The Invicta clasp is functional and does an excellent job, but simply doesn’t compare to the push button clasp used on the Seiko. The Seiko clasp really is a great feature that you just don’t see used that often, especially in a watch of this price range.

WINNER: Seiko SKX781K



CRYSTAL

This is an area of improvement for both watches, given that they both employ a mineral glass crystal. I’d prefer sapphire myself, though arguably mineral glass is preferred to sapphire for a deep dive watch. The crystal on the 8926 does employ a date magnifier cyclops, but it’s hard to fault the Seiko in this regard as the day and date are clearly legible without magnification. However, what the 8926 does have which the Seiko does not is a matching mineral crystal display back. A display back is a great feature for any automatic which is rarely seen at this price.

WINNER: Invicta 8926



LUMINOSITY

The SKX781K is the clear winner of this category; the Tritnite coating on the 8926 literally pales by comparison to the Lumibrite coating on the Seiko.

WINNER: Seiko SKX781K



BEZEL

Both watches employ unidirectional bezels quite common among dive watches, but are styled quite differently. It’s a matter of personal opinion as to which is more attractive. However, from a functional standpoint, the Seiko is a clear winner. The bezel on the SKX781K easily turns with one hand, like it glides on ball bearings. Try to turn the bezel on the 8926 with one hand (especially when brand new) and you’ll go back and look in the Invicta box to see if a pipe wrench is included…..

WINNER: Seiko SKX781K



CASE

Here is another category that’s tough to judge. Both watches employ tank like stainless steel cases that are both attractive and durable. Both cases also have a water resistance rating of 200M. The Seiko case is 2mm larger in diameter than the already large Invicta case (they don’t call it the Orange Monster for nothing) but this doesn’t necessarily make it a better. In fact, some owners complain of wrist fatigue due to the increased size and weight of the Orange Monster. I am perhaps a bit more muscular than most and have not noticed any fatigue when wearing this watch. The case design of the 8926 is classic and creates the foundation of a watch that can be worn for nearly any occasion. The Seiko is quite unique and really makes a statement, but may not be quite as versatile of a watch.

WINNER: Tie



CONCLUSIONS

TOTAL CATEGORIES WON BY 8926: 3
TOTAL CATEGORIES WON BY SKX781K: 3
TOTAL CATEGORIES TIED: 3

Purely looking at the categorical wins each watch received, there is not clear winner. However, the number of wins each watch received doesn't necessarily mean a winner can't be declared.

Each of these categories will carry a different amount of weight to different people. To some, cost may be a stronger category. Others will place more weight on luminosity, etc.

In this reviewers mind, the Invicta 8926 is a superior all around watch to the Seiko SKX781K. The 8926, with its long list of features and low price tag is simply one of the best watches ever made for the money (the cost difference is a significant factor to me). That said, the Seiko “Orange Monster” came close. Darn close. It is an exceptional watch by any measure. I would add that for actual diving purposes (these are watches designed to go diving with remember?) the Seiko is no doubt the better watch with its more rugged finish, dive suit extension, and vastly superior luminosity. Fit this watch with a display back, and an auto movement which could be hand wound (and hackable!) and my conclusions would likely be much different.

I feel quite fortunate to own both of these fabulous watches; if you have any interest in automatic dive watches, you should too!



*All information and images contained in this review are the original work of the author, John B. Holbrook, II and are copyright protected. Use of any of the information or images without the permission of the author is prohibited.

BACK TO MAIN WATCH COLLECTING PAGE