- jason_recliner
- ASSHAT
- Posts: 10873
- Joined: September 17th 2011, 10:00pm
- Contact:
Can a Watch be Too Good? Citizen BN0116-51L and BN0118-04E Review
The watch I’m wearing as I type this – Citizen’s BN0116-51L – is so good - so legible, accurate, comfortable, reliable and durable - it just might be, objectively the best analogue three-hand watch in the world. Focusing on what isn’t perfect, rather than the plethora of positive attributes, will make for a more succinct, concise, objectively better review.
Getting a really good fit isn’t as easy as it should be. The holes in the strap are too far apart, presumably to allow space for the chunky metal eyelets and maintain sufficient unbroken Kevlar fibres between each hole. Immensely strong and feather-light the strap may be, but it’s usually a bit too loose or a bit too tight for my wrist.
The bracelet doesn’t fit much better. The links are too long and it doesn’t include any half links. And although the clasp has ratcheting adjustment, I don’t like the appearance when the adjuster is pulled out so I tolerate a looser than ideal fit.
The ratchet adjustment on the clasp is pretty rough. The buttons must be pushed overly forcefully, and movement of the extension piece through the ratchet teeth is a bit crunchy. The buttons and the clasp body don’t look too flash, either - definitely cheaper-looking than the rest of the watch.
The 116 comes on a bracelet and the 118 comes on a Kevlar strap. The 118 should come with a spare strap as replacements are prohibitively expensive. The primary reason I have two versions of the same watch is I wanted a blue dial watch with the choice of bracelet or strap, and it only comes on the bracelet. The strap was so expensive it was only slightly dearer to buy the watch as well.
A laser-etched Eco-Drive ‘globe’ logo features on the back of the 116 whereas the 118 is sterile (apart from specs and serial number), for reasons unknown. Perhaps one is JDM and one is for export (both were bought from an AD in England). Laser etching doesn’t wear well in my experience; both should have a deeply stamped ‘globe’ logo, ideally, or engraved at least.
And that’s it for the negatives. These watches are otherwise objectively superb and practically perfect in every way. They are so light and the case so beautifully contoured that they disappear on the wrist. The features are straight out of an engineer’s wet dream with monocoque titanium construction, Kevlar strap, internal-AR sapphire, 300m water resistance, and a very accurate solar-powered movement. The Duratect Super Titanium is as new after around a year of very regular wear, including swimming in the pool but not in the sea.
Lume has been applied so thickly, and is so glossy, it looks like you should be able to dig in with a spoon and enjoy. Brightness is extremely impressive but that of the 118 seems to surpass the 116, if I’m not imagining it, and is utterly shine-on-to-the-wall nuclear.Practicality is equally as superlative as the technology, engineering and quality. The crown is knurled for faultless grip every time. The clasp has push-buttons as well as a fold-over lock. The dial and handset are the most perfectly legible I’ve seen, bar none.
Even the paper used for the box is nice, a bit special, perhaps reflecting Citizen's current preoccupation with using it as a watchmaking material?
But putting a nice box aside, do practicality, legibility, integrity, quality and durability equal desirability? Are the ginormous Arabics and arrow-shaped hour hand a little oafish and clumsy? A little My First Watch? Or, dare I say, My Last Watch? Do you want a watch that's been designed seemingly with the objectives of suitability for ages 4-104 and surviving any incident that will finish you off? These Citizens might be superbly designed and engineered high-quality near-indestructible techno-fests for the wrist, but stylish they are not. I absolutely love them but very much understand why the next person may not care for them one bit.
If it thinks, it stinks