Invicta or Seiko?

>>12732733
Casio F-91W until you can afford a big boy watch

>>12732764
>Casio F-91W
snob

>>12732733
>being this poor

Casio w35

>>12732764
fpbp

>>12732733
The seiko looks cooler.

>>12732733
Seiko hands down

Seiko all the way

File: typicalinvictawearer.jpg (40KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x450px

>>12732733
i dont know? fat, bald, ethnic, white tank top/rhinestone t shirt wearing UFC fan douchebag (invicta) or skinny jeans and retro glasses hipster douchebag (seiko)?

>>12733096
If you think right even has chance against left, then I have bad news for you.

File: IMG_20170905_111504.jpg (3MB, 2976x3968px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2976x3968px

If you're gonna get something shitty at least get a tag

As terrible as it sounds, I would read the watch general on /g/ for some opinions.

Here is the link!
>>/g/62245024

>>12733962
>>>/g/62245024
Try number 2

>>12732733
Seiko has better build quality.

But they supplied SOME of those Invicta divers with really low end movements made in Malaysia.

The problem is even with a Seiko movement, a low end one...

It still has Invicta build quality around it, including crooked cyclops, glue residue, finger prints inside case on crystal, loose second hand, misaligned bezel, hairs inside watch, counter weight scraping plastic movement holder.

(Mid level seikos don't use those shitty mvmt holders )

Snapped stems, cross threaded screwdown stems are all known Invicta issues

Both brands are ugly. Why are they always recommended here?