I believe not. Seiko started dominating the COSC trials in the late 60's and quickly the contest was stopped. in 1972 COSC started certifying watches. The contest resumed about a decade or so ago with the requirement that all parts must be of European origin, I believe that this does not apply to COSC certs.

This being said, "officially certified chronometer" or even having chronometer on the dial is defined by ISO 3159 first codified in 1976, and the current revision is dated 2009 and was recertifed in 2015 with no changes and is to be reviewed in 2020.

So date of the watch is needed on the piece in question. That being said Seiko in 1976 could have had an inhouse test for ISO3159 and legally labeled the watch that way. Currently afiak there is a German Body that can certify a watch as a Chronometer and the watch would not go through COSC.

 

Thanks for this. Extremely informative.

 

The European Chronometer Official Association believed that a chronometer rated watch had to be independently tested to be awarded that designation. Seiko watches were not independently tested so therefore they could not be chronometers. The ECOA did what irritated watchmakers do, they wrote a stern letter to Seiko requesting that the designation of Chronometer on Grand and King Seiko watches stop. Seiko obliged and ceased using chronometer on their watches. In response, the Japanese Chronometer Authorization Association was started in 1968 as an independent group to test timepieces to chronometer standards. The Association was short-lived: due to the rise of quartz watches, it closed in 1983. https://www.timepiecechronicle.com/features/2017/8/17/in-depth-the-history-of-grand-and-king-seiko

 

Makes sense but post 1976 as I read the iso the Japanese can legally do it with thier own in house testing.

 

Can legally do what? Certify?

 

sarg013 Seiko5

 

According to ISO 3159 written in 1976, "Chronometer" is a restricted term bound by international agreements. You cannot have a watch labeled Chronometer and have it not be tested to that certification. I cannot get the actual 5 pages of the standards as they are located behind a paywall on the ISO site. As for the legal definition pre 1976 I am not sure if there was one.

Same with having the word "Dive" or "Divers" on a watch, there is a list of criteria and testing involved due to ISO 6425. These requirments are pretty easy to google.

160 countries adhere to these standard and products in those countries have to adhere to the standards. Oddly the Planet Oceans are not tested to this standard and are not labeled as diver or divers anywhere on the watch. The do in fact exceed the standard but are not tested so they are not labeled. The SKX is tested to these standards and is labeled as a divers.

 

Maybe I'm dense but I'm not sure of your point in the context of the watches in question.

 

I’m saying no way to know but the age of the watch would give clues.

 

Ah. I'm going to say it's from around 1970. Here's one for sale on WUS that dates to June 1970. I'm really debating whether to go for it or not.

 

That was my assumption on date also 70-72. Either way gorgeous pieces. Exquisitely Seiko with none of the drawbacks perceived or real. It’s on my list now also.

 

Go for it!!! If I had the money I would buy one in a instant

 

1969 6100-8000 - ah the good old faded bezel

 

You talked me into it.

 

Good you won't doubt it though I think it would look better on thin black leather with no padding.

 

No doubt. Fortunately, I didn't buy it for the strap.

 

One of the best designed Seikos in my opinion

 

I love the story about Seiko entering the swiss Observatory Trials in Neuchatel and Geneva in the late sixties, getting better every year until seven of the ten best watches were Seikos, and the Swiss stopped the contests alltogether. The winning watches probably were King Seikos.

 

I love the Swiss but it is like a Mercedes W123(Seiko) vs a Ford Granada.

 

The resemblance is uncanny.