Review on Invicta INVICTA-9937 Men's Pro Diver Swiss Automatic Watch: Coin-Edge Elegance by Landon Bandepalli

My first dive watch was Seiko's first dive watch, the 62 MAS model, released in 1965. I've been collecting watches ever since. of this original watch, their new automatic diver watch SPB051J1 from 1965. I have worn this original Seiko diver watch maintenance free for over 20 years and have done thousands of dives. Your new "reinterpretation" is greatly improved. I bought my first Invicta 9937 many years ago to replace the original Seiko, mainly because I liked the look of the Submariner and it served me well until a close friend advised against it. I bought a new one to replace it. The 9937 is my favorite Invicta dive watch. This is a story but I thought it might be relevant to those considering a purchase. In this review, we look at and compare the currently available Invicta 9937 and its cheaper cousin, the Invicta 8926. Both models are pictured side by side. You will find that they are almost identical. external, but differ significantly in cost. In my opinion, the 9937 is the best watch to justify the price difference, but "your mileage may vary". This review is posted under both watches. There are LOTS of good reviews of both watches on Revain, but if you look at the data you'll see that many of them are outdated and address quality control issues that have long since been resolved. If you look closely at the image of both clocks, the clocks are side by side, you'll see that they drift apart by a few seconds, which is notable given that they were discontinued a few days ago, according to NIST clocks. The 9937 is about 2 seconds faster and the 8926 is about 2 seconds slower. Such accuracy cannot be expected from ANY mechanical watch. My most expensive COSC-certified mechanical watch lags behind by about 3 seconds a day on average. I found it pretty amazing. The glow on both watches is equally pathetic. They seem to glow but compared to my other watches (WITHOUT Tritium) which are in exactly the same condition (watch boxes) they could not be disturbed. I put them in a completely dark room, my SEIKO watch (my best non-tritium fluorescence) is very legible, while this one is invisible. If you need to read the time in the dark, this is a complete failure and one is no better than the other. I'm a big fan of tritium bulbs that do NOT dim overnight. You can expect them to glow exactly the same for 25 years. Watch manufacturers like Ball, Nite, Luminox etc using tritium tubes are the way to go if you need to read your watch in the dark. Straps for diving watches are very important. Lose a pin, screw, . anything down to corrosion or failure of the clasp and your watch will fall to the bottom of the sea. These bracelets are almost identical except for the clasp, I've never had any problems with my 9937s and I don't expect any problems with either. Both bracelets appear to be similarly finished and feel the same on the wrist, which means they're quite comfortable, and while the clasps share the same overall design (with a security fold), they're made differently, which the 9937 (top image) has the best design. NONE of the watch straps have a wetsuit extension, which surprised me. The dials may look the same in the picture but they are not. The 8926 is gloss black, but the 9937 looks a LITTLE grayer. Labels and indices are identical. The 9937 model is equipped with a Swiss Sellita movement. The 8926 model is fitted with a Japanese movement which I believe is made by Seiko. The difference is that you can manually wind the Sellita, but both movements are incredibly accurate and I find the Seiko and Sellita movements to be very reliable. The main difference lies in the assembly of the crown. The 9937 feels smooth and precise, but the 8926 lacks that sense of precision. The 9937 no longer has the sapphire crystal (I think my others had). Instead, it's a type of hardened mineral crystal they call "Flamemelt". 8926 has a base mineral glass that is easier to scratch. but I never scratched a single one. The bezel assembly is firm and feels precise, with the same micro-click system on both. The engineering is MUCH better than some of my more expensive watches. The insert fits snugly onto the bezel and matches the crystal perfectly. They aren't exactly identical, in the sense that the markings on the 8926 seem a bit "clearer" to me. They claim that both models are rated for depths of up to 200m and both are listed as suitable for diving. Both have a screw-down case back and both have a screw-down crown. The reality is that divers use dive computers almost everywhere these days, so it's not like it used to be when your dive watch was crucial. I wear Seiko for diving. but it may just be an old man's fondness based on nostalgia. Bottom line, I think the 9937 is a better watch and probably worth the price difference, but I haven't found any of the issues with the 8926 reported in older reviews. The construction, fit and finish is superb on both watches, it feels and looks exactly the same on my wrist and I just can't explain the phenomenal accuracy. If you are not sure what you need or what you like, I would suggest 8926. Wear it for a while and decide if the design and functionality suit you. For less than $80, you can't go wrong, and if you find that you like the design of a sport watch for divers, you can always upgrade later to a better watch with a similar design. I hope this will be useful for someone.