A comparison of the Chase Durer Pilot Commander and the Seiko SNA411

A Brief Review and Comparison of the Seiko SNA411 "Flight Chronograph" and the Chase Durer Pilot Commander XVI

A few years ago I received a Chase Durer Pilot Commander XVI as a gift. A few months later, I became interested in what I consider to be a somewhat similar watch, the Seiko SNA411, sometimes referred to as a "flight chronograph" or a "pilot chronograph".


 I subsequently noticed a few posts on various forums discussing this watch, and ended up buying one "LNIB on the 'bay ("LNIB" my "A$$", but that's another story) and have worn it a couple times now. 


Conversely, I seldom see much mention of the Chase Durer brand pretty much anywhere. So, for some reason I feel compelled to share my experiences with both of these "pilot" or "flight" chronographs.


Let me say up front, it is my hope that you pilots out there have better instrumentation onboard your planes and will not find it necessary to employ either of these watches as intended except under duress.

Here goes a brief description, thoughts, etc. Some of the pictures are mine, some are borrowed...I hope I am not breaking any rules, etc....Please advise.

Overview
The Seiko SNA4xx family comes in three models, the 411 (which is what I will be reviewing), which is stainless with black face, subdials and bezel, the 413, which is stainless with a white face and blue subdials/bezel, and the 414, which is gold tone stainless with black subdials/bezel.

The case is listed as 41x13mm, with 22mm lugs. It has Seiko's standard Hardlex crystal, visibly domed, with a coin-edged type, non-ratcheting slide rule bezel. It took me a minute to figure out the non-ratcheting, then realized that as it is a slide rule, ratcheting is not strictly necessary. 


The stock bracelet is a little unusual; it is predominatly Oyster in shape, but the outside links are brushed and the middle links are polished, similar to the standard Invicta scheme on their divers. This middle link also has a slight crease down the middle, causing it to look like two links, when it is actually one. It has a common flip/push lock clasp that closes crisply and is unobtrusive.

The nominal retail price is somewhere around $450; I see them brand now on reputable vendor web sites for around $300 or less. I got my "LNIB my A$$" for, shall we say, considerably less.

The Chase Durer comes in two basic models, stainless with black face and bezel with silver subdials, and stainless with a white face, medium blue bezel and grayish subdials. They are available with a small graphic representing various military units on the dial is so desired.

The case is listed as 42x11mm, with 22mm lugs. It has a flat, sapphire crystal, also with a coin-edge type bezel, which does ratchet at 120 clicks. The stock bracelet is a President style, all brushed, with a flip lock only clasp, no push.  It is nice and heavy; my only issue is that the words "Chase Durer" as engraved on the clasp are a bit shallow, not quite up to snuff.  The nominal retail price is $399, commonly seen on reputable web sites for around the same $300 figure.


Logistics
My first impression of the Seiko is of good, solid Seiko quality. The watch is appropriately heavy, and the fit and finish on the bracelet and case is good, as expected. The non-ratcheting bezel turns readily but not freely, so will reasonably stay in place when making those frantic last minute fuel load calculations. 


The dial is clean and quite readable with the white on black scheme; the bright yellow sweep second hand is a nice touch. Subdials are for small seconds, alarm time and elapsed minutes, the sweep second hand is for the chrono. Lumibrite is used on the markers, absenting the quarter hours, which are taken up by the date windw and subdials. The hands are similarly coated, and I found the lume to be readily legible after approximately 5 hours in darkness, which is quite good compared to many others I have seen.

Sizing the bracelet was simple, with standard split pins and easily manipulated links. The date window is smaller than I prefer, but as I get older my criteria get larger, so to speak; it is certainly legible. 


The most remarkable feature about the watch is the seemingly inexhaustible array of engineering data (for lack of a better term) represented not only on the bezel, but the chapter ring and even on the outermost edge of the face itself. While I am attracted to the style, I have given up any hope of knowing how to do anything of worth with the vast amount of information, literally, at my fingertips.


The screwdown crown (unprotected by "shoulders") is well serrated, making it easy to grasp and turn. The two pushers, located for standard "righties" at 2 and 4, are remarkable for their screw down feature. When screwed down, the pushers, obviously, do not push. While I don't know if this is strictly necessary for WR of 200m, as the watch is rated, it does two things for me: One, it keeps me from accidentally pushing the pushers, and two, it ups the cool factor a bit. It looks pretty neat, the question of functionality aside.

The Chase is similarly constructed of what appears to be good quality, and the fit and finish are very good. It is slightly larger than the Seiko, and for some reason looks larger than the 1mm size difference suggests. The ratcheting bezel turns and stays nicely; I don't have a preference at this point for either the ratcheting or non-ratcheting, they both seem fine, particularly since I do not use it in any way. Since the slide rule nature of the pilot bezel does not require it to "line up" on the markers as a diver bezel does, they both appear equally random at all times.


The dial is readily readable, but the silver sub dials reflect light in a way the Seiko's black sub dials do not, which gives them the impression of being "busier". The sweep second hand, used for chrono functions as in the Seiko, is red-tipped. 


There is a fourth full-sized hand, which is used to set the alarm, which is all red, making it stand out nicely. This does not exist on the Seiko, which uses a subdial for the alarm setting as noted above. The Chase's subdials are for seconds, elapsed minutes and elapsed hours. 


The lume is said to be Lumibrite, but my observation has been that it glows for a shorter period than the Seiko, only a couple of hours perhaps. The bezel, chapter ring and dial-edge are similarly taken up by numbers of diverse sorts.

Sizing the bracelet was simple and standard; the date window may be slightly larger but only minutely so if at all. The screwdown crown, protected by shoulders, is a bit harder to grasp and turn. 


The Chase has three pushers; 2 and 4 as in the Seiko, and also at 8, although the pusher at 8 is actually a puller, meaning something you pull out to activate the alarm, and push back in to deactivate. The pushers are not screw down, although the watch is rated 200m WR like the Seiko.


Movements
The Seiko is powered by the venerable 7T62 quartz chronograph movement, certainly not unique among Seikos of this type. The battery is anticipated to last 3 years, and the type is listed as a "Seiko SR927W".  The second hand is supposed to jump to two-second intervals as the battery life nears its' end, but the manual does not specify how far ahead this warning begins; they admonish one to simply "have the battery replaced with a new one as soon as possible." 


My watch had the sweep second (chrono) hand centered nicely at the 12:00 position when I received it; there are instructions for how to fine tune this if needed. Given the hectic nature of the dial and my diminishing eye site, I will assume that the minute hand lines up accurately on the markers. The bezel, as discussed above, is somewhat unique, and does not require alignment with the markers as it would on a dive watch.





I will assume for now, as well, that the watch will prove to function within Seiko's claim of accuracy (within 15 seconds a month); anyone who has owned a Seiko quartz will probably stipulate this as well. 


There are two distinguishing features of the movement that I have noticed. One is the alarm; as mentioned above, one of the sub dials is dedicated to this function and indeed has fully functioning hour and minute hands that keep time independently of the main movement. This allows it to either work as a second (GMT if you wish) time zone keeper, or as an "echo" of the main movement. The alarm is set using a combination of the crown and pushers, and interestingly enough can be set in either 12 hour or 24 hour mode, allowing you to set it at 8am to go off at either 6pm that day or 6am the next, as an example.

The other feature that stood out to me is more style oriented. The sweep second, or chrono hand, when timing something, moves in a very smooth and pleasant manner, I assume because it is measuring elapsed time in 1/5 second increments. So instead of lurching along like the regular second hand, it literally sweeps very much like a mechanical watch. How one would manage to actually decipher 1/5 of a second on an analog readout is well beyond both my interest and my eyesight, but the capability is there.

The Chase, interestingly enough, is powered by another Japanese chrono movement, the Miyota OS80. Previous version of the Pilot Commander actually used a Seiko movement, the YM55; I believe this is the first iteration that employs the rival movement. 


The battery is listed as a 3 year model as well, something called a 280-4404, also with low battery warning. Due to the dedication of a subdial to the process (the seconds subdial becomes a split-second dial when in chrono mode) the Chase is able to measure in 1/10 second increments, rather than the Seiko's 1/5. So far the Chase appears to be within the 15 seconds a month guideline as well.

As mentioned above, the alarm is set using a single full-sized hand, and is activated by a puller. This is a somewhat inconvenient arrangement, as compared to the Seiko, for a couple of reasons. One, you can only set the alarm for a 12 hour period, and you cannot really be certain of the exact time it will go off, as there is no minute demarcation and you must give it your best guess when setting the single alarm hand. 


Second, and most important perhaps, is the fact that when you have the alarm activation puller pulled out, to activate the alarm, you compromise the water resistance of the watch, and you are warned not to operate it under water in this condition. 


While I have to assume that most pilots, or at least most good pilots, are not plying their trade deep under water, for the rest of us this could certainly be problematic.


Impressions

The bottom line is that both watches appear to be good quality, accurate, functional, fashionable time pieces within the same market segment. 


If one is interested in buying a watch of this type, I think it is a virtual toss-up as far as quality, so style may be the ultimate decision maker.

There is one element, however, which does distinguish the two for me, and that is the crystal. 


The hardlex on the Seiko is certainly clear and I have no doubt admirably strong and durable. However, due to what I assume is a lack of a "double curve",  if you are not looking at the watch fairly straight on, the view gets distorted, like looking through a Coke bottle, or perhaps underwater.  You can kind of see this in the second side-by-side picture near the beginning of this document. 


The Chase's flat, sapphire crystal, on the other hand, is marvelously clear from any angle. This may not be a "deal breaker", but for me it is a noticeable and somewhat annoying mistake, oversight, whatever. I must admit I am surprised Seiko did not use their Sapphlex, with a double curve, on a watch that retails for well over $400.


Either way - both very solid pilot chronograph style watches, so enjoy!