Comparison of San Martin SN0148 and Christopher Ward C60 dive watches
San Martin SN0148 vs. Christopher Ward C60: A Dive Watch Showdown
For a little while now, some enthusiasts have claimed that San Martin watches rival entry-level Swiss timepieces. I recently picked up the San Martin SN0148 37.5mm dive watch, marking my first San Martin diver in a couple of years. It felt like the perfect moment to compare it against my one-and-a-half-year-old Christopher Ward C60 38mm.
I’ll be rating each watch across several categories using a 10-point must system, with ties expected. The goal? To determine whether the San Martin delivers comparable premium quality at less than one-fourth the cost of the Christopher Ward.
Dial, Hands, and Indexes
These elements form the visual identity of a watch—the first impression when you glance at your wrist.
The C60’s date window at 6 o’clock is more balanced than the San Martin’s 3 o’clock placement. Both watches feature well-applied markers, but the C60’s batons are more visually engaging than the San Martin’s circular indices. The dagger-style hour hand on the C60 adds character, while the San Martin’s arrow hand feels more conventional. Likewise, the orange-tipped seconds hand on the C60 pops, whereas the San Martin’s lollipop is standard fare.
Even the logos differ in impact: the printed black logo on the C60 offers better contrast than the applied logo on the San Martin.
Still, the San Martin redeems itself with a more dynamic dial texture. While the C60’s flat white dial is clean and refined, San Martin’s textured backdrop adds depth and visual intrigue—a hallmark of microbrands willing to take risks. Final score: CW 10, San Martin 9.
Bezel
Both watches feature slim, fully lumed bezels with minimal back play and premium materials—sapphire for the CW, ceramic for the San Martin. Alignment is spot-on for both. No clear winner here. Final score: 10 each
Case
Though both cases mix satin brushing and polished accents, they diverge in execution. The CW’s light-catcher case offers visual complexity, while the San Martin’s slab-sided design feels ultra-premium thanks to its thinness and clean polished edges.
The CW benefits from turned-down lugs, but the San Martin’s slimmer caseback makes that unnecessary. The tie-breaker? Caseback design. The CW’s sapphire window and unique removal slots edge out the sterile, basic caseback on the San Martin. Final score: CW 10, San Martin 9.
Bracelet
Both watches come equipped with modern bracelets: solid links, solid end links, milled clasps, and on-the-fly micro-adjustment. The clasps are sleek and screw-free on the exterior.
The CW’s Bader bracelet leans tool-watch, while the San Martin’s Jubilee-style bracelet blends tool and dress aesthetics. It’s the standout feature of the San Martin—fully brushed with polished edges on each small link, offering a premium look and feel. It’s also more comfortable on the wrist.
Micro-adjustment is slightly easier on the San Martin, and resizing was smoother—I struggled with one of the CW’s screws. However, CW includes quick-release spring bars, which San Martin still omits in 2025. That keeps this round at San Martin 10, CW 9.
Crystal
Both watches use clear sapphire crystals, but the San Martin’s domed crystal adds charm and contributes to its slightly thicker profile. It’s a subtle but meaningful difference, however more of a preference, so no winner in this round.
Lume
As dive watches, both deliver solid lume performance. Fully lumed bezels, strong initial glow, and similar fade rates after a few hours. No major differences.
Movement
Each watch houses a 4Hz automatic movement—the CW with a Sellita SW200, the San Martin with a Miyota 9-series. While the Sellita winds bidirectionally and the Miyota is thinner, neither spec sways the verdict.
However, San Martin appears to regulate their movements. Mine runs at +1 sec/day, while the CW runs at +10 sec/day. That difference matters to me—I often have to pull the CW’s crown to let real time catch up, whereas the San Martin stays accurate for longer stretches.
That said, the San Martin’s rotor noise is unusually loud for a Miyota 9-series. I've owned several Miyota movements over the years, and have never experienced rotor noise quite like this. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it’s noticeable. The San Martin would have the edge due to the accuracy, save for the rotor noise, so we once again end up with a tie.
Subjective Experience
Both watches look sleek and modern, but the San Martin’s bracelet integrates more cohesively with its watch head. The dial textures and color play on the San Martin add flair, while the CW’s dial is traditionally premium.
San Martin’s bracelet steals the show—it’s elegant, functional, and elevates the entire watch. The CW’s bracelet is fine, but lacks the wow factor (though CW’s Twelve bracelet is a different story).
Buying a San Martin requires navigating sales and discount codes, but they’re frequent enough that my $284 landed price feels standard. Meanwhile, CW’s British/Swiss identity may appeal to some, but the brand doesn’t carry mainstream recognition. And recent customer service issues haven’t helped their reputation. San Martin subjectively takes this round 10 to 9.
Final Verdict
Unsurprisingly, it’s a tie. A $284 Chinese factory diver matches a $1,255 entry-level Swiss timepiece in nearly every category. With just a couple of tweaks—quick-release spring bars and quieter rotor—San Martin could pull ahead.
| Category | Christopher Ward | San Martin |
|---|---|---|
| Dial, Hands & Indexes | 10 | 9 |
| Bezel | 10 | 10 |
| Case | 10 | 9 |
| Bracelet | 9 | 10 |
| Crystal | 10 | 10 |
| Lume | 10 | 10 |
| Movement | 10 | 10 |
| Subjective Experience | 9 | 10 |
| Overall | 78 | 78 |
Comments
Post a Comment