(This page features affiliate links, for more information, click here.)

If you've ever shopped for watches on Amazon, you'll have noticed the tidal wave of weirdly-named Chinese-made watches hitting the platform over the last couple of years. The space that used to be dominated by Casio, Citizen, and Seiko has been overrun by Bobobird, BiDen, and Tsar Bomba.

This tsunami of rubbish has made it tricky to discern between the good and the garbage. Previously, you knew what to expect with prestigious, time-tested brands, but now it's a minefield. After all, Amazon reviews, often written by bots or people who've never owned a wristwatch.

So, to try and find out what the crack is, I've got my hands on a couple of pieces from one of the most popular of these oddly-named brands; Stuhrling Original. This company frequently features in the 'Amazon's Choice' and 'Best Sellers' sections, and they've got tonnes of five-star reviews, meaning they've got to be half-decent, right?

Well, thanks to Amazon, there's no need to speculate. They covered the cost of two Stuhrling watches for review purposes, so thanks to them. By the end of this post, you'll know if I think they're worth buying and how they compare to similar offerings from other brands.

THE BRAND

Who exactly are you buying from then? According to their website, this brand dates back to 2002, so they predate most of the microbrands I mentioned at the start; it's promising that they're still in business 20 years later.

Nevertheless, they showcase much of the same cheesiness as many sub-par watch brands I've covered before. Firstly, they've got an overwhelming number of discounts on just the first page alone. Not only is there the 'buy one get one half price offer,' but there's also a 10% newsletter sign up discount, on top of 25% off the Aquadiver range and up to 68% off some other watches too.

Surely there's a combination that gets you a free watch, huh?

Lots of discounts may seem pro-consumer on the surface. But, in all seriousness, if a brand has to discount all their products to draw your interest, it's because they don't command their RRP. Take their 'special reserve' watch, for instance, which is supposedly 'new' but is instantly discounted by 68%.

The brand also uses much of the formulaic fashion brand rhetoric we've seen repeatedly. This includes the rags to riches founder backstory, the 'groundbreaking' innovation that's changed the watch industry, the obscure connections to well-known brands that have nothing to do with watchmaking, and the recurring claims of craftsmanship and quality.

At one point, they boast that the founder "could have sold out and used beautiful people and places to sell his watches" but instead chose to let the products speak for themselves. That's surprising considering that two good-looking models appear when you scroll down the same page. I think whoever wrote this also needs to communicate with the Stuhrling Instagram team, as they don't seem to have got the message either.

I'd better not forget the ever-popular magazine mentions, where clueless individuals who've never even touched the watches shill them harder than the airheads on QVC.

Completely ignore appraisals by garbage sites like these. When you read their coverage, you'll see all the telltale signs mentioned in my 'shady reviews' video, indicating that most of their posts are adverts in disguise. I'm not implying that Stuhrling has paid these people, though it's not out of the realms of possibility. Rather the recommendations from these sites, in general, don't hold much weight.

The company itself is named after master watchmaker 'Max Stuhrling', who supposedly operated in Switzerland in the late 1800s. I say 'supposedly' because I can't find any credible information about this guy online. The only details available are a few sentences from the Stuhrling brand, and most third-party webpages use Stuhrling's website as their only reference. You'd think a legendary Swiss master watchmaker would have a cult following, but apparently not. Perhaps he was friends with the intriguing British gentleman Daniel Wellington; who knows?

UNBOXING

I'm not gonna lie; alarm bells immediately sounded when unwrapping these two. Both arrived in pretty elaborate boxes, which is uncommon at a price point accustomed to rudimentary housing.

While this does make them friendlier for gifting, it also raises some questions. When targeting such a low retail price, is it cost-effective to blow so much on a box that will end up in the trash? I mean, wouldn't it make sense to put your limited resources towards making the watch itself as good as possible?

Unfortunately, over the years, I've noticed a negative correlation between the fanciness of the packaging and the product quality. After all, how many Casios have you seen arrive in a decorative chest? Still, I'm prepared to be proven wrong. Some lesser-known brands have delivered extreme value in the past; if there's another to add to the list, it's a win-win.

Here are the pair I'll be pondering over. The diver is listed as the ‘792 series' on Amazon but is called the 'Aquadiver 3950' on the Stuhrling website, with the nickname 'Depthmaster' present on the dial. The skeleton model goes by the codename 3933 and is called the 'Winchester,' though I'm not sure what it has to do with the small city in Hampshire. The former retails for around $75, while the latter hovers between $100 and $150 on grey market sites like Amazon. So, both are usually pretty affordable.

That's despite them having supposed MSRPs of $795 and $1250. I think someone at Stuhrling forgot the meaning of MSRP, as they (the manufacturer) aren't selling their watches for anywhere near the retail prices they recommend. It's almost like these figures are entirely made up, eh?

Sizing

Both are also on the larger side. The Aquadiver is 42.7mm wide, with a lug to lug of 50.2mm and a thickness of 13mm. When including the male bracelet end links, the effective height increases to 55.8mm, which is rather unwieldy for average and smaller arms. The Winchester is marginally more petite, with a 41.7mm diameter, a 13.7mm thickness, and a more palatable 48mm lug to lug.

CASE CONSTRUCTION & FINISHING

Outside of the packaging, the thing I immediately noticed was the finishing. Unfortunately, I noticed it for all the wrong reasons. Both watches have a glossy finish that looks just like chromed brass. For those of you newer to watches, chromed brass is essentially a lower-grade material used in cheap watches to cut costs. It looks okay at first but typically corrodes and degrades faster than the industry standard 316L stainless steel, which most watches use from about $40 and upwards.

Oddly, neither Amazon nor the Sturhling website lists the case material for either watch. The diver reportedly has a steel case back, but aside from that, you've only got the stainless steel stamp on the rear to go off.

I'm inclined to believe the diver probably is steel, as it weighs an appropriate amount and is relatively cold to the touch. The Winchester, on the other hand, is much more sketchy. It's suspiciously lightweight for an automatic metal watch of this size, at a measly 72 grams, making it lighter than some quartz titanium watches I've reviewed previously. That's not as good as it sounds.

While it feels quite comfy on the wrist, it also feels extremely cheap, and the weight savings likely come at the expense of performance and aesthetics. Skeletonized watches like this do use less material than other watch styles; that's true. Still, the outer shell here is undeniably very thin, evident from the vast spaces around the edges. If you look closely, you'll notice that some of the innards are constructed of sloppily painted plastic, not metal. This includes the chapter ring, whose reflectivity doesn't match the rest of the watch. The case is relatively warm to the touch compared to its contemporary as well, which is strange.

I'd guess this is either an inferior grade of stainless steel, as opposed to 316L, or a completely different alloy altogether, neither of which are acceptable for a watch at this price, let alone at the outrageously inflated MSRP. I could be wrong, though, as I'm not an expert in that field.

Metallurgy aside, both watches look second-rate.

The Aquadiver strongly reminds me of the Accurist that featured in my 'watches under fifty' roundup, as the case finishing has many of the same characteristics. Both have the hazy sheen you find on lower-end pieces, and each lack the clean, precisely cut edges of better-quality watches. The rounded-off corners used throughout are a dead giveaway. The primary difference is that the Stuhrling costs about twice as much as the Accurist, meaning the skimping is less forgivable. It's not a disaster, but the similarly priced offerings from Invicta, Casio, and Pagani Design all hammer Stuhrling in this category, with improved construction and finishing noticeable to the naked eye.

It's also worth mentioning that the highly-edited product shots aren't representative of reality. Many of these renderings provide a higher-quality look with sharper edges than on the real thing, which is quite misleading for prospective buyers. The bezel is more accurate; it's misaligned both in the renderings and in real life – a match I was hoping wouldn't come to fruition.

Much of the same can be said for the Winchester, only this time they've added a hideous coined edge to the outside. It's unnecessary and tacky; not much more needs to be said. I guess this could float your boat if you like the maximalist, overdesigned look.

Regarding other specifications, both watches have reasonably secure screwed rears, each with a decent 100m water resistance rating. I'm not sure I'd label a watch with this designation a 'Depthmaster,' as many similarly priced dive watches have double this score at 200m. Nevertheless, it's dependable enough for most aquatic scenarios, which is pleasing to see, as is the screw-down crown fitted to the diver for added security.

Watch Glass

When it comes to crystals, there's once again some confusion. On Amazon, both are stated as having a 'Krysterna' crystal, which is supported by the engravings on the back of the watches. Yet, on the Stuhrling website, one is said to have a hardened mineral crystal, while the other has nothing mentioned whatsoever.

If you've read my watch glass guide, you'll know some brands essentially rebadge hardened mineral crystal with a buzzword of their choosing; to convince you that theirs is somehow superior. I believe that's the case here too.

Stuhrling may have a whole webpage touting the supposed benefits of 'Krysterna' and why it's better than sapphire (the go-to crystal used in most higher-end watches). However, on the same page, Stuhrling effectively admits that Krysterna is not as hard as sapphire when discussing the Vickers rating scale. They've sneakily ordered this list so that Krysterna comes after sapphire. If you were skim-reading this, you'd probably think Krysterna ranked higher, as human nature expects lists like this to be in ascending order.

They're relying on you misreading the 'greater-than' symbol, which reveals that the lower-placed sapphire scores more than the 2000 rating of Krysterna. Realistically, sapphire should come after Krysterna in this list.

Many users online have reported that Krysterna scratches readily, unlike sapphire, which is unanimously known to be virtually scratchproof. I'm excited to test it versus other hardened mineral crystals to see if it lives up to the billing.

Whether it's jargon or not, this material is still acceptable for watches at this price, and it will give better scratch resistance than untreated mineral crystal. I just wish there wasn't all the pretentious hype behind it; it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

Dial Design

The aesthetic story is quite a short one. The dive watch is an enlarged Rolex Submariner rip-off with an identical handset and marker arrangement. I don't think it's an ugly watch per se. After all, the Submariner is a well-loved watch; it's just not original at all, despite the brand name. The red and black color scheme works well, though the sunburst dial isn't nearly as prominent as in the stock images. In person, it looks like a plain matte finish in the vast majority of scenarios, which is a shame.

It does feature applied indices, which are reasonably well-aligned and nice to see in a budget watch. The lume used is mediocre even for the money and fades quickly in low light, but at least the markers are clean, and there's no sign of dust or dirt under the crystal to the naked eye.

All text is printed, which is to be expected for a sub-$100 watch. It would undoubtedly qualify as daylight robbery if this were anywhere near the $1250 MSRP, though. It's a barebones watch, which is alright as long as you've spent a small amount of cash on it.

I'm not big into skeletonized watches, so I can't tell you if the Winchester is a direct copy of something else, though I suspect it may be more original.

The first thing you'll notice is the logo. As is commonplace among skeleton watches, the text is inked on the crystal's underside, providing a cool hovering effect as you move it. Unfortunately, the illusion is shattered by the fact that the logo and lower text are significantly off-center and are tilted substantially clockwise.

Take a look for yourself; these aren't just slightly off, they're way off!

It's probably the worst logo positioning I've encountered since starting this blog in 2019, and it doesn't leave a good first impression. It also gives credence to my theory that Stuhrling watches are fired off the production line as quickly as possible with minimal care or attention to detail. This watch should never have passed quality control checks, especially for a model with a supposed $795 MSRP.

A pleasing blue tone inhabits the hands. Disappointingly, they extend far past their respective markers, the opposite of the typical short handset problem. At least they remain legible against the mesh of parts beneath.

Watch Movement

To some people, especially those newer to watches, I'm sure the view of a mechanical movement of any sort will be impressive enough to convince them they got a good deal, regardless of its quality. If this gets more people into the watch community, that's great.

On closer inspection, though, the mechanism really doesn't hold up well. The brushing atop it is possibly the roughest I've ever seen, with gaudy striations across the surface. My expensive lighting setup makes this look much more appealing than in person, so I'll try and get some shots in natural light for context. At this budget, I don't think brands should even attempt elaborate movement finishing, as it only yields crude results like this, but because it's a skeleton watch, I guess their hands were tied, and they had to try something.

This ugliness is hardly a surprise, as both watches use bottom-of-the-barrel movements.

Within the Aquadiver is a Miyota 2315. This battery-powered ticker is on the lowest rung of the Miyota ladder and can be had for around $3 a pop, potentially far less if bought en masse. When I removed the rear, I was met with the term 'unadjusted' for the first time, at least in the watch world. Unadjusted movements are those which apparently haven't been fine-tuned to keep the best possible time, which doesn't surprise me in the slightest. It's still a quartz watch, so it does maintain reasonable accuracy; it's just another area where corners have been cut.

That fitted in the Winchester is much more obscure. There's no information about this unmarked automatic caliber on the Stuhrling product page or on Amazon.

On the back of the watch, it says 'UGUU movement,' whatever the hell that is. It's not a manufacturer I'm aware of; I'll tell you that much! I looked through other products on the Stuhrling website and tracked down some alternatives that use the same movement. Here, Stuhrling claims that it's, in fact, an "impeccable and potent in-house automatic movement."

"In-house" as if Stuhrling is designing and manufacturing these from the ground up rather than outsourcing their construction.

While it does have a Stuhrling branded rotor, I couldn't help but notice the uncanny resemblance to the sea of skeleton watches on AliExpress. Most of those use crude, low-cost versions of the 'Chinese standard movement' aka the 'Tongji' that saw mass production in the 1970s and 80s.

I've done some digging and have bad news for Stuhrling owners. It looks like you've been duped…at least if you bought a watch with this movement inside.

I initially queried this on WatchCrunch, where a user pointed me toward the similar-looking but hand-wound 2660S.

After some browsing on that same site, I landed on this, the Hangzhou 2650-SSZ automatic.

According to William Ho of PTS resources, the parent company of Hangzhou Watch Company, this modified Tongji movement has been in production since 2003.

When looking at the pair side by side, as far as I can tell, the only perceivable differences are the blue screws and the lasered rotor.

"Well, Stuhrling dates back to 2002," I hear you say. "What if Hangzhou copied their design in 2003?" Well, the WaybackMachine shows that in July 2003, the Stuhrling website wasn't even operational, with only a 'coming soon' banner displayed on-screen.

Hangzhou Watch Company also doesn't seem to be owned by Stuhrling, as it was founded in 1972, predating the New York-based LLC by 30 years. So, I don't see how it could qualify as an in-house movement by proxy.

I then uncovered an article on Europastor.com from 2009 where then-CEO Yossi Gleiberman openly admitted that "more than 50 percent of Stuhrling watches used Chinese movements from Seagull and Shanghai".

If they've previously admitted to using off-the-shelf movements, why are they now claiming that these are in-house? Surely that must be false advertising?

Perhaps some microscopic adjustments technically make this a custom caliber. If not, Stuhrling is knowingly lying to consumers about the movements they use. If colored screws are the sole requirement for a movement to be classed as 'in-house' these days, then Spaghetti Scameti's first collection will sell like hotcakes!

Unfortunately, the legitimacy of the movement isn't the most pressing issue.

You see, when manufacturing a mechanism with strict budget constraints, you have to make some sacrifices. For comparison, the controversial Miyota 8215 (the one with the noisy rotor and common stuttering problem) costs about three times this Tongji.

So, what's the catch?

The din produced by this Stuhrling is a one-way ticket to the asylum. It's by far and away the loudest I've ever featured, making the Timex Weekender look like a silent assassin in comparison. You can hear the tick across rooms and through headphones, while the rotor noise sounds like one of those clicky pullback toy cars when it rotates. It's a total deal-breaker, even considering the moderate price tag.

When reviewing watches, I usually keep them on my desk if I take them off, so I can be around them and get a feel for them, but this one…it was driving me and my wife nuts! Like the horological equivalent of Chinese water torture! I've been storing it in its box in the next room, and I've barely worn it as a result.

Thankfully, the Miyota in the dive watch is virtually silent, which did give me some respite.

Watch Straps

Something I'm yet to touch on is the straps. The bracelet fitted to the Aquadiver is not half bad. It's got solid links, including the end links, and has a functional clasp with three micro-adjustment holes. The tone of the bracelet doesn't match well with the case, but it's at least competitive with others in its price range, and you should be able to find a comfortable fit.

The leather band on the Winchester isn't so nice. It looks okay on the surface, but the quality is mediocre. I'd put it on par with those that came with the new Orient Bambino that I covered a few weeks ago, as it's stiff and plasticky. Ironically, those straps were the worst part of that watch, whereas they're probably the best part of this one.

Reviews

Before I give my final thoughts, I need to provide you with a word of warning. Please don't be fooled by the phony 'reviews' that are particularly prevalent with this brand. These are slightly different from the media appearances I talked about earlier. Instead, these are written by people posing as independent reviewers who, again, have never handled these watches and are just after quick commissions. You can identify these by their exclusive use of stock images and the complete lack of user-generated photos on their sites. Most of these contain false information, and some even compare Stuhrling watches to luxury brands, a comparison that an infant would realize is bogus after experiencing them in the flesh.

I think some of Stuhrling's popularity on Amazon is because they put much more effort into their product images than other brands (which is commendable), and they have some extreme designs which make them stand out. I also think the German-sounding name potentially gives viewers a sense of trust and expectations of quality, despite them being wholly Chinese-made.

Final Thoughts

So, do I think Stuhrling watches are worth buying? In most situations, I don't think so. While their prices aren't outrageously high, and their designs aren't as generic as the likes of Daniel Wellington or MVMT; they're still handily outdone by other well-known brands. If you're after a dive watch on Amazon, your money is better spent on the Invicta Pro Diver, Accurist 7037, or Casio Duro MDV-106. The Invicta and Casio have superior finishing and specifications at the same price point, while the Accurist offers similar performance to the Stuhrling but for far less money and without all the marketing jargon.

The Aquadiver isn't a terrible watch; it's just made obsolete by those alternatives. If you can justify shelling out slightly more, you can do considerably better with the likes of Orient, Seiko, and others.

The Winchester, on the other hand, is shockingly bad. If you want a watch of that style, I'd recommend heading to Chinese retailer AliExpress. They stock hundreds of skeleton watches with comparable specifications for a fraction of the price. This Stuhrling is built in China with Chinese parts anyway, so you may as well save some money and shop directly with a retailer based there. Their site is way more Westernized than it was a few years ago too, so it's a no-brainer.

If you must get a Stuhrling, buying used is probably the wisest move.

From the ground up, I don't like how this company operates. They're giving massive 'discounts' on top of generous affiliate commissions, which shows that their watches aren't worth anywhere near their MSRPs. While they're not technically posing as German, the name sounds European, as they've cashed in on an elusive watchmaker whose existence we're supposed to believe in blindly. The other half of their name is 'original,' despite their repertoire consisting of many clones of famous watch designs. Their in-house movement claims may also be false, and it all just feels unnecessarily scummy.

For some viable alternatives, check out my post, where you'll find the best watches under 50 pounds. I'd take all of those over these Stuhrlings.