- Reactor “Trident” with NEVER DARK luminova/tritium luminous system. Photo: Princeton Watches
Reactor Tritium & SuperLuminova Watches Miss the Mark by Miles
I recently came across these watches from Reactor. They include the semi-significant innovation of utilizing supplementing SuperLuminova and tritium luminous systems simultaneously, a combination Reactor aptly terms its “NEVER DARK” system. Most mainstream modern brands brands seem to have considered the technique redundant, but from a practical and reliability standpoint there’s something about the reassurance afforded by redundancy that appeals to me and I thought the tactic to be notable. It is potentially useful, as it perhaps includes the best of both worlds: the short-term brightness of Luminova and the long-duration, “self-charging” properties of a tritium radioisotope capsule system. The system has the potential to produce an especially luminous, legible watch under most any conditions. And it is perhaps also encouraging as well that the innovation comes from an otherwise all-but-unheard-of brand. I can’t think of any other brand that has tried this, even though Luminova has been on the market since about 1993 or so and tritium since about 1960.
However, this is perhaps one of those all too frequent occasions in the watch world when an otherwise notable innovation seems to fail rather gloriously and mightily right out of the gate, overwhelmed by other shortcomings on the way to becoming a finished product. The execution of the concept in the finished model seems profoundly ill-conceived, so badly so that the innovative tritium/luminova combination is entirely eclipsed by gross stupidity.
So Close and Yet so Very, Very Far Away
Despite the innovative luminous system, this Reactor watch has several endemic problems, so many that I feel somewhat challenged in even trying to list them all and in having to decide on a coherent order in which to present them. So here are some of the problems I think most significant, in no particular order:
- The tachymeter scale on a “three-hand,” non-chronograph watch is all but pointless unless phenomena to be observed happen to occur precisely at :00 every time. Why bother to include it unless you’re just trying to look cool without bothering to provide any actual utility?
- The tachymeter scale is even more pointless on a quartz-controlled watch, in which the second hand steps in discrete 1-second intervals that don’t often coincide with the marks on the tachy scale.
- The second hand doesn’t even reach the already pointless and irrelevant tachy scale, making the ostensible use of it an exercise in visual extrapolation.
- The gap in the outer edge of the case at 9:00 seems to have no visible purpose beyond an ill-conceived attempt to maintain a sense of symmetry with the crown guards. Instead it sticks out like a sore thumb.
- At 13.2mm (0.52″) thickness the watch is especially and impractically thick. This might be forgiven if the water resistance were something more than a rather anemic 200m, but it isn’t. For the sake of comparison, the 42mm Omega Planet Ocean is about 14.5mm thick, but with three times the water resistance (600m) for that paltry extra 1.2mm.
- At 192g, this is a really, really heavy watch. That works out to 6.7 ounces, or about 0.42 pounds. Again, the weight could be forgiven if the WR were something greater than 200m, but it isn’t. Especially irksome is that with a small, lightweight quartz movement much of that weight likely owes to deadweight, nonfunctional case and spacer.
- The goofy lugs mean that you’re stuck with that goofy polymer strap and won’t be able to swap with standard straps or bracelets.
- The “ND” logo on the dial is superfluous and is a distraction in daily use. Its stylization also makes it difficult to discern, so much so that for several minutes I was left thinking, “Why on Earth did they print ‘NO’ on the dial so prominently?” As a rule of design dial text should be kept to an absolute minimum in my opinion; the luminescence should be self-evident.
- Black number markers on a black bezel? Why bother? They’re all but illegible. This might almost be stupider than the pointless tachymeter scale, and that’s saying a lot.
- The $350 pricetag is overreaching for a quartz watch with so many inherent design problems. Comparable tritium-illuminated quartz designs (to which adding luminova would presumably be inexpensive) from established brands like Traser, Luminox etc. start at around $110 or so.
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you get fooled and get way less than what you pay for. I think I know which side this one comes up on. So… back to the drawing board for you, Reactor. I would be curious to see another attempt (perhaps even by a more experienced brand) as the luminova/tritium idea as it does seem to have more than a little merit on its own if it were executed in more well-thought-out design.
0.42
loading...
Related posts:
Rrryan i think you totally missed the boat on your comments here. I am former special forces and my company used to have Luminox as standard issue. Those things fell apart and I went thru 4 of them in just 8 months. One of oour guys was given a Reactor Trident by his wife and we were all so impressed after watching him shoot some extremely high powered weapons with serious recoil (All Luminox snapped at pin attachment) Reactor came thru some other serious stuff I would not like to share. This watch has a 10 year battery, the strap you make sound like plastic but this thing is soft and the lugs actually make the face feel better fitting on my wrist. Furthermore the lugs are the main reason that our company changed from the weak luminox pin interface. Your review of this watch is not very accurate in my opinion. I am guessing you have not actually worn one for a day or even more importantly for a guy like me in the field of battle. Respectfully submitted and a fan of your blog.
Cory .S Winston-Salem NC
loading...
loading...
Hi Cory,
Not sure what you’re trying to imply but I’ve worn some watches in dusty places around things that go boom myself. Mostly agree re: Luminox. At least they finally quit writing “NAVY SEALS” over everything though.
I appreciate the comment but I stand by my earlier words. The Reactor Trident shown here is still replete with obvious design errors like the silly black-on-black bezel, pointless gingerbread tachy scale etc. 10-year batteries are also not so unusual as Reactor might have you believe; Timex and Casio
achieve the same thing in some of their $30 models. The dual-lume approach is indeed quite clever but the end product has so many goofy errors and a price point that is oversteps the product provided.
Regardless, I’m glad the watches performed well for you and I hope you continue to wear it in good health.
Ryan
loading...
loading...
I don’t get your complaints here. Who cares if there are black numbers on a black bezel? They are second markers and don’t need to be legible. Why are they there? For looks. The “ill-conceived” gap on the case is the same thing. It doesn’t stick out like a sore thumb; I’ve seen this watch before and didn’t notice until you pointed it out. Every watch design takes aesthetics into consideration. You don’t have to agree with the choices, but it’s a little strange to dramatize them as if the Reactor watch company has wronged you. Your apparent outrage over these subtle and unimportant details is comical.
Your complaints about the tachymeter are almost as funny. The tachymeter on the watch is functional if you can make a straight line and do simple subtraction. Lots of tachymeters are on a watch’s bezel, and I’ve never seen a watch hand that extends all the way to the bezel. Discrete 1 second hand movement makes the tachymeter a little harder to use and decreases accuracy slightly, but it’s not as if tachymeters are incredibly accurate to begin with.
Mentioning every little detail that you find fault with and dissecting it the way you do makes you sound awfully bitter towards a watch. A watch.
loading...
loading...
What does mentioning every detail of someone’s opinion you find fault with and dissecting it the way you do make one sound like then? It’s an opinion. An opinion. If you don’t like what I’ve written, don’t read it.
I don’t have any particular axe to grind with Reactor, but I object to the way in which most modern makers think they can just slap a buncha goofy crap together without thinking about function or purpose and stick a $400 pricetag on it, and then masses of ignorant fanboys line up to buy them. It’s a lament about the general industry and market today. The major reason for my objection is perhaps that it wouldn’t cost any more to pick features that actually made some sense with a minimum of thought. If anything, I’m mostly just disappointed that the thought, innovation and intelligence that Reactor put into the Neverdark tritium/luminova system wasn’t displayed elsewhere in the watch’s design, as the end result is just an overpriced goofy trinket.
loading...
loading...