Findtime Square Watch Review: cheap retro-style office watch that looks pricier than it is

I picked up this Findtime square watch mostly out of curiosity. Unknown brand, very generic listing, and a design that clearly tries to copy more expensive square watches. I’ve been wearing it on and off for about two weeks, mainly at the office and a couple of dinners out. No sports, no hardcore outdoor stuff, just regular daily use: typing on a laptop, commuting, washing hands, light rain.

My expectations were pretty low given the price and the fact it’s a zinc alloy case and bracelet, not stainless steel. I usually wear mid-range Japanese watches, so this one had a bit of competition on my wrist. I wanted to see if a cheap, unisex square watch could realistically replace a more known brand for someone who just wants a simple dressy piece that tells the time and looks decent in photos.

From day one, what struck me is that it looks more expensive than it is, at least from a distance. The fully metallic silver look, the square case and the bracelet give off a bit of a retro business vibe. Up close, you start seeing where they cut costs, but on the wrist, most people won’t notice unless they’re into watches.

Overall, after this short test, I’d say it’s a watch that does the basics: it tells the time, it doesn’t feel like a toy, and it’s fine for office and casual wear. It’s not perfect at all, and there are a few details that reminded me it’s a budget product, but for someone who just wants a simple square watch to match a shirt or some jewelry, it gets the job done.

Value-wise, this watch sits in that zone where you’re clearly buying a style piece first, and a serious watch second. Assuming the price stays in the low-budget range (which it usually is for this type of unbranded or lesser-known brand watch), what you’re paying for is a retro square design, a metal bracelet, and the fact that it looks more expensive than it actually is from a distance.

Compared to basic fashion watches from big clothing brands, this one actually holds up okay. Many of those also use generic quartz movements and non-stainless cases, but cost more just because of the logo. Here, you’re not paying for a logo, you’re paying for the look and basic function. If your goal is a cheap dress watch for work, events, or as a backup piece, the price-to-look ratio is pretty solid.

However, if you compare it to entry-level watches from known Japanese brands that sometimes go on sale, the picture changes. For a bit more money, you can get full stainless steel, better finishing, more reliable water resistance, and actual brand support. So if you care more about long-term use and less about this specific square design, it might be worth saving up slightly more and going that route instead.

In short, the value is good for someone who wants a stylish square watch on a tight budget, doesn’t plan to abuse it, and is okay with the idea that it’s basically a fashion accessory with a quartz movement. If you expect premium materials, rock-solid durability, and serious water resistance, you’ll probably feel it’s a bit of a compromise, even if the price is low.

Design-wise, this is clearly the main selling point. The square case with rounded edges and full metal bracelet give it that old-school office watch feel. If you like the look of classic square watches but don’t want to pay big money, this scratches that itch visually. The dial on mine is silver with simple stick indices and slim hands. No fancy textures, no applied logo that stands out, just a clean, basic face that’s easy enough to read in normal light.

The proportions are okay. The lug-to-lug distance (around 47.7 mm) makes it wear longer than a round 38 mm watch, but the thickness (9.7 mm) is still reasonable, so it slides under a shirt cuff without much trouble. The bracelet integrates into the case, so visually it looks like one continuous block of metal on the wrist. That’s nice from a style perspective, but it also means you don’t have much flexibility to swap to other straps unless you’re willing to tinker.

One thing I noticed is the finish. From a meter away, it looks like stainless steel with a brushed and polished mix. Up close, you can tell it’s a cheaper alloy: edges are a bit sharper, the brushing isn’t super consistent, and the shine is slightly more “chrome-like” than higher-end watches. It’s not ugly, but if you’re picky about finishing, you’ll see the shortcuts. The glass is basic mineral-style, flat and reflective, and it picks up fingerprints easily.

In real use, the design works for office, dinners, and more dressed-up situations. With a t-shirt and jeans, it can look a bit formal but still fine. I wouldn’t wear it for sports, despite the listing mentioning golf, tennis, and walking. It just doesn’t feel like a sports watch; it’s more of a cheap dress watch trying to look fancy. Overall, the design is the main reason to buy it: if you like that squared, slightly retro business look, you’ll probably be happy enough, as long as you remember you’re not buying a luxury piece.

On the wrist, the first thing I noticed was the weight. At around 200 g, it’s on the heavier side for a dress-style watch, especially with a relatively compact case. If you’re used to light watches or smartwatches with silicone straps, you’ll feel this one quite a bit, especially in the first few hours. Personally, after a day or two I got used to it, but it’s clearly not a “forget you’re wearing it” type of watch.

The bracelet out of the box is quite long (210 mm listed), so unless you have a big wrist, you’ll need to remove a few links. That part is a bit of a pain if you don’t have a basic tool or don’t want to go to a watch shop. Once sized correctly, it sits reasonably flat and doesn’t move around too much. The bracelet articulates enough to wrap around the wrist, but it’s still a bit stiff compared to better bracelets, so you sometimes feel pressure points, especially near the clasp area.

The case back sits flat, and I didn’t have any issues with it digging into my skin. The watch didn’t cause any obvious irritation for me, but keep in mind it’s zinc alloy, so if you’re sensitive to certain metals, that could be a factor. The stainless steel clasp itself was fine and didn’t pinch my skin or pull many hairs, which is always a small win with metal bracelets.

For day-to-day office wear, comfort is acceptable but not amazing. After a full working day plus commute, I was aware I had a heavier watch on. For short outings or occasional wear, it’s totally fine. If you’re planning to wear it all day, every day, and you prefer lighter, more ergonomic watches, this might feel a bit tiring over time, especially on smaller wrists.

The watch is mostly made of zinc alloy for both the case and the bracelet, with a stainless steel clasp. That’s clearly written in the specs, and you can feel it in the hand. It has a decent heft, but the metal doesn’t have the same “cold” and dense feel as solid stainless steel from better-known brands. It’s not toy-level cheap, but it’s also not something I’d expect to age gracefully over many years of daily use.

The bracelet links are also zinc alloy, and they’re more about looks than long-term durability. The brushing and polishing are okay for the price, but the inside of the links and some edges feel a bit rough if you run your fingers along them. No sharp points that cut, but you can tell there wasn’t a lot of time spent on finishing. The clasp, at least, is stainless steel and feels more solid than the bracelet itself. It closes with a deployment system that snaps in place with a decent click. Not super smooth, but secure enough.

The crystal is just listed as “glass”. No mention of hardened mineral or sapphire, so I’m assuming standard mineral glass at best. After around two weeks of normal use (desk work, light knocking on door frames, etc.), I didn’t see any scratches yet, but this is the kind of watch where you expect the glass to pick up marks if you’re rough or clumsy. It’s fine if you’re careful, but I wouldn’t trust it in a more demanding environment.

Overall, the materials are exactly what you’d expect for a low-cost watch: they look okay but they’re not premium. If you want something that will survive years of heavy daily wear, I’d stick to stainless steel from a more established brand. If you just want a watch to wear a couple of days per week to the office or for events, the zinc alloy construction is acceptable, as long as you’re realistic about its limits.

Durability is probably the main question with a watch like this. After around two weeks, nothing has broken or fallen off, which is the minimum you’d hope for. The bracelet links are still tight enough, the clasp still closes with a firm click, and the finish hasn’t worn off yet on the high-contact areas. But you can tell from the materials and finishing that this isn’t built like a long-term heirloom piece.

The zinc alloy case and bracelet are the weak points for long-term durability. This type of material usually scratches and dents more easily than solid stainless steel, and coatings can fade or chip over time, especially on the edges and clasp. I already noticed a couple of very light hairline marks on the bracelet after normal desk use, nothing dramatic, but it shows how it will likely age if you wear it daily for months.

The glass has held up for now, but since it’s just listed as glass, I don’t expect miracles. Tossing it into a bag with keys or banging it hard against metal door frames will probably leave marks sooner or later. The water resistance is fine for hand washing, but the seals on low-cost watches like this are usually not as robust as on more reputable brands. I wouldn’t trust it in the shower every day for years.

Overall, I’d rate durability as “fine for occasional or light daily use”. If you rotate watches and only wear this one a couple of times a week, it will probably look decent for a good while. If you plan to wear it every single day, in all conditions, you’ll likely see cosmetic wear and maybe bracelet looseness sooner than you’d like. There’s better out there if durability is your top priority, but for the price bracket, it’s acceptable as long as you know what you’re getting into.

Performance-wise, there isn’t much going on: it’s a simple quartz movement, battery powered, with three hands. In about two weeks of use, it kept time just fine. I didn’t measure to the second, but comparing it to my phone every few days, I didn’t see any noticeable drift. For a cheap quartz, that’s pretty much what you expect: set it once, and you’re done for months. The seconds hand hits the markers fairly well on my unit, not perfect on every index, but close enough that it doesn’t look sloppy at a glance.

Where things get a bit messy is the water resistance info. The description mentions 30 meters water resistance, which usually means “splashproof, hand washing, maybe light rain, but no swimming”. Then in the highlights they throw in “IP67 waterproof”, which sounds like some kind of electronics rating. In practice, I treated it like a 30 m watch: I washed my hands with it on, got some light rain on it, and nothing bad happened. I would absolutely not shower, swim, or dive with it, no matter what the listing says.

The listing also throws around words like “shockproof, drop proof and abrasion resistant”. I didn’t baby it, but I also didn’t throw it against walls. It survived a couple of small bumps against a desk and door frame without any visible damage. That’s pretty standard for any metal watch. I wouldn’t rely on it as a rough sports watch though, despite them mentioning golf and tennis in the specs. It just doesn’t feel built for heavy impacts or sweat-heavy workouts.

So in real life: it tells the time accurately, it handles everyday splashes, and it doesn’t fall apart from normal use. That’s it. No extra functions, no alarm despite the listing text, no lume worth noting, and no real sports performance. If your expectations are “basic quartz that works”, you’ll be fine. If you expect serious water resistance or ruggedness, look elsewhere.

Out of the box, the presentation is pretty straightforward. Simple cardboard packaging, no luxury feel, but everything is packed correctly. The watch comes already running with a battery inside, protected by a small plastic tab on the crown in my case. There’s a basic leaflet with tiny writing, not super helpful, but considering it’s just a three-hand quartz watch with no real complications, you don’t really need a manual anyway.

The first impression when you pick it up is that it’s heavier than you’d expect for a cheap watch: around 200 grams according to the spec sheet, and it feels close to that. It doesn’t feel hollow or ultra-light like some very cheap fashion watches. Someone who likes a bit of wrist presence might enjoy that. If you’re used to light watches or have a thin wrist, you’ll notice the weight pretty quickly during the day.

The case size is listed at 37.8 x 47.7 mm, which on paper sounds large, but because it’s a square shape with a metal bracelet, it wears more like a medium men’s watch or a slightly oversized women’s watch. On my average wrist (about 17 cm), it covers a good portion but doesn’t look absurd. On a small wrist, it will look quite chunky and clearly more on the masculine side despite the unisex label.

In terms of functions, forget the “alarm clock” wording in the listing. Mine is a simple analog three-hand quartz: hours, minutes, seconds, that’s it. No date, no alarm, no backlight. So the presentation is basically: one retro square watch, one generic manual, and that’s all. No fancy extras, but nothing missing either for the price segment it’s aiming at.