Leaderboard

Hi friends ! Followers of my dials thread know I'm working on several project since few weeks. 6538 for a friend, and two Explorers 5500 and 6610 for me. I'm very happy to show you my completed mid 60's 5500 Explorer Super Precision. Gen 1002 case serial 130xxxx with IV64 case back, bezel, and 503 crown. 25-12 plexi. Octo low beat non hacking ETA 2888 (2846) serviced by myself. Vintaged Clark's Tudor hands. True gilt underline glossy dial. Riyi Rivet bracelet. Can I call it a franken ? [emoji6] [emoji632]

For a few years I had a '1016' made up using a genuine 16220 case with a 1570 and it was Ok but I always worried about killing the genuine movement so I cut the dial feet off and stuck the dial on a swiss Eta 2846 and put it in the case. All was fine and dandy until JMB came up with a much better looking case. So...I bought a couple cases and went to work. The problem is the oem spec '1016' dial is 27.9mm and the JMB case has a 29.2mm dial seat making the dial a loose fit in the case. I do not like having dial alignment depend on unreliable 'dial dots' to hold the dial centered on the little sheet metal calendar spacer without the benefit of dial feet. Not good imho because it only takes .5mm (or less) 'dial slide' to jam up the hour wheel and/or hour hand hub when they rub against the edge of the dial center hole. What to do? I read where someone said to cement the top dial ('1016') to a Raffles Time etc dial with Eta dial feet and put it all together. Good idea. Today I sanded the lumi dots and paint off of a 29.0mm Raffles 'mil sub' sterile dial and cemented it to the '1016' dial using slow set heavy duty epoxy. So far it looks like a very good fix and I will put it all together in a few days after I c/o the 28xx, using case clamps and screws with the brass JMB spacer. No plastic. The spacer supplied with the JMB case has an od of 29.15mm so it is a very good fit inside the 29.2mm dial seat. The oem spec '1016' dial is 27.9mm. The '1016' dial is from 'Stilty' about 10 years ago, is of unknown origin and has slightly smaller numbers like the older models did. The dial seat inside the JMB case is 29.2mm. The Raffles dial od is 29.0mm. All in all this may be a good way to go. But...there is one big catch and I bet all you sharpies already caught it... The 16220 project mentioned above used an Eta 2846 and the JMB '1016' case is made for an Eta 2824 (that's one reason why it makes such a good '1016'). So now I have to change all the 21600 bph parts from the 2846 into an Eta 2824 along with the taller CP etc. Nothin' to it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like the blue bezel. These things are personal, but the stainless insert never appealed to me. I bought a 2531.80 when they were new and still love it. I'm also wondering about going the other direction to you and fitting a gen smp dial and hands to a PO rep.

I am absolutely speechless!!. No words come close to praising this.!! a home printed dial! I would never have guessed it!,, next time you may want to create a review/ tutorial with some pictures showing at each stage up-to the final development as not many people have ever seen a watch dial being printed. It would be the only known web page in the world that would show how a dial would have been made in a traditional manner!!! i salute you!!!!

You have a lot of time and effort invested in it. I find that makes a watch more significant to me than a bought one, even a gen vintage Rolex.

Lol, haven't noticed that many panties yet - but at least my jaw is dropped several times per day for this.

GANG!!! The seller removed the item!!! I wish I could find out why. Somebody needs to do some recon. Email this clown and find out why. I want to know if it is because ebay forced him to take it down, or he made a deal with someone off-site, or if we just harassed him so mercilessly that he finally relented! Either way, glad I don't have to look at it anymore. It was such a train wreck.

The 6536 is ridiculously thin, and the 6538 is much thicker. The Big Crown almost makes a 6536 look like a dress watch in comparison. Quick snap to show the difference

That watch must drop jaws and panties.

My fellow brethren and sisteren, I've been researching this for a few obsessive days. Here are the facts (not unlike Avenger II Seawolf facts...Jebus, what a shitty watch.) on both gold plating and this particular model in question. The first thing we need to realize is that sites such as PC and PT list gold plating levels in two forms of measurement: Mils and Microns - one is english, one is metric. Most models will list the gold plating levels in mils, and most decent reps claim that there is .5 mils of gold plating. Using the chart below (which I have also hyperlinked), we can see that .5 mils is equivalent to, roughly, 12.5 microns... http://artisanplating.com/measuring-layer-thickness-on-gold-plated-surfaces/ This is the gold plating chart as required by United States commerce laws... The watch in question claims that it has 25 to 30 microns of rose gold. The video on the PC site shows Joshua using a Karatmeter to test the the purity and the level of plating on the watch. The video shows that the gold is 78% pure (which is basically 18K) and that it has a thickness of 25 microns. I exchanged emails with Joshua asking him to elaborate on the 78% claim, and he said that as the machine shows (?), the gold is 78% pure. This watch, as we have already discussed, is almost $900, shipped. I really hope Joshua isn't reading this - he has always been really good to me - because this is the thing...If you will notice on the PC site, there is another 18K rose gold calatrava, with the same movement and features, that costs only $308 and claims that it has .5 mils of gold plating - or, as we discussed, about 12.5 microns. If you look at the photos on the site, as well as the QC photos, you will notice that the watch is basically THE EXACT SAME THING, just different photos. The only difference is that the $308 version was released in April, and the $838 version was released in November. Using our basic calculations from the chart above, the $308 version has 12.5 microns of plating (5x the amount to qualify for Heavy Gold Plating). The $838 version has 25 microns of plating (10x the Heavy Gold Plating requirement), or twice as much gold as the lesser priced version. So, for an extra $530, your are getting a extra layer of gold on your watch that is about as much as a thick coat of varnish. Let's put it this way, an older/vintage gen Rolex Oyster bracelet has hollow middle links made of 18k gold. There is about $600 worth of 18k gold in that bracelet - SOLID 18K gold. With this $838 Calatrava, we are LUCKY if the extra 12.5 microns of gold plating that the dealers are claiming equates to about an extra gram to 1.5 grams of gold...or $40-$60. Hmmmmm....This is why I recently ordered the $308 version As an addictive rep owner, and gen Rolex owner, I will not buy a rep over a certain $$$. For me, that dollar amount hovers around $500-600, and it is reserved for only the rarest and most worth finds. I usually stay in the $275-$400 range. At a certain point, it just makes no sense to pay that much for a rep - just save for the real thing, you won't be disappointed! Nearing $1000 for a rep straight out of the box is ludicrous. Especially when this is the type of watch that you only strap on for special occasions. If you wear a Patek on an everyday basis, and your name is not Charlie Sheen or John F. Kennedy, then you are a tool. And if you are wearing a rep Patek at gatherings where there are people that can actually tell the difference, then you are an even bigger tool. The fact is, I just sold a TT sub that I purchased four years ago from Joshua, and in those four years, I wore the hell out of it. However, the gold plating on the clasp - although worn - was still gold, showing no steel underneath. It was advertised as .5 mils plating. If I can have a sub with .5 mils plating last me several years in the spot where it gets worn out the most, then .5 mils should be enough for a rose gold Calatrava. My feeling is that the boys from China got themselves a new Karatmeter and are using it as they should - to try and maximize their profits. They made an investment in their business, and they are hoping that is pays off...and I am sure that it will! There will be plenty of people who don't read this post and who will shell out cash for the $838 version. More power to them!!! It's an outstanding gimmick for those who don't have research accumen. I feel bad because "gimmick" is the word I used with Joshua when asking him about the machine and the model in question, and in his response he claimed, "It is no gimmick." I'm sure he begrudgingly smiled, though, when he saw me order the lesser priced version