highoeyazmuhudee

if youre fretting over accuracy no aftermarket hands you buy will be correct anyways, this has to be accepted. maybe 90% close, but no one will be able to tell except a few of us here and the Rolex WIS on various gen forums, but the majority of them might confuse a seamaster and a submariner... ive seen it happen.

Zack -the last three digits on the MBKs change, which is a nice touch since theyre not as frequently repeated. in my once large pile of empty cases from the factory only a few repeated, which made them kind of unique and more personal. the magic number youre looking for on the dweller is the "5790 _ _ _" same goes for the 5513/1680 case but "L342---". i wonder if this is a specific factory indicator as my buyer at MBK tells me theyre apparently sourced from about 3 different factories... maybe the shop owners blowing smoke to give them a colorful and mythical origin. either way $200 is stellar, a case alone comes close to that price.

with out buying a case i doubt you can get the caseback, lots have asked, i should truly find out the answer once and for all directly from MBK. but i doubt without getting a whole case you can get a caseback.

i hope you receive EXACTLY whats pictured +1 for Clarks

link us the pics once received. are you getting one with or without the rehaut engraving?

The Zigmeister does wonderful work from what ive seen. for me, rep hands (excuse the pun)are sore thumbs.

very nice indeed the end link in the second pic fits oddly tho. the only thing i would have changed from what i can see are those hands.

old thread- love the piece and i love the vhs tripod! looks great! what kind of time accuracy is that tudor movement keeping, any hiccups?

thats the worst part in my opinion.

its kind of a mystery what youre going to get with a wm9 from PT. he convinced me a year back that he was selling me the last one he could get and even gave me a really good deal in order to get rid of it. i got the watch, it resembled some sort of wm9 type watch that was indeed constructed like the gen with a 'z' dial. it was great for the price but the lugs didnt fit bracelets correctly with out slight modification. buy one, itll be interesting to see what you get

hard to tell time at a glance, but i guess thats not the point of that watch.

thats a shame, along with the noob subs with the unmolested rehauts

FORGET THE OCTOS there are better routes to go. octos are NOS and yes dry like Ronin said. the rotors on mine spin as well which damages the ratchet wheel and sends all sorts of debris in the movement as well. ive since abandoned octos since im running out of spare parts to fix to fix the unjeweled and unoiled reversing wheels. i have a thread in the movements section of this board as i saw myself in the same predicament while im making my franken the 2846/2842 just didnt semm up to par.

ive seen that too, but never too that degree where so much was cut. also the insert looks in really great condition. ive never seen this style of insert in such good condition. i smell a franken watch. its obvious lots of parts have been replaced either legitimately by RSC or by the owner. if the price was right and it contained a gen rolex caliber and a valid serial number if it could be had for that right price it might be worth having.

what year was this advertised as ?

LOVE IT. Ubi does some wonderful work from what ive seen. is that the original pearl that came with the insert? i have the same insert sans pearl and an ofrei replacement doesnt fit it perfectly

looking for low beat movement candidates to replace a 2836 i know most would just say "use a 2846" but after doing some reading the thought of using a such a low grade movement originally intended by swatch to be disposable after 10 years in a $1000+ franken just doesnt seem like it fits the project to me. so what i know so far is this: a 2836 has a ligne of 11.5", DM=25.6, and H=5.2-5.3mm hand sizes= 90/150/25 im looking for a drop in replacement with a beat rate as close to 19,800 as possible. after some research my list of candidates so far are: ETA caliber: 2461 2472 2781 2782 2783 2879 these represent calibers with the correct specs as the 2836 the stem height might be .1-.3 different my next contenders with the correct dimensions are true vintage work horses, and maybe even chronometers, but i cant find enough information and the COSC seemed to have been just getting established. each caliber is essentially the same movement. tissot 2511 tissot 2481 Omega 1480 Omega 1481 these have a frequency of 18,000 and the dimensions fit the 2836 as far as i can tell. i can not however find what the hand sizes are, but eta seems to have very set standards. so if someone happened to know the hand sizes for any of the above caliber it would be great and please add a reply. last and fortunately least i would suck it up and get me a 2846, or 2842. im doubting it since tudor would have used one of my above mentioned movements, but would these swatch disposables be offered in something higher than basic eco grade?

i knew it was an ingod, but only because you mentioned interest in it before, and for some reason i remembered that. more about the hands every gen set of hands ive seen has the hour hand lume reach the ring that fits to the pinion, http://www.getyourwatch.com/Ebay/rolexsead-1289401370-29621.jpg http://www.getyourwatch.com/Ebay/rolexsead-1289401381-29625.jpg clarks: NOS gen: which is why i thought they werent gen, which they technically arent. only on the watch maker 9 subs have i seen them exactly like the gen. clarks, yuki, WO are all incorrect, but i guess truly correct for tudor. this is true not only for the 1665 but also the 5513, and the 1680

thanks for the replies. im seeing someone else had success with a 2879 instead of a 2846 in an MBK im finding a 2842 is also a good candidate for these slow beats. but its very eco grade the 284X family, my concern is regulating issues and ive even read the pallets are made out of plastic on the swatch 2846,42 movements. since the movements were intended for swatch consumers who would never get them serviced since the initial purchase price was low. they were basically created to run problem free for ten years then disposed of. maybe The Zigmeister could mention whether this is true of the 284X family having the plastic pallets instead of oiled jewels.

I was looking at swapping in a slow beat eta where a 2836 once was. i know a compatible movement would be the 2846 with the same ligne and dimension and height at 5.2mm. but ive also found some slow beats with decoration that have the same dimension and ligne but the height was 5.5mm a .3mm difference. would this minuscule difference cause problems? i know a 2824 wouldnt lineup right with the tube and crown but the difference is .6mm twice the amount... any thoughts or experience?

without reading any previous answers End links look like PTs and dont fit the case, so fake insert looks like PMWF and the pearl is from ofrei valve looks like yukis the dome is genuine the caseback is from an MBK, id recognize it anywhere the dial looks really good, but i just doubt one would spend the money on a gen dial...based on that alone id say fake, unless youre truly sick. the clasp has a bit of a double strike to it so this is what i would say indicates a fake and would naturally assume the bracelet therefor is as well the hands are fake, the hour hand lume doesnt extend far enough to the base close to the pinnion, the only rep maker ive ever seen this get right was watchmaker 9. the hands still look good for aftermarket tho. datewheel looks great, and not sure about the crown other than its the wrong style for the period of the watch either way the whole watch looks really nice

not bad! but until they fix that engraving alignment problem i aint buying one.

+1 for clarks

anyone have any experience with cleaning the tritium markers on their dials? i received a NOS dial and two of the markers have a dark smudge on them, it kind of looks like a pencil mark. im pretty sure its not due to age of the tritium. what would be the best way to clean it? im not sure what dissolves tritium or would cause it to break down or crumble. i have optical cleaner for lenses that contains no alcohol which ive used on glossy dials and super lume markers without incident.

i bought their GMT a few years back and the case lugs said "116610T" it was a bad sub case, a cheap CN rep if i had to guess. the chronotac gmt broke after a few months, the crown got stuck. didnt they also change their name from chronomat or something