chefcook

 

Nope. Y3135 flips down like gen 3135 or ETAs. 3035 DWs won't work.

The jewels are not there in 10:10's review because the Y3135 uses a gen-like setup without them.

 

The A3135 reversing wheels will fall apart. The are not one part but three plus a bunch of jewels. Red top plate, outer gear, inner gear with stem and the jewels inbetween. Not only is this design not true to the gen, it is at least as problematic as a second at six movement.

None of the A3135 I held in my hands so far survived without problems with the reversing wheel and according to Puretime nothing was changed from V1 to V2 with those.

 

I'd prefer the Y3135 over the A3135 any day. It might be of a lesser degree of quality but it does not have a flawed design and is serviceable to solve the quality issues.

Thanks for the great post!

 

I am a little disappointed by the reversing wheels. From my own experience with the V1 those will come apart and then that's it with automatic winding. The reversing wheels hold 6 or 8 small jewels each to mimic the function of the genuine part and once those fall around inside the watch they'll get stuck and probably cause additional damage.

As long as there is no way to replace the reversing wheels with either genuine or aftermarket wheels like those of the Y3135 I'd say stay away from this movement.

I had two of them, one early (1994) with matte black dial and a very late example (2000) with blue gloss dial with white gold surrounds, both Tritium. Both had 120 clicks unidirectional bezel. 

Both came on a 9315 folded bracelet with tudor clasp. Super flimsy crap, even for the kind of money the Tudor sub was back then. 

 

Interestingly the older 79190 had a mineral crystal whereas the newer came with sapphire. According to my Rolex / Tudor AD the crystal material was switched in 1996.

The Tudor 79190 is not an anomaly by any means but just another regular Tudor Submariner model that was sold for several years.

 

The case is basically a 5513 with different retaining ring and unidirectional turning bezel and a more modern looking case back.

That is just a redressed ETA 2836 and usually bad quality. The bridges are chinese and even if the main plate remains swiss it is the kind of quality (or most probably below the kind of quality) one could expect from an asian ETA clone.

I'd even say the cubes (called Méga Tapisserie) are correct and that it is only lighting and angle that make them appear smaller in the pic of the gen. If you compare the hour markes in relation to the Tapisserie then it seems to match up.

thanks for the update and the clarification about he diver dw

I thought the rep diver was using an ETA dw?

I thought about this project and came to the conclusion that we might underestimate the demand for this.

The AP Diver is one of the best selling reps at the moment and it is powered by a 2824. 2824 and 2892 share the same date wheels! So it might be very interesting to also make a black background / white font version for the Diver.

Dear noobfactory: And now go on to a swan neck screw with the correct length and shape

I'd be in for one as well!

 

The reversing wheels on the SA3135 are a completely different design than the genuine. The SA3135 reversing wheels consist of the toothed wheel, a toothed axle, some (I think jewels and a lid, which is made from aluminium and red anodized. The lid is pressure fitted to the toothed wheel and that is the problem. The pressure fit is crappy made and that causes the little jewels to fall out. Once more than maybe two jewels are missing the reversing wheels will not "reverse" anymore and the watch will not wind. Remember all the members that opened the watch and found some small jewels falling around in it? Those were the little suckers...

I really really hope the reversing wheels got some improvement. The reversing wheels clearly were the weak part of V1.

good to see it arrived well and you like it

I have one of those in the current 40mm version with matte black dial.

Three things about the rep bother me:

1. No AR. None, not even a bad one. The gen has double sided AR coating so you'll definitely need to have the crystal coated.
   
2. The clasp on the mesh bracelet. It is not actually well made. The clasp will require modding to not fall apart within two weeks.
   
3. The date wheel. It is a bad copy of an ETA date disc which not only is nearly unreadable but also has a totally wrong font for the Portofino
   

I'd take one on a leather strap, get a genuine or a TWB strap for it, have the crystal ARed and the date disc at least changed for a genuine ETA disc if one cannot find a genuine IWC disc.

Regarding the dial: Even though IWC is still showing the black sunburst dial on their website this dial made it to the shops for a few weeks only. Everything after that came with a matte black dial. I once saw a genuine with sunburst dial and while it was awesome and very special it was completely different from the rep sunburst dial. The rep is kind of grey, more like IWCs Ardoise dials. The gen sunburst was truly black.

Therefore I'd go with the matte black rep dial because it is a perfect match to the genuine dial.

Same movement, same dimensions.

Yup, gen. Tried it at my AD last Friday. 16100 Euros or something like that.

Compared to the much cheaper steel Big Pilot it is a huge step back.

The correct crown is 24-530-0 with crown tube 24-5330-0. Source of that information is the Rolex R20 spare parts catalog.

So that is 5.3mm...

If it was a case for a Bumblebee I'd be all over it.

If I was in the market for an Angelus 240 powered watch I'd try to find a nice 1950 style 47mm case set and build the watch as a sterile homage. IMO that is the nicest way. Fantasy watches with brand names on them are just ridiculous.

Actually the price was not that bad considering a much less rare 203 already goes for that kind of money.

Is it the same DW that said a while ago he wanted to get out of the rep business?

I thought about that.

Problem no. 1 is getting a decent Angelus 240 without alarm.

The Angelus movements with alarm function come up every now and then but finding such a piece without alarm function and therefore the right bridge design for the 203 is like searching for hen's teeth.

Problem no. 2 is the finish of the movement. Finding a skilled finiseur who is willing to work on reps and actually replicate brand name engravings might be difficult.

Problem no. 3 are dial and hands. Never seen something like that in decent quality and printing.

Problem no. 4 is the price of all that. I'd bet you end up spending something in the range of $7k +/- $500 and end up with a fine but nearly unsellable timepiece. Who is willing to invest that kind of money in a rep, even if the genuine article goes for $100k? For a really good replication of a 203 you'd need a lot of commitment to exactly that model.

where is the simplicity that usually is apparent on Panerai watch faces?

Worst new Panerai for years...