sssurfer

Rigorously tone on tone for me: ... black on black... ... grey on grey... ... black with 'lume-like' stitching... I even tried a bold stingray strap time ago (but now I've grown more conservative):

A great rep. Funny how the 40mm auto PAM reps are usually better than their 44mm counterparts. Just the CG... yes, polish it. And maybe a little reshaping before the polishing job. I checked my OP catalogue, and all my gen pics (about a dozen), and I am still unsure about it. But I would say polished.

Yes they are the same.

I agree with peepshow about the flaws, but in the end I am not so critic on this rep. Considering that the original 036 rep is long time sold out now, and considering the limited price of this rep, it might work as a decent starting point if you really love the 036 and if you are inclined to mods. The crown looks odd because it has fewer teeth than the gen -- and than any other crowns I saw, for that matter. You should replace it with a T crown. The movement is E-style that is incorrect. But correct pre-E rep 6497 movements are relatively easy to find (especially on low-cost 127 and 111 reps) and they are quite accurate, as those movements had no swan neck or special bridges. My eyes are not so eagle-eyes to tell about the CG. All in all, the only unfixable flaw I see in this rep is the "L SWISS L" text. As kruzer pointed out, you may always pretend you are the owner of one of the five "L SWISS L" 036 ever made.

Unfortunately, no idea about it other than asking your usual dealer if any. Agree

I was not aware of that. Thanks! @blue_sphere: in this case, this is surely the way to go.

A better A-6497. That movement has no swan neck, bad wheels, bad text... Considering all the good improvements you performed on this watch, that movement looks a shame now. That crown is ok. Very ok. It sits a little far from the case, but this is a minor issue.

You need a 120/90 stem adapter. 120 male side, 90 female side. In EU Cousinsuk has them. In USA, I suppose Ofrei too.

Very nice shots. Congrats! About the watch, at this point I would also suggest to replace the movement.

PT

Replacing the CG does not gurantee that the new CG fits your new crown. I suggest you replace the crown instead. To replace the crown you need to perform the following steps: 1. Remove the CG. 2. Set the crown in winding position. 3. Open the watch caseback. 4. Gently pull the crown+stem out while releasing the stem by pushing with a needle on the small pin that is close to the stem and to the movement's border. 5. Measure the crown+stem length with a digital caliper. 6. Firmly hold with pliers the stem near its base (close to the crown small tube), and unscrew it off the crown tube. 7. Fully screw the stem into the new crown tube. 8. Measure the new crown+stem length. If it exceeds the original length measured in 5, then you will need to shorten the stem (instructions will follow if needed). If it is lower than the original length, then you are out of luck and you will also need a stem extender. 9. Gently push the new crown+stem back in place into the movement, by contemporarily pushing the same pin as in 4. 10. Close the watch caseback and reinstall the CG. Done.

Thanks for the heads up. Too bad they completely disregard Seagull movements.

Yes, there's no gurantee that different models have similar crowns. Because it pushes too hard on the crown? In this case, most likely your new crown is thicker than the old one. Your best fix is using a crown thick as the old one. If this is impossible, then shortening the crown tube (the tube on the case where the crown goes into), and possibly the stem too, may work.

What does it mean "the CG won't lock"? 1. The CG does not arrive to the case anymore, rather it touchs the crown instead? 2. Or you cannot close the lever because you feel too much resistance against the crown? 3. Or, if you close the lever, the lever stays floppy and it does not press the crown? Shortening the stem is a fix to cases 1 and 2, but not 3.

I naturally agree, B. Just, I have no experience with Rolex, and on the pics posted here the cyclops area looks very different from the rest of the crystal surface.

It was a reply to: My bad English did the rest. @Lani: really thanks for your consideration, R! I just hope it's no overextimation.

My bet is: double side AR cyclops + single side AR crystal, only on the inner surface and most likely only in the cyclops'area. Just, I only bet $10. BTW, a purplish tint along the crystal border when viewed at a skewed angle might be just the sapphire.

On PAMs, the best result I got was with single-side AR applied with the cyclops already glued to the crystal, so that the AR covered both the crystal and the cyclops. Stunning. It erased 95% of reflections from the cyclops (even if only 50% from the crystal, naturally). Unfortunately, I suppose this does not apply to Rolex crystals -- unless they are AR coated on the external side. On PAMs again, single-side AR coated cyclops (domed side) on double AR coated crystals proved not as effective as single AR involving both the cyclops and the crystal. I did not try a double AR cyclops (that I do not have) on a double AR crystal, but I expect nothing good. Preliminary tests with double AR crystals coupled together resulted in worsening reflections.

AFAIK, no Ti logo base model.

Just bought

The grey strap.

I don't know who Styler is, but I followed the whole original thread in the Italian section of RG and I can assure you that Involt's study on the gold of George's was performed in a very thoughtful, scientific manner. Jake48, I cannot understand why you seem to try and bring this issue to personal level about Styler. The point here is not who Styler is, but if what he posted is true. And it undoubtly is: he proved it with screen captures (do you think he simulated them?), and I confirm here the existence of that equivalent thread on RG. Statements like "if you want to know, just push the search button" or "if you want to know, then just ask the seller" are simply ridicolous (sorry). Should we follow them in everyday's life, there would have been no progress in human life since the Dark Ages. Please take your time, translate the Italian thread on RG, then reconsider what you think about the whole matter.

http://www.jpc8118.com/000000pn22002-best-...bph-p-5304.html

Thanks for your reply, Rob. Even if my cyclops accounts for less than 1% of your amazing work, I am glad it has an even small part in the most accurate 028 I ever saw.

Really thanks for your help guys. I did some more search too on iOffer and so, and I came to the following figures so far: Dealers: 3x "Fake / Faux GMT hand". 2x "GMT tracks 24hrs / is a 24 hrs hand". Not adjustable. 4x "Functional / Working GMT hand". Buyers: 2x "GMT tracks 24hrs / is a 24 hrs hand". Not adjustable. Considering that: 1 - a 24hrs tracking hand can be either considered as fake or functional depending on how conservative a dealer is... 2 - both the buyers reported that the GMT hand is moving and tracking 24hrs, and not adjustable... 3 - dozens of pics I examinated point to this same direction... ... then I am leaning to assume that the GMT hand is not completely fake, but it tracks the 24hrs and it is not independently adjustable at the crown. This is enough for lello and me to try this watch. I'll post advice if we will be able to make correct datewheels for this watch. szvwj, thanks for your measurement. Your 0.455'' equals 23.12mm. On web pics I measured 24.54mm. The average is 23.83mm, incredibly close to the DW middle size (23.97mm) of the Seagull 2530, the movement in the 090/124/222 reps. This might raise even more interest about these datewheels. The very problem is that, as these datewheels are not available as spare parts, the interested members should be willing to remove their DW out of their watch and send them out to have them reprinted. I'll let you know as soon as I'll have the watch in my hands so I'll be able to take the DW out and verify these assumptions. Rocketeer, double thanks about the Mille Miglia heads up as well. Just, I suppose that the MM DW is not available as spare as well? Thanks you all for your help once again. You helped a lot.