sssurfer

Sorry to say that, as far as I know, very few 'collectors' actually do quality control. And high volume ones, like Paul, Josh and Andrew are not among them. But with Josh and Andrew you may be sure that they won't leave you cold in case of troubles. With Paul, best wishes. Pls let us know how this comes out.

Repost (and a little editing) from an old post of mine on RWI: Lever loose in the open position, or in the locked position, those are two entirely different beasts that need entirely different fixes. For the loose lever in the closed position (this is your main problem, vb!): This is the worst flaw of the two as it may compromise waterproof. It is due to too much room between the crown and the lever, so that the lever is not pressed enough against the crown when closed. In its turn, this can be due to a lacking the gasket below the crown, or to a poorly manufactured CG. If the gasket is missing, naturally you have to add it. But even if the gasket is present, adding another gasket (so to increase the overall gasket thickness) may help. If this does not work, you have to file down the CG feet (where the CG touches the case) a little, so to make the CG shorter, so to reduce the room between the lever and the crown. This can be a tricky task as you need to preserve the CG shape and not to mess the CG screw threads. Added: I would not recommend adding a second gasket on your watch, vb: the crown already looks out enough. For the loose lever in the open position: This is an universal flaw of almost all PAM reps (I just saw a very recent 005 unaffected). It is not dangerous, but it makes for the easiest way to tell a rep from a gen. It is due to the fact that the rep lacks a rubber gasket around the lever's pin, while the gen have it. To fix it you have to remove the lever's pin and the lever, slightly enlarge the lever's hole where the pin goes into, put a small segment of a plastic tube (e.g. a piece of electrical wire insulant) into the lever's hole, and reassemble the whole thing. The insulant will replace the missing gasket. An easier but less durable fix is made by removing the lever's pin and lever, filling the lever's hole with silicon glue, reassembling the whole thing, and leaving all untouched 24 hours in order to leave silicon to harden. In this case the silicon will replace the missing gasket. I hope to have been clear enough, English is not my language so it is quite difficult to me to describe this sort of things. In case, feel free to ask again.

Remake the tan strap in black, make it shorter, replace the buckle, and you are in.

I seem to remember that the guy in the restaurant had his Polex bezel popping off. Only three members (out of more than twenty) told that their exploded crystal was mineral. One of them told it on the (poorly reliable) water drop test, another one said it was advertised as 'synthetic sapphire' on Josh' site, the third one did not declare how he knew it was glass. All other members with exploded crystals had 'ultimate' fiddies, 'best' fiddies, swiss versions (expensive and hardly coming with mineral glass), and 212. In any case, even if those three were actually mineral glesses, ratio is about 7:1 against sapphire. Almost all the talking against glass, under objective examination, reveals to be essentially rumors, suspicions and pre-assumptions. Almost all the fixes have been made by getting a sapphire from Davidsen. Noone posted a follow-up, but I can suppose that DSN sapphires did not furtherly explode. DSN sapphires are thicker than usual reps, and a thick sapphire is with no doubt better than a thin glass. What I am telling is that a thin sapphire is worse than a thin glass. You are absolutely right in preferring sapphire to glass. I'm just adding: with exception for domed sapphire. I am so persuaded about this that, on my upcoming 212 purchase, I think I'll go for the glass version and avoid all sapphire versions.

Hey there, even a stainless steel surfer has to work / sleep at times! However, good to get a whole watch replacement, especially until you will not enjoy from disassembling a watch.

You reported it?!? Ouch, I was hoping this was my occasion to finally get in possess of a noobmariner...

Well, I actually had a feeling that that was the box.

I can't tell you what happened to me when I saw those pics as it would get censored. I'll make it easier by pretending I had an heart attack.

You may be sure that the cat made it for the best.

Kudos to the Almighty. Several steps behind you, but I share your same obsession, W.

If the text on your watch was like this, I am sorry to say that you just changed a nice 6152/1 rep. I tried several chemicals to the task, and none proved able to remove the text only while leaving the background untouched. Just, one of them (I can't even remember which exactly, maybe acetone) removed the text a few seconds before attacking the background. So, if one is really fast in removing the solvent after it removes the text and before it removes the background, he could end with a just slightly damaged backround.

Nice find! It also has the usual 'certifiDato di garanzia internazionale', and the caseback qualifies this watch as the low-cost 027 rep that, e.g., Silix is selling @80 USD. Still, with the box & cards & screwdriver included, and a starting bid of about 100 USD, I would not say this was a rip-off. But the bay is a wrong place to sell reps.

Yes, with Josh you can't go wrong, his customer care is simply outstanding. Turning back to considerations about the watch, I really hope that that cyclops actually was a mistake, not a first example of the new models with 'improved' date and cyclops that were rumored to make their appearance in a while. I am wondering this as the date font looks really good, a step ahead in comparison with former models. As a smaller cyclops provides higher magnification, the manufacturers might be tempted to use such a cyclops even on a 'sandwich' crystal with a larger hole. In this case, sending that watch back actually made for a double benefit: to you, and to any future customers. We have to make it clear with the manufacturers that we don't want that kind of a date 'improvement'...

Did anyone notice that CH stands both for 'Switzerland' and 'China'?

In this case may I include the best robbering politicians force?...

An excellent rescue and revenge on that site. Now you can be proud of your first purchase!

Wow, 2 years lurking before making your first purchase. A good first purchase, congrats! It is my sad duty to inform you that once you get your first PAM there's no coming back. This is the end of your lurking age and the beginning of your watch and strap frenzy. Welcome aboard.

Oddly enough, the ring is also undetectable on Josh's pics of his upgraded (PN09203 - PN09204) models, I can spot it on his 'old' (PN09202) model only...

Thanks to everyone who expressed their interest. Notice taken.

Well, I was suspecting that (actually, I asked that exactly to be sure). As a matter of fact, I had some experiments on that kind of sandwich crystals, and I could verify that that double ring appears only when the cyclops is not extactly the same size as the hole -- e.g., a 6.75mm diameter cyclops in a 7mm diameter hole. So I was essentially wondering whether that watch had a replaced cyclops, or it came that way from the dealer. In either case, I think it would deserve a new cyclops with a better fitting in the hole. I feel it is a shame that the cyclops is screaming 'fake!' in an otherways very good watch.

Ok. So you have either to get a new 1st link + pin, or a whole new watch. It never happened to me, but I heard that the collectors use to send you the new watch first, then when you receive it you send them back the first one. If you don't want this, then I'm afraid your only option is getting the link+pin and have them mounted where you are. As usual, you are welcome. BTW, you seem to have a lot of experience, and your posting skills look surprisingly good both on quoting and pics, for a female apprentice... Also, don't you ever sleep?!?

Check the link on the watch side and look whether it has empty holes where the pin should stay (unable to tell from the pics). If yes, it's just a matter of a missing pin, you may ask Silix for one. (I doubt that a pin from another link would fit, as the links close to the watch are of different sizes than those close to the clasp, and they have pins rather than screws). Be aware that it will be a push-only pin: once placed, you cannot remove it. If not, then it is a defective first link. You may ask Silix for it AND a pin, but I think you'd better ask for a whole watch replacement. BTW, I may confirm that Silix is sometimes slow on replying, but he always comes through.

Narikaa has one. PM sent.

Do not worry, gen hands are black, the pic on the OP catalogue must be of a prototype. Yours is an excellent watch, congrats! The only (very very minor) 'flaws' that I can spot on a side-to-side pic comparison are that, on the gen, the lume on hands is whiter than the lume on mumbers and indices, and the brushed SS texture is a little more aggressive. ...Apart from the cyclops... Where does that odd 'double contour' come out from?!?

Surely you wanted to type 'brushed', archie