lhooq

I thought I'd be more bothered by the design "updates", but I'm OK with most of them. Knurling? Cheap attempt at 'retro' with no basis in history? Maybe, but I find the contrast between the diamond texture and the brushed and polished surfaces pleasing. Hour markers on the bezel? I'm sure Tudor's just trying to put some distance between the Heritage Chrono and a Daytona, and I can't blame them for wanting to distinguish the brand. I would have preferred if they'd kept the cyclops, since its absence leaves a big grey or black expanse above the date, where nothing's going on. The only other parts that bother me are the teeny-weeny subdial hands that can't... quite... reach the outer markers. Regardless, I wouldn't kick it out of the watch box because of those. By the way, were those hour bezels only found on the 7169s, or were there 7032s that really had them?

Supply and demand, unfortunately. They really are just cheap rubber straps, but they happen to be scarce and very desirable to anyone who loves vintage divers. What I did was constantly monitor eBay and buy vintage Tropics when no one was bidding, regardless of whether I needed the straps or not. I figure I eventually will! I've now built up a nice collection of perforated, basket-weave-textured rubber: A couple of 19s (curved and straight), a curved 20, and two straight 22s in black and silver. The black 22 was the only one that cost more than $50. ($120 for the black 22, since I really wanted one for my Longines.) I was able to get the super-rare (and somewhat ugly) silver 22 for less than $20. I bought one of the Modena Tropics a while back. It's a good, comfortable strap in its own right, but very different in look and feel from the original. Another alternative might be a Hadley-Roma Carbon strap, which has a diagonal checked pattern like a Tropic. I've thought about getting one and punching diamond-shaped holes in it to make a poor man's version of the JLC Tribute to Polaris strap, but I'm afraid the liner would just puff out and make a mess.

Let me brighten your day with a little communist, military, er, FESTIVE, ST.PATRICK'S DAY GREEN!

What I find tricky about searching for a genuine SM300 is finding the one that's in just the right condition that I find pleasing. They range from being beautifully aged like ubi's example, to pieces that have been through utterly miserable, Pulp Fiction-esque experiences. And maybe a previous owner decided to replace one or two parts. Don't get me wrong: I would love to have a shiny Watchco SM300, but getting that mix of old and new right and finding one that's old, but doesn't look TOO old... As I said, it's tricky and an issue that I find cropping up with Seamaster 300s more than other models. Perhaps it's because there are so many of them around?

Maybe a bit simplistic, but I think "mid-engine=cool and efficient" while "front-engine=sexy and evocative". And to those of you who might counter with a Dino 246, please tell me with a straight face that it has more raw sex appeal than a 250 GTO or a Daytona!

Same here, which is why I'm still setting some money aside for a good gen. That said, it's a reasonable resemblance when you're looking straight down at the dial, but how often do you see that exact view while you're wearing it? Ubi: Is it possible that the rep SM300 case began as a rep Speedy case, but with the chrono holes and notches filled in? I can think of one genuine part that will fit: An Omega 20mm Milanese! Sure, it would double the value of the watch, but you'd be able to fool distant observers from more angles!

It's baaack!

Lots of talk about the new Subs and Explorer, but this is rather nice:

We need a billboard showing a picture of the LV with the words, "Miss me yet?"

Before anything else: I would like to retract my claims about both thewatchgarage*com and watchcrusher. I am now very certain that the crystals I purchased from them were, in fact, genuine Tropic 21s. I recently received a T21 that I'd ordered from a trusted source on the Rolex Forums. It wasn't cheap, but I wanted to be sure about what I was getting. Before bringing it to my watchsmith for installation, I took pictures of the T21 using the same angles I'd used in my aforementioned photo comparison. I was very surprised to find that it was identical to what I had believed to be another fake crystal. It was only then that I understood what was happening. The left crystal, which I suspected as being fake, is from the comparison I made last month. The T21 on the right, sourced from a trusted supplier, arrived days ago: The first two times I'd purchased these crystals, I'd handed them over to my watchsmith to attach on my 6263. As others have noted, the DW bezel is too tight a fit on a genuine Tropic 21. So when faced with the choice of trimming a metal bezel or trimming a clear hunk of plastic, my watch guy did the logical thing and trimmed the crystal. I'm certain that the ugly crystal pictured in my March 6 post began life as a genuine Tropic 21. I don't have any pictures of it prior to installation, but I went over its surface a loupe. The edges have been buffed to clarity, but there are telltale signs of reshaping. It's my fault for not working things out beforehand so that I could give my watch guy clear instructions. And it's my fault for not paying attention on two separate occasions. I feel terrible for ruining two good Rolex crystals, but I feel even worse for badmouthing two eBay sellers who did nothing wrong. On the plus side, I finally got the edge and the refraction I'd been after: Had I been more aware, I could have had these two months and $200 ago.

1976: Really nice selection you have, and great strap choices, too. AMK: I'm familiar with the Amphibia, but I've never seen this reissue before. Wow! I love the groovy Cyrillic script, and the '1967' in disco letters! Despite the name, it really looks like a watch design from the mid-70s. Speaking of which, the Poljot Ocean is the next Russian watch I would want to buy. Prices have been shooting up in the past couple of years, unfortunately:

This Vostok is the first mechanical watch I ever owned. I bought it new in 1989, and wore it every day until some time in 1995 when it seized up and the crown would no longer wind. I tried to find someone who could get it running again, but was told by the guy at the department store watch repair counter (shows how much I knew back then) that the entire movement would have to be replaced. That sounded like way more hassle and expense than I wanted to go through, especially since I was still in high school. I started wearing my quartz Bulova again, and put the Vostok away in various drawers for fifteen years. I finally got the brainwave to bring this piece to my regular watchmaker just a few days ago. He said everything in the movement looked fine, but that it just needed a bit of cleaning. So he did, and filled in the portion of the minute hand from where the lume had fallen out. Afterward, I polished the crystal as best I could with Polywatch, and cleaned out all the green gunk that had accumulated between the metal and leather. Aside from the springbars (which were originally shoulder-less pains in the butt), everything is still original and beaten up quite nicely. The 2414A movement keeps the time well enough, but winding the crown for minutes to set the date is a headache. Oddly, I never noticed the lack of a quickset back in high school! I doubt this watch will ever be worth more than $100, but the sentimental value is immense. It's great to have it running and on my wrist again.

Hot day over here. Time to check if the 1016 is still watertight.

Ah... Singapore.

Thanks for the compliments, ubi and alligoat, but I think I need to make a clarification: Lani's MBK dial (SWISS MADE) is paired with the solid-link bracelet, and topped with the GS Tropic 19. This is the watch I refer to as V2. V1 is the Narikaa watch (SWISS T<25), with Yuki 7206 and Clark "Vintage Tropic 19". That's the project in my original thread. I recently saw a completely serviced and refinished 1016 in Singapore, looking as new as it did in '85. Price was SGD 10,000, or about USD 7,000! I think I need to start reading VRF more often, as I'm beginning to really consider the gen. Less than $3000 will be a steal in a few years, I think.

A while back, I tried to put together a decent 1016 Explorer out of easily available reps and assorted parts. The results of that project can be found in this thread. Since then, my obsession with the 1016 has continued to grow. The more I learn about the old Explorers, the more I realize that I will never be satisfied with 1016s based on rep Datejusts. Short of buying a gen, I figured my next 1016 project would involve an MBK (like Lanikai's and Crockey's), a genuine 16200 case (as on Stilty's legendary franken), or even one of Yuki's pricey 1016 cases. This is not that project! Rather, this one began with me jumping on the chance to buy Lani's jettisoned MBK dial so I could spruce up my old Hont 1016 beater. It's not a great rep, but it's got a terrific ETA movement that's rock-solid, and perhaps even heart-touching. For the past year, I've taken it swimming at least twice a week, and it always keeps good time. Unfortunately, the dial sucks. It may not be immediately obvious in the picture below, but the text is not a high-contrast white, but more a dull, light grey. Fonts and text sizes are all over the place, and I haven't even said anything about the huge numerals and indices yet. I followed most of the same steps I took with my original Cheapo 1016: Drill lugholes, replace crystal, but add a dial swap. I didn't go with the riveted bracelet this time for several reasons: I thought the MBK dial looked more modern than Narikaa's, the Yuki 7205 is $40 more expensive now, and I didn't want to go through the headache of ill-fitting endlinks again--especially since I'd be wearing this on a NATO strap 90% of the time! Strange, though, how heavy and bulky the solid-link bracelet now feels to me: Instead of the smooth-domed Clark "Vintage Tropic 19" I have on the V1, I decided to try a crystal with an edge, and might better resemble a Tropic 22. (As explained in my original thread, a Tropic 22 -either gen or aftermarket- will not fit these reps.) I went with a GS PA462-66 from Ofrei. I thought it would be lower than the Clark crystal, but obviously not! It sits much higher than the crystal on a gen 1016 but the circumferential edge is good to have. The Clark dome is nice to look at, but it gives you all sorts of funny distortions at acute angles that you'll never see on the real 1016. Note that this GS T19 had to have its inner diameter trimmed to fit. FYI: The outer/inner diameters of the rep crystal are 30.5/28.9 mm. I measured a Clark T22 at 31.1/29.4 mm. The lugholes are conservatively small, but smooth around the edges. Unfortunately, they were off-target on the upper lugs. This is why I should learn how to drill these myself, or keep a closer eye on the guy doing it! Thankfully, they're not noticeable unless the watch is laid flat, like so: So was the MBK dial worth the trouble? It won't knock your socks off like a Yuki dial, and it can be sloppy in places (look at the lume edges on the numerals), but it gets all the elements right and holds up better under close-up scrutiny than the Narikaa dial. As an added bonus, the MBK dial has half-decent lume, as opposed to the Narikaa's. Nevertheless, it's a real shame that Narikaa no longer carries Explorers with this dial, as it was peerless in its ~$100 price range. Now that I've got two 1016 reps, which do I wear? Despite the nicer dial and better-fitting endlinks, I think I still prefer my V1. Maybe it's the curvy dome, or the smooth looks and lightness of the 7206 bracelet, but I find it has a greater presence overall. However, I will continue to wear the V2 around the house, and in the pool (after I make sure it doesn't leak through the crystal!). At least now I won't hesitate to show the time to the swimmer in the next lane, and I'll have a dial that's easier to read at odd angles. But I'm not ready to drop my 1016 obsession just yet. When I went to my watchmaker to get the V2 this afternoon, he happened to have a 1967 Explorer on his desk that was being repaired. Finally, I had the chance to compare my rep directly to the gen! It didn't take long for me to wish I hadn't, since everywhere I looked I saw nothing but mismatches and imperfections. The expression "Eat your heart out!" had never seemed more appropriate.

If they're going to take out the springs, you'd think they'd at least drop the price back down to $108! Sorry, I'm just bitter since the thread title led me to believe that Yuki had repped the 7836...

The Erfurt combo have stressed that their Deep Sea is an homage rather than a copy. So: No big coronet dial and the bracelet has solid links rather than riveted, among other departures from the original. Also, I don't think it's going to be a two-tone, so you won't be able to wear it to the fancy dress ball. I wonder if I can get one with fake snow inside the crystal?

This is very encouraging news. I spoke to Stilty about the possibility of using one of his Datejust adapters to fit an ETA movement into an accurate or genuine 1016 case. He believed it could be done, but I would have to sand his adapter ring down to the appropriate thickness. If DW can provide a 1016 as accurate as, say, Yuki's, and make an appropriate movement holder, then his could be the last 1016 rep I'll need. (Third time's the charm!) Here's hoping he can produce 1016 dials of similar quality to the best of his Daytonas. The last I heard from DW, he said the 6238 should be available by the middle of this month. I will definitely be in line for one of these!

It looks like a mishmash of parts, most notably the case marked '6036'. (Seriously, who would even consider ripping up a Datocompax and turning it into a bad Daytona franken?) What I find very odd is how the lugholes are only present on the side opposite the crown. I know there were older Rolexes that had this configuration, but Daytonas? The crystal looks OK, though!

freddy: That's the one. On your DW, the entire '4' of the left subdial is refracted on the edge. (Ditto the '5' on the genuine.) I see less than half a digit on mine, and the vertical portion is more prominent than the angle in profile. Photos of coolfire's Spinmaster-prepared Paul Newman also show a crystal that matches the gens I looked at. Marty: In that case, it may well have been an honest mistake on their part, but the crystal I got from thewatchgarage has practically no angled edge to speak of, and was further away from the gen than the one I got from watchcrusher: Not the greatest photo, I know. I will update my comparison and this thread as soon as I get a genuine crystal that matches the gen examples I've seen at trusted vintage shops and online. In the meantime, either take my warnings with a grain of salt or pay extra attention to sellers with white Rolex envelopes!

freddy: A while back you posted a wonderful comparison shot of a genuine black Paul Newman next to the DW version. I think you were pointing out how well the refractions of the DW matched the original's, thanks to the T21. As hard as I tried, I could not replicate that shot, and I first suspected that the crystal was (somehow) mounted too high. But the angled area is much smaller on my "gen" crystal. Consequently, I can only see a sliver of the refracted subdials. I'll try to post some photos of the case viewed in profile. When compared to photos of gens taken at similar angles (e.g. Robert Maron), the difference should be clear. This is turning into an unexpected money sink, but I believe I've been able to find the real deal this time. (Famous last words.) I hope to update this comparo within the next couple of weeks with a genuine genuine Tropic 21!

A second, sobering update: This morning I had the good fortune of examining and handling a couple of genuine 6263s and a 6265. I can now confirm that the second crystal I bought from eBay seller "watchcrusher" is also not genuine. You can see pictures of this bogus 21 in my most recent 6263 posts, and in my photo comparison of vintage Daytona crystals. While the second crystal I bought has the beveled edge, it's only about half as deep as the edge on a genuine crystal. That makes a much bigger difference than it might sound, I assure you. I'm currently looking for alternative sources for genuine Tropic 21s, as these two experiences have soured me on eBay for a while.

Do not buy from these guys. Whatever it was that came in that Rolex branded envelope (marked '21', of course) was NOT a genuine Tropic 21. Look in one of my older 6263 threads to see what you're going to get: It's a straight cylinder without the ~60 degree bevel that sets a genuine T21 apart.

I've yet to fit them, but I ordered the Sternkreuz T19 and the PA 462-66. The SK crystal looks to be a better bet, but -in hindsight- I wish I'd ordered the 462-67 as well. Both look to be closer matches to the T22 than the Clark 'Vintage T19' that I currently have fitted to my rep. The Clark is a nice and deep dome, but lacks an edge on the circumference. I'm currently on a business trip, but when I get home in a few days I can post a few macros for comparison.