txcollector

great tip. I had to use a new cloth but using a fine felt tip brush to apply the right amount of pressure on the cloth. My big fat fingers wouldn't do it right.

yes, a bad rep of a gen. Spamming is bad too.

I've tried that but still some marks in certain angles. Darn hard to make it shine without marks.

Folks, I have a few smudges on my Ploprof dial and I'm wondering what's the best way to clean the smudges on that mirror finish dial. Ideas?

I'd think two VC CEO's (Claude Daniel Proellochs, 2004 and Juan-Carlos Torres, 2007) qualifies as VC officially confirming Genta as the designer.

Evo

the problems with any gold watch are 1) color (never right) 2) weight (solid gold is way heavier than SS). So like Watchmeister said, go with the Safari. I've heard good things from HKTan but the AP Bands are almost indistinguishable from the OEM ones.

nuts

unfortunately yes.

I took my apart. It was just a question of pushing the screws from the back but the caseback screws are actually nuts for the bezel screws on the new case construction.

there's no way for you to twist them since they are buried inside the bezel. Pushing is the only option.

I'd try very carefully just push the screws out.

open caseback pic would help but the bezel screws on the new RO models are held by the caseback screws. I'd assume you just need to remove the caseback and push the bezel screws from the back.

I find it funny that he starts his "discussion" with 3 very strong proof points that Genta was behind it and then he cites his "findings" on some unknown document as definitive proof. Gerard even says in the interview that due to contratual constraints he could not take credit for the AP RO and that Japanese fans were the ones that broke the story. So maybe this guy will dispute that too. Besides don't you think that Hysek would have found a way to set the record straight by now?

btw, if Hysek did indeed design the 222 Genta and AP would probably have the right to sue him because the 222 mid case and the AP RO are identical. I think Genta did it. Alex Ghotbi is full of it. Here you have 2 former VC CEO's attributing the design to Genta and Gerald himself admitting that due to contracts he can't explicitly take credit for the designs, therefore the coy answer: "RP: At the launch of the new Vacheron Constantin Overseas in 2004, former CEO Mr. Proellochs cited your role in the design inspiration of the Overseas’ predecessor, the 222. How do you feel about this? GG: Yes, I noticed that Mr. Proellochs mentioned my involvement in Vacheron Constantin’s 222. But I must say I am flattered today when people mention me in conjunction with products. " http://www.thehourlounge.com/thread/view/the-genta-myth_35848_35848.html

Considering that the 222 is a milestone for Vacheron I think they would be asking someone like Genta to design it. However his other creations (PP Nautilus, IWC Ingenieur SL, AP Royal Oak) all follow the design philosophy that the bezel should resemble a ship's porthole. The 222 just doesn't strike me as following the same theme. However the 222 came out in 1977 to commemorate 222 years of VC production. It has been associated with Genta since then. I think 34 years is long enough for VC and Genta to set the record straight if in fact he was NOT responsible for the design. I'd say this forum moderator is full of it. BTW, great review of the 222 here http://www.thehourlounge.com/thread/view/vacheron-constantin-quot-222-quot-review_14390_14390.html

like many said, simple business math: cost of goods and services + profit = final price. The costs involved are many, going from ongoing permanent costs (facilities, staff, machines, maintenance, etc.), to R&D, marketing, managing distribution, supply chain etc. Variable costs include taxes, quality check rejects, commissions, COSC, advertisement, warranty services, overstock, etc. The cost of goods (parts, assembly services, shipping, etc.) would probably account for 30% of less of the final price with 15-20% profit, if they are lucky. That's normal with all manufactured goods. so no, I don't think you are being ripped off with most high end gens. Of course with individual models models like the PAM111 or 005 their cost is significantly lower but with other models the cost may probably be higher than 30%. Reps don't have the same functionality, QC and materials as the gens. So it's hard to compare final cost.

maybe I'm the odd one out here but I like it.

he probably got the dial directly from Panerai.

I have never seen a Gen PAM with a blue AR like the reps. Pics are deceiving. Yes, there are some blue ARs around but VERY faint. The most noticeable part is the cyclops. The reps ALWAYS get a very strong blue in many angles. Not believable. I have removed the AR on all my autos. They look a lot better.

cheap reps are cheap reps. This one is not very accurate at all. Only you can tell if it's worth to save the money for the best versions.

List 1 ) Canon pin is too short - one of the biggest tells on these older reps 2 ) Crown guard should be brushed and not polished (let alone it's a bad one). Plus it should have a roller ball 3 ) Crown is too thin and not spring loaded 4 ) The movement is not engraved (that's a sticker with Offiicine Panerai written on it) 5 ) The movement is not platinum platted 6 ) The dial is horrible with the wrong thickness, wrong number cut out (specially the 6), L Swiss Made L too close to the 6 and the list goes on 7 ) Can't see but I bet the caseback says either H or F series 8 ) The case shape is wrong, specially lugs and bezel 9 ) The strap you already mentioned And since when you have to prove the watch is a not what you ordered? You've asked for H factory M series, not close enough. That's NOT the H-factory M series. If you paid with Paypal open a dispute right away.

everything is wrong with that one. It's a horrible rep. You've been taken. Try to get your money back.

This one today

it doesn't exist. I was looking for it when the movie came out but after years of rep collecting I realized this model is just too complicated to be rep'ed and probably not enough interest.