ubiquitous

Difficult to say with the pics provided.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm... Inserts...

Have a look at that top pic. The spacing of the pushers is much more pronounced in that pic. The second pic shows it as well... But it's not as obvious.

My problem is buying parts! I just cannot resist a good offer on Rolex genuine vintage parts! Even if it's something I don't need, I'll think 'Hmmmm... Well, it might come in handy later?'. My wife is ready to toss my parts box in the trash...

Take a look specifically at the crystal size and bezel. Genuine SD's have a smaller diameter crystal, and wider bezel. If you had profile pics, you'd also see that the crystal is thicker, to accomodate the deeper depth rating. Of course, if you saw a profile pic, you'd also see if the HeV was correct or not! Like Bob says, however, just because the pictures check out okay doesn't necessarily mean you'll be getting what's shown. Caveat emptor!

Gee, I wonder why he didn't het any bids?!?! Watch looks interesting. At first glance, because of the subdial layout, it looks like a piece of junk. But if you analyze the photos a bit you'll see: -Asymmetric pushers -Nice 571 end links -A dial with a coronet placed too high Hmmmmm... It is a very intriguing watch indeed.

Well, that is a genuine 'flat' T-39, but not the one that's really 'correct' for the DRSD. The DRSD originally came with a T-39 Superdome like this: The Superdome, however, is commonly replaced with the 'flat' T-39 these days, as the Superdome is, and has been out of production for some time now. BTW- Here is a side by side comparison of a genuine superdome and a genuine flat 39. The Superdome is a friends' watch I installed it on- The flat is my 1665 white font SD: Original post.

Ditto on that. 'Slytech' just seems cheesy to me. Always has...

Private feedback doesn't always mean a scam. I believe the watch, for the most part, to be genuine... Just the details around some of the finer points not readily disclosed (when they should be).

For someone who doesn't mind a redialed SD, this one could probably be had at a decent price. The only ones who (in my opinion) really care about a watch being all original are the investment collectors, and I don't think there is any worry about one of those guys placing a bid on the watch in question! All in all, the condition of the watch looks pretty clean. If I were to purchase that watch, I'd want to revert it back to the white font dial. The only thing that really bugs me about this auction (and ones for watches of similar nature) is that the information about the dial having been swapped is not disclosed in the auction description, or any where in the content. I mean, it's not hard to figure out that this watch, with a 6.1M s/n was produced far beyond the issuing of any double red dials. With the incorrect case back and a few other small details, my suspision is further confirmed.

You need to consult a physician. Immediately.

It's a former white font 1665 converted to double red dial (using a reprinted dial). Lots of clues give it away...

Very nice B!!

Bazz- That He valve (from the angle of the pic you posted) looks damn good!! Do you have a full frontal??

You are indeed correct!! I'm usually K.O. around 10pm these days!! <<<Ubi is a lightweight...

Variation in the tone and hue of the red font printing may vary depending on the dial manufacturer, and of course, their subsequent runs of dial batches. i.e. you will see variations across the board depending on if the dial was manufactured by BEYER, Singer, etc. how much UV it's been exposed to, in combination with other factors that may be unique to that specific watch and how it has been cared for during it's life. I've seen some brand new, in the wax packet Rolex Service Center issued replacement dials (Lumi) with the red printed as dark as the MBW/WM's, and I've seen original dials, like Ed's examples on his site, that are such a pale pink that the font may as well be white. So... In short, I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Well, there's only one way to wind it, and from the sounds of it, you've got it right. If you turn the watch over, and look at the movement from the display back, you should see the balance moving (oscillating). If you don't, and you're certain the movement is wound completely (until you feel resistance), then there is a chance that there is a problem with the movement (which is always possible). Speaking of which... What movement do you have? Swiss ETA/UT 6497? Or the chinese copy?

Wow Pug... You sure do know how to make things sound like fun!

The one posted in the pic here is a 2846. Because of their slower beat rate, I typically install these in my vintage MBW's to match the genuine a/h of 19800bph. ETA 2846 swap. BTW- What does it matter what color the movement is? There are no ETA's that look anything remotely like a genuine 3135 (or 3035, 1570, etc for that matter). The minute the caseback comes off, the movement will be instantly recognizable as 'not genuine'. So, really, there is no point to having gold, or nickle plated, or red anodised gears, etc. The movement still looks wrong regardless.

Mmmmmmm... WD-40!

I'm not usually a Panerai kind of guy, but I must say that the base models really appeal to me. I tend to like my PAMs simple, and I don't think you can get any more basic than a base (002, 009, 112 etc). Must be something about the balance of the dial, and lack of seconds that just does it for me.

What I find interesting is how the 44mm crowns seem to be so difficult to reproduce, yet the crown on the Fiddy, which doesn't look any less technical to produce, is done perfectly.

Just a matter of where the hands were set when they were pressed onto the pinion in relation to the change over of the date when it was assembled. Typically, when I take my watches apart to swap dials or movements, I'll manually go through the time to see exactly where the date change takes place (and I'll leave the hands set to that time prior to removing them). When I press the hands back on, I'll press them on exactly at 12:00. This provides me a reference point to make sure the hands are set straight, and correct for time setting, and also ensures that the date will now roll over at 12:00. For what it's worth, it is acceptable by Rolex manufacturing and servicing to allow a date change to take place anywhere from 12:00am to 12:15am on their genuine quick set calibers. Personally, I think any variance +/- 10 minutes is acceptable. I myself never see my date change over- I only notice that the date has changed the next morning (which tells me it's at least doing what it's supposed to do, regardless of when )

Holy smokes!! Comes with it's own wrench to snug down the pushers?!?! Can you post some pics of this bad boy?