madmex

This is one of the first watches I remember seeing in the 1990s in magazines (the titanium tantalum and rose gold version), and really thinking "wow."

Well the rep is pretty fantastic as we all know. This is the rep out of the box. I got it in 2008 from Ms. King. I think my pearl was chipped and I put a drop of clear UV glue on it--the results speak for themselves. Check out these pics I took, trying to resemble the original ad I saw in the 1990s.

This one has had it's share of mishaps. Of course it has the wrong date disc font. But more tragically it came with the center chronograph seconds post bent at the tip. So the seconds hand is tilted on its axis. You can see it in the pics. Yet, this was purely aesthetic.

I later replaced that post with a spare part Daytona seconds at 6 movement that was dead. And then I replaced the date disc with gen (not pictured here).

Is the new red wording version as good as THIS? Please chime in.

Unfortunately the 2nd wheel on this broke, and the Swiss version does not fit (well it does fit but has the wrong number of teeth). So I need a replacement 7750. If I go gen, I have to buy the hands which are pricey and of course the movement.

So my watch can't hold a winding, because it self-unwinds. I opened it and found a tiny wire. Figured out it was the click-spring. The part is so darn small and I only have half of it, that I can't figure out how long to make a replacement. Also what is the official name of this tiny wire if anyone knows, so that I can inquire with our dealers to see if they can source it.

Something so simple... yet so tough to fix.

Thanks all for reading!

Omega Speedmaster Day-Date Asian 7750

Another new arrival of 2008. The biggest flaw are the hour markers on the dial, which should be thinner. Other than that, this one seems to be an excellent replication. I'm waiting for a comprehensive member review of this watch, and will update this info as soon as I have more information.

The biggest flaw I see with this one is the old Asian 7750 [7751] base with 21,600 bph. The gen runs at 28,800 bph.

I saw the pics (and movement frequency) at King's site.

PS AWESOME reference, By-Tor. Thanks!!!

Wow, I love threads like this. You guys are so good at picking up the minute details... I've been taking lots of notes in the last few days as to what to look for...

Question for you guys:

Would you remove the date cyclops on a GMT master II?

I really don't like date bubbles as all the reflections on them drive me batty... But it's true to the original on the GMT. I'm very tempted to just burn this sucker off as it's my watch so why not make it the way I like it right?

So what do you guys think? Ditch it or not?

Thanks,

Ben

I would leave it and get a watch without the cyclops--like a seadweller. How do u plan to take the cyclops off?

I wanted to point out that the bezel teeth are longer on the gen, because the crystal and dial on the no-date Sub are smaller in diameter than the Date model.

I prefer the no-date myself, but haven't found a really good one. Where does one get a gen dial? sounds like it would be a few hundred bux.

ahhh I hadn't read the description... the watch pictured is a midsize 36mm, between the "I didn't take these pictures" and the "new automatic movement"... I vote fake too! good catch!

http://cgi.ebay.ie/Omega-Seamaster-Mens-Wa...1QQcmdZViewItem

That's real. It's a midsize.

I received this beauty from king. This watch is like a toy.... it's super thick and it is amazingly detailed.

Observations: The crown screw-threads are inside the tube--as on the gen.

Tip: shine a black light and the orange indicators look like they're floating--this is a different paint than on the tip of the Seamaster Pro basic seconds hand.

The waves are glossy as on the gen as well. Very happy with this purchase!

It's not bad if it's all stainless steel. If it's chrome plated brass... well then it will be short lived--unless you don't wear it much.

Excellent review! Too bad about the misaligned pearl. I'm waiting for mine to arrive!

unique piece, that's for sure!

The subdial spacing is correct on that DAY TONA

Thanx 4 the info. Yeah, if you have (easy)access/url to the right gen photo, I'll switch it out in the post...that would be great.

The little hands for the sub-dials should also be white.

I like the 3rd and 4th one (same one)! Do they have a deployment buckle?

I had it's twin, a day-date version that I added moonphases to....

feast your eyes on this!

BEFORE.

AFTER.

The fit and finish on the movement is awesome...

The Project

It's what I'm inclined to think too.

Having read By-Tors excellant reviews and looked closely at the reduced and normal Moon, it's all getting a bit confusing.

Ok, I'll try and explain.

The usual Speedy Pro moon rep has the incorrect subdial spacing which inturn means the 9 and 3 stick markers are short. Hands are as per the gen as is the remainder of the dial markings..no second numbering around face and two dots either side of the 12 marker. From our dealers, I've read the case dimensions are 40mm across the case and 10.5mm thick. These dimensions equate to a pre 1965 Speedy (non pro).

The gen Reduced has a case size of 38mm and the same face as the 'new' one I've mentioned in my first post. Numbered seconds on the face, thin sweep hand and the thin crown guard. These facts (apart from the case size) means the current Speedmasters the dealers have are all Reduced despite having Professional in place of Automatic below 'Speedmaster'.

So, my conclusion so far is that there are currently three Speedmaster Moonies available from the dealers.

1. 40mm case with all the correct Reduced features. Case a bit too big. Professional instead of Auto. Subdial spacing is accurate to gen Reduced.

2. 40mm case with the wrong crown guard, face and hands. Subdial issue. Case of a reduced, face of a Pro.

3. ??mm case with correct face and crown guard. Subdial issue.

3 is at present the nearest to a Speedy Pro Moon. I believe its the one that baltic reviewed recently next to a gen. The two pictures at the begining of this thread are closest to a Reduced imho.

So, to summerise!

My initial title of 'New Speedies. Getting Closer to Gen' would now appear to refer to the reduced. I was hoping we would be a bit closer to a Pro Moon to be honest. Each time I'm about to commit to buying one, I get this anally retentive 'detail devil' tapping me on the shoulder prior to pressing 'purchase'! I guess I'm going to go with the one baltic has. (Can we have the Speedy Broadarrow case (42mm) with a Moonie Pro face please? Subdial will still be an issue but it will be closer in case size to the gen).

BTW, where did you get it from, baltic? Great review too, thanks.

Edited to add. Cancel that baltic, I've just read back through your posts and you got it from EL? Regards

THe non-reduced version, is 1:1 with the gen when it comes to case size. The stats on the webpage may be wrong. I owned one and it's pretty big--much bigger than the gen reduced I owned too.

eBay 2002-Rolex-SS-Stainless-Steel-Submariner-16610-SEL Z260041934593

This is a real 16610... but that aftermarket crystal makes it look like a replica.

Too bad we can't fit gen crystals on most of our reps, as I think they make a big difference.

Nope. I think you're getting the "reduced" confused with the "moonwatch."

Look at the crown on the reduced ("latest one" in your post), it sticks out... it also has the numbers on the hour indices... that's from the reduced only.

The subdial spacing is correct on the reduced, but the word "Professional" should not be on there.

Look at the hands too--they're correct for both versions (being different in each case--look at the seconds hand).

By-Tor wrote a review of his "Speedmaster reduced" check it out.

like i said i have tried epoxies and nail polish and they never did it good enough for me only because they r not hard enough, but i think just maybe the uv stuff could work, or maybe i have tried the wrong epoxies and or nail polishes in the past lol , but anyway it is a great idea and i hope it hardens, see the other stuff mars and dents easily that is why i dont like it , i love learning however, thanks

joe

The UV cement works great. It is designed to cement watch crystals in place. It hardens very well.

Model glue sounds good too, as was suggested. What I like about the UV Cement is that it's designed for watches and does not solidify until it is exposed to a UV source. It is semi-liquid, and you can clean up and restart if you make a mistake. When it looks good, then u go outside for 3 minutes in the sun. THen u reapply the bubble, and repeat.

After a long UV application (wear it out in the sun or somehting), you wash it with soap and water and can polish it with your shirt, to give it a good shine.

By adding some clear U-V crystal cement, and then curing it with the sun for a couple of minutes, you can fill the little voids and give it that gloss-over look as on the GEN.

I just received this beauty from EL, by the way.

The procedure was done in 2 steps. First to fill the void, I added a small drop. I cured it with the sunlight (or UV lamp if you keep a spare around the garage--I don't).

Then I added another drop on top to give it the round pearl look.

The pictures were taken prior to polishing it with a cotton shirt.

before the procedure, the pearl looked good, but was a little small, and favored one side more than the other.

Judging from the pic (could be the pic), fake but a real good one. The CGs give it away. Look at the real thing (snagged and blown up from Rolex official website) and yours (flipped 90 degrees). Your CGs look a little short. From this angle, the outside of top CG may look straight, but that of the bottom should show some curvature. It looks like a straight line to me. And the CGs should be more pointy. Again it could be the picture.

I guess you missed the boat. It's genuine. The owner just admitted it. It looks genuine too.

There may be a little bit of variety in the finishing of the same Rolex gen watches, explaining your observation.

One word: if it looks "harmonious," then it's likely a gen.

I'm still in awe of Tag's 360 chrono movement. 360,000 bph when the chrono is running.

Correction: the beat is 36,000 bph not 360,000.. if it beat that fast the friction would cause heat that would crack the spring and wear the gears very fast.

That's an El Primero movement. Tag was purchased by the same umbrella group that purchased Zenith. It's the same movement that was used on the Daytona subseconds @9. Except Rolex modified the escapement with their microstella and took the beat down to 28,800.

The reason some are jerkyer than others, for instance the Daytona Reps w subseconds @6, is a question of direct vs. indirect drive.

Most of today's watches are direct drive, meaning the gear that moves at that rate is the one attached directly to the hand.

In the case of the Daytona rep with Subseconds @ 6, there are a few gears that transition the beat, each one of them adding a little bit of play in the gearing, so the end result is jerky and irregular. This is not the watch ticking like that, but the second hand being indirectly driven by auxillary wheels adding in the little play between gears.

Old watches had indirect seconds. I think the Miyota autos have indirect seconds too, because if a certain spring is not tight on them, their second hand looks like it's crazy... it jerks.. then stops until the gears catch up then jumps back etc.

Regarding the quest for sweep seconds, it has been done! The Bulova Accutron and the Omega electric watches of the 60s and early 70s had electric (not quartz) movements.

In a quartz movement, we know a quartz crystal oscillates at exactly that 32727(?) Hz when current is run through it. Always. So a little stepping motor, sends power to the seconds hand at that rate, to 1 second.

The old electric watches had a tuning fork inside that was "excited" and the stepping motors were regulated by that. The approximate rate was 300Hz... their second hand is beautiful! It just sweeps.

Unfortunately they were expensive to maintain and if something attached to the tuning fork (dirt or debris) it would change the frequency and thus the accuracy.... so they left them for Quartz which are very simple to make now.

Here for your veiwing pleasure I present....pictures

Opinions alway welcome.

These are great pictures! I've always been fond of both models, and like you, I was curious to see what they were like side by side.

Wow. Absolutely stunning! I was wondering if this was ever going to come out.

Beautiful watch and what gorgeous pictures Neil! You earn a Pulitzer for these.

Will be my next watch... I bet it's huge.

It never hurts to try. It is a very nice rep.

It was posted by someone likely from this or another rep forum. They only posted once on Timezone.

It's unfortunate that they linked directly to Eddie's pics on his album. I hope this does not jeopardize him.

That is awesome!

Congratulations on your devotion and hard work to create this beauty. I really like your story about the AD. Did they not have a gen to compare it side by side, and weigh them, etc?

I always heard stories about someone *typically a Cartier AD, getting a customer in for a change of battery or whatever, and the dealer taking the watch to the back and coming back with a hammer and destroying it to the horror and dismay of the owner! Probably an urban myth, lol.

Seriously, congratulations!

Hey so how is EL's ss band? I read you used Andrew's. Does EL's have hollow middle links? The crown you have on there (from Josh, I read) is really a stunner.

You really did take the best of the pack and created a masterpiece. Maybe you can create a few frankens from the leftover parts and sell them to recoup your investment.

You're my new hero on here! Enjoy it in good health.