sneed12

Thinking about building a 1675, but I want it to glow at night

Ah yes, my VIP expired a few days ago and I haven't made the payment yet. Try again in a couple of minutes.

Holy crap dude... I'm sorry. If you want to send it to me when you source another gen insert, I'll fit it for you (for free), and I guarantee it won't look like that.

Not uncommon. The usual fix is to shave the bottom of the gen insert slightly.

I've been collecting the parts for another Super-Sub C build for quite a while: I just bought a parts watch with a green dial in it, and I was going to gut it, but... something about the green dial caught my eye. So I built the watch with the green dial. The parts watch had a cracked bezel insert, which is part of why I got it cheap, and I've got another one on the way. Same specs as my last Super Sub-C () except this one has a gen crystal with AR under the cyclops. The DWO on the movement is the new one that the factories are putting out, the one sitting alone is a BK DWO. The new factory DWO is much better than the old Noob one, take a look at the placement of the 21: And here's the dial: Hands installed: Assembled: One thing that the new factory DWOs have is the subtle serifs and the black hole effect on the gen crystal is NUTS Here it is in the box--I sold off 6 pieces to get it down to half a dozen, but it seems like it's growing again. I don't know if I'll keep it, I think it'll depend on the new bezel insert. The color on this one isn't quite right, it's a bit too olive.

Bah. OK fine! Pics tonight.

Honestly, the gen bracelet feels exactly the same way. Maybe a bit smoother, but the gen Submariner bracelet has hollow center links which gives it that light rattly feeling. Seriously. It's supposed to be like that.

It'll physically fit, no problem. Just like every other 21J to ETA swap, you'll need movement, hands, and stem. You could cut the dial feet and glue it, but it's easier just to source a dial as well. Movement holder, screws, clamps, and DWO can be re-used. Honestly, the easiest thing to do would be to buy another one. You can mix and match parts, keep what you like, and assemble what's left into another whole watch and resell it. You can probably do the swap a lot cheaper that way. That's what I usually do.

Not much shorter actually. Stumpier, and a tiny bit shorter, but not much shorter. It looks "much shorter" in that pic because the CGs are a tiny bit short, but mostly the crown is way too big.

Yeah. I have this watch in the clone ETA, haven't gotten around to trimming the CGs yet but it is on the list.

I've just collected parts for yet another Super Sub-C build. I keep deciding that the Sub-C isn't a good enough rep to bother with, then changing my mind a couple of weeks later. Scored a gen crystal with AR'ed cyclops off of Londongeorge, so that'll go into it. As a parts watch, I bought a green Sub-C with sunburst dial. I was planning on gutting it, but... I saw the dial reflecting the light last night and it sort of spoke to me. I don't have any other sunburst Rolexes, and I already have a black Sub and SD... what do you all think? Never thought I'd be a fan of the green, but now I'm seriously considering it.

Wow. $2900... tempting... I could sell my WM9 collection, buy this and have money left over

That's an astonishing amount of information contained in your post. What, exactly, seems to be wrong with it? Does the stem come out completely? Does the crown come off the stem? Does the watch wind? Does the date flip?

I saw it in the for sale forum, right here at rwg. They've been out of production for several years now.

I should say also that I've owned two BK Sub-C's, and liked them. They're nice watches. I didn't stress out about the flaws, and when I decided I wanted to try and fix some of them I did. Until then I wore the watch just as it was.

No. By modern super-rep standards, the Sub-C simply isn't very good. Even by Rolex standards, it's not all that good--and there are some other brands that are much better. Omega, Panerai, Sinn, IWC--there are quite a few reps out there that are much "better" in that sense than most Rolex reps. HAVING SAID THAT--if you're wearing a rep to try and fool people, you're going to fail. That's not really what reps are about. YOU'RE going to know it's a rep, after all. 99.9% of people literally won't even notice that you're wearing a watch. Even watch people won't look closely. I'd have trouble telling the difference between a rep Sub-c and a gen at wrist distance, so unless you take it off and hand it to me I'm not going to be able to tell. No. The tells on the TW are different, and it's hard to tell from that angle, but I could tell if I had one in my hands. Again--buy a rep because you like the way it looks. Build a rep because you like building watches. But don't buy a rep to try and fool people. You're not going to. People believe the wearer, not the rep.

Here's a gen (pic from the sticky) Comparing these two pics, I think it's clear that everything I said about the Sub-C was something I could see in the pic that the OP posted. If you know what you're looking for, it's obvious. Here's the rep again: Compare the hour hand on the gen to that of the rep. Far too fat. Same for the steel surrounds of the hour markers. If you look by the 20 minute mark, you can see that the "L" in the ROLEX rehaut engraving is right next to the 19 mark, but it should be the "E" if the rehaut engraving was aligned successfully. The cyclops is reflecting too much light. Even from just that small part of the date that is showing, you can tell that the date is too big. Look at the sparkle of the engraved numerals in the bezel of the gen. It's vapor-deposited platinum (the actual metal), not paint. The rep is painted using grey paint. The difference is obvious when you're looking for it. But the point is, of course, that most people aren't looking for it, and therefore don't see it.

No, but it's the same base watch. It just doesn't have the BK mods and quality control. Us rep freaks can spot this watch as a rep from a mile away--unfortunately, by modern standards the Sub-C isn't a very good rep. Fat minute hand Fat marker surrouds Lack of sparkle in the bezel numerals Pearl is wrong Rehaut engraving is off no AR on the cyclops datefont is too large/not centered on the numerals Having said all that--the average person couldn't tell the difference between this watch and a gen if you held them right next to each other. Wear it and enjoy it.

No. Different size = different cases, bracelets, lume, bezel inserts... they're two different watches.

What do you mean by "not working properly"? Honestly, with regular ETAs I don't even bother fixing them anymore. A movement swap is cheap, easy, and fast.

I like the ceramic sub and have built several of them, but frankly by today's standards the ceramic sub isn't a very good rep. On the other hand the TW is excellent.

I know that for me personally, over the last few years I've gone from not being able to tell what a wokky rehaut looks like, to being bothered by the crown height of an otherwise perfect Submariner rep. Sometimes all that matters is what YOU notice.

Yep. No worries about lume, crown guards, crown height...

No, it won't. That's what I just said. The date window position on these reps do not allow use of a DWO.

What do you use to waterproof the sleeve for the gen tube/crown? Steel-on-steel doesn't waterproof well, do you use a gasket of some kind?