freddy333

Here is something that I have not seen in decades - a redial commisioned by Rolex SA & sold through Sotheby's (click pic for link) As far as I am concerned, this seriously blurs the line between gen & franken. In fact, it forces a rethinking of the term 'franken' & causes me to reconsider whether I even need to qualify some of my all-gen-except-for-professionally-repainted-gen-dial watches. Apparently, if a professional dial repainter repaints a gen Rolex dial using a gen Rolex template, the dial, as far as Rolex SA & Sotheby's is concerned, is gen. So, using that specification as a guide, this &, excepting the insert, this are genuine Rolex watches

Granted, a used/unserviced or poorly maintained 1030 is not going to prove reliable for daily or any other use. However, once properly overhauled, there is no reason it (or any subsequent Rolex caliber) cannot be relied on for daily use. That said, I would never wear a mechanical watch for activities where it might be exposed to bumps, bangs or fast acceleration/deceleration. That is the purview of solid state digital devices.

As happens with ever new Rolex model release, 6 months after release, many of the initial nay-sayers are (proudly) wearing them. Amazing, how predictable these cycles have become.

chriz74 - Some builds are constructed from gen parts, some builds are constructed from replica parts & some a combination of the 2. If you can be specific, you will get a more specific answer.

Older Twinlock tubes often had to be broached, but, as others have said, you have a 702 crown, not 700

Anything is possible, depending how much work you are into. You can cut the dial feet off & use dial dots.

That seems very reasonable to me. Chronograph overhauls are very time-intensive & some watchmakers charge $1k+ (that is too much).

1570s contain a number of jewels. Knowing which jewel it is & where the jewel came from would help. If you can locate the specs for the jewel, you can purchase generic jewels (which are fine) from any of the watch parts houses (julesborel.com, cousinsuk.com, ofrei.com, etc). Depending on the jewel, you may also need a jewel press or stalking tool to install the new jewel. You may be better off having a watchmaker handle this.

I love what they did with the new GMTIIC bezel. Now, you can finally differentiate the current GMT from the current Sub at a quick glance (I have been wondering how long it would take them to correct that) & the new ceramic bezel (with blue glacier dial) for this platinum Daytona, now with AR crystal , is certainly in keeping with the new corporate look But the most interesting thing about these new, Basel-inspired changes is the inclusion of & history about the Paul Newman Daytona on Rolex's website. It is great to see Rolex taking some type of interest (no, they are not re-releasing the Newman Daytona - it is just for marketing purposes) in their vintage classics

I think Patek & Rolls are meant to be more like ultra-refined works of art than hearty, well-engineered tools. But Bose?????????? Not even in the same stratosphere as the likes of Patek, Rolls, Rolex or Mercedes. As an ex-Bose 901 owner (& dealer), Bose has never been anything other than middling in quality. In the watch world, Bose probably equates more to Bulova or Seiko (which I believe now own Bulova) than Rolex. Not bad, but nowhere near state-of-the-art in any category, except, possibly, marketing (they market their products very aggressively).

Easy. Just locate a damaged gen dial & have it repainted (multiple times) by a professional dial repainter. Got a black 1, too (not for sale)

Looks like a great beginning.

Yes, Patek is more akin to Rolls. Rolex is the watch analogue to Mercedes-Benz. Both (Rolex & Mercedes) began around the same time, have been credited with bringing more innovations to market than any of their competitors (even if they did not themselves invent all of said innovations), produce a wide range of luxury products within their respective ranges & generally maintain a high level of quality. I think it is worth noting that each produced 1 of their most iconic products the same year - the Sub & 300SL appeared in 1954. The main difference between them is that Mercedes lionizes collectors & provides ongoing parts/support for their vintage products Meanwhile, Rolex appears to do everything they can to undermine them (refusing to provide parts/service for vintage watches, limiting parts availability, requiring owners to replace vintage parts be replaced with modern parts, etc).

For full disclosure, this insert was an early test sample & differs in some details from later versions. That said, the current run is still miles ahead of anything else & absolutely acceptable. Any criticisms of them are extremely minor, visible only when viewed via a loupe or at macro distances & in direct comparison to this 1. However, JoeyB is working to replicate this 1 & I am sure he will comment here as well.

I imagine he has seen it, but since you asked

Ditto Nanuq. Nothing else even comes close. The original was Perspex, not bakelite.

Ditto.

I love Patek & that 1 is certainly nice, but I would still opt for a Lange. The Lange 1's place is secure near the top of the watch pyramid.

'Come on it!'?????? Either that is a typo or DNS has resolved me to a porn site (with crummy, iconistic porn).

Wore my 116509 today