freddy333

Please do not re-quote an entire set of pics just to add a line or 2 at the end.

Nice work.

Rolex benefits - good fit & finish, high degree of build quality, (higher) resale value retained/gained over time, legal (not contraband) Top quality rep benefits - relatively cheap, provides appearance of gen Rolex negatives - expensive, costly to repair (especially, in the case of vintage) Top quality rep negatives - little or no Q/C, unreliable until/unless professionally overhauled, legal issues with ownership in some countries, low resale value, risk of being identified as 'poser'

Yes, chrono seconds hand is slightly askew of its null position, but this is fairly common. If it left an RSC that way, I would have taken it back, but, like I said, the offset is slight & many would not even notice it. All things considered, the price seems a bit high, but not unreasonably so considering the accompanying provenance & condition.

I have a gen movement & handset in my double-red & all I had to do was reshape the calendar ring to allow the movement to sit flush with the dial opening in the MBW case. I believe some others changed the calendar ring, but I do not know which ring they used? I sourced a dial made to fit the 1575 on ebay (cannot remember who the seller was), but my guess is that the date window in an MBW dial, as cib0rgman suggests, will be slightly off if used on a 1575 movement.

Archie has some interesting watches, but the guy is a moron. To paraphrase from 'A Hard Day's Night', I like to turn the sound down & just enjoy the video without his clap-trap.

Andrew will replace the watch, but the replacement is best shipped via EMS (avoid Fedex, if possible).

The primary problems with Minh's (best) Newman dials are the slightly incorrect fonts (especially the P in COSMOGRAPH), poorly shaped crowns (I replaced mine with gens) & faux (as opposed to real) subdial depth (achieved, on Minh's dials, with a painted 'shadow'). But, overall, his best Newmans contain the least objectionable sins to my eye.

Oh, that Tudor 9315. Yes, I believe you were originally correct about that clasp only being used with later Tudor Subs. I thought you had 1 of the rare rose clasped bracelets.

Wearing my old '39 today

The Tudor clasp is absolutely correct &, in my opinion, preferable to a 9315 with the standard Rolex clasp. Pics please.

I think he overbaked the hands & I would prefer it on a gen folded link or rivet bracelet, but I love the rest of it.

Well, nearly as good as new The shop that did the original spray, contrary to request to paint it the original color, mixed a custom color that seems to be impossible for the paint company to match. So, now, the car has a slightly off-color door panel (where the car wash damage occurred). By the way, the reason I only 'semi' restored the Z is because it has been my daily beater (& looked like it prior to the semi-restoration) for 3 decades & I did not want to end up with a show quality car that I would be affraid to drive or park. But, as my car wash experience illustrates, no matter how careful you are, sooner or later, they will get you.

I certainly feel for you. It is bad enough to have your car damaged, but the purposeful anonymity of the guilty party only compounds the pain. Depending on your will power & available free time, you could do some detective work & check with any of the businesses served by the parking lot to see if they either saw anything or have cameras that may have photographed the incident. Most likely, though, even if they did, pinning down the required license number would be a longshot, at best. My (semi-restored) Z was recently scratched (badly, down to bare metal) by 1 of the revolving brushes inside my local car wash & the car wash owner refused to accept fault &/or reimburse me for the cost ($1,200) of repairs. Unfortunately, in these cases, you just have to deal & chalk it up to another part of the rich pagent of life.

Wow. Enjoy.

Although I did replace the bracelet (with a custom rubber strap), crown/tube & xtal (with gens), my 3-4 year-old GMT2C is from the original run & I think it looks pretty accurate

Definitely the white hand (assuming, as it appears in the above pic, it does not look brand spanking new). Most (but definitely not all) of these early Subs came with white ss hands.

What about the current crop of GMTIICs is 'not accurate at all'?

Swapping the GMT for a Patek en route to a formal, last minute dinner date

Within seconds of seeing Butler appear on screen in 300, it was clear that he IS (or should be) James Bond. Am I the only 1 wondering why Gerard Butler has not yet replaced Daniel Craig (who, while a great actor & good in the part, has never had that X factor that Connery had) to play 007?

To be able to make any kind of accurate comparison, the lens under scrutiny must be the same (correct) distance from the datewheel. Otherwise, the magnification will be artificially increased (or decreased). For what it is worth, I would be very surprised to see Mr. Slimeball selling lenses with the correct 2.5x magnification. And I must disagree with Alli in that Rolex (& most who are familiar with Rolex specs) will be able to ID an improper cyclops mag when viewed from an arm's length away. I have also purchased gen Rolexes from long-time Rolex dealers that came with either the wrong gen xtal or an aftermarket xtal, resulting in weak date magnification &/or slightly off-center date positioning (both of which are remedied with the (correct) gen xtal). GMTs, DJs & DDs are especially apt to have been fit with the wrong gen xtal due to the number of xtals that physically fit the case, but, due to varying versions within a model range (each having a different movement), leave the date window slightly off-center. My Mystery DJ, purchased years ago from a well-known collector/dealer, had been fit (by the dealer) with a xtal that was made for a later DJ version & T116s are frequently (& incorrectly) cited by knowledgeable dealers as the correct xtal for 6542 GMTs (the T115, which differs only in the location of its cyclops, is the correct part).