freddy333

As some of you know, 1 of the shortcomings on all GMTIIC reps (& other current Rolex sports models with AR'd date windows) is their lack of AR on the crystal, above/below the cyclops, which produces the elusive (it only occurs under the right lighting conditions) black hole effect over the date window as seen here on my gen crystal Previous attempts at AR'ing the cyclops itself have, to my eye, produced neither the black hole nor any real improvement over the standard, non-AR'd crystal. So, along with stopping into just about every jewelry store I pass (in my ongoing search for NOS Rolex parts), I have been asking eyeglass stores if their lab can AR specific sections of a lens by masking-off the other sections? The typical answer is no. However, recently, I found a shop that said 1 of their labs has done something similar before. So, last week, we sent them an aftermarket crystal (purchased from a well-known/reliable ebay seller) with instructions to AR the underside of the crystal below the cyclops & this is what I received back. As you can see, as indicated by the jagged edges, the masking was not perfect but the basic shape is correct & in the correct location (below the cyclops) (Shown here with gen-style gasket, which was not used because it does not fit rep cases) So let us see how it looks on the watch (remember, the AR was applied only on the underside of the crystal) Definitely, a step in the right direction (the reflection over the date window is a bit darker/clearer than the rest of the crystal & you can see the AR 'rainbow'), but not quite a black hole. Obviously, having AR topside would be required to complete the effect. Unfortunately, the lab had already told me that applying any type of adhesive/cement to the AR will damage it, so they cannot AR the top of the crystal beneath the cyclops. However, while not the best solution, I may try the next best thing - AR'ing the top surface of the cyclops. Although the AR will eventually wear away (if it does not get scratched off 1st), if it works to produce the black hole effect, it might be an option for watches that see only occasional wear, which is the case with my TT GMTIIC here (wearing yellow gold generally makes me cringe). Unfortunately, other things have come up that will delay me from being able to spend much time on this for the next week or 2, but I will try to get the lab to do a 2-side AR treatment & report back the results.

Still

Great post (should be pinned (somewhere it may actually get read by newbs)). Let me add that, if a rep exists, the sellers listed on RWG can usually source it for you. Some (thinking of Andrew/Josh here) will even tell you to avoid certain reps if they have had problems with them.

When the 1st comes after the 31st, it is my favorite day, because I do not have to (manually) reset the date on half dozen non-quick-set watches.

Either that or the 2 screws that hold the movement in place are loose/missing.

The large date window has been the stumbling point for Lange 1 reps. There have been a number of attempts, but no rep has ever come close to getting this right & the typically standard-sized (small) date window is a dead giveaway of fakes. Although not 1 of my favorite models, the most accurate Lange rep I have seen is the Grand Arkade in rose with a black dial (this combination is a custom order in the gen). Depending on the date (some dates have alignment problems), it is usually close enough to pass from an arm's length away Otherwise, select a model without a date complication & be aware that the angles/edges on the gens are more articulated than on the reps.

Wearing my bling-ograph today

I have to disagree with you. The profile of the 300 UPH bezel on my 6239 matches those on pages 58-59 & 118-119 in my Daytona bible. Same case with most of the gens in my pic archives. The 1 area where all steel aftermarket 62xx bezels differ from their gen counterparts is the grain of the metal & its finish. Most aftermarket bezels I have seen, including all of DW's, Phong's, NDT's, etc, are highly polished (more or less), while the gens seem almost brushed in contrast. Not actually brushed, but they do not reflect light as brilliantly as the aftermarkets do. That said, differences in finish can easily be chalked up to the procedure the last watchmaker used to polish the watch. So that is not really an issue.

No great deals there that I can see. In fact, pricing seems a bit high.

Let me tease you with a bit more steel & gold But, like you, still wearing steel today

Thanks. This is 1 of DW's newer bezels (though it is still a roll-of-the-dice as to what you will receive), which also got the flat-top 4 correct. Frankly, if I did not know the source, after you clean it up (these things arrive with (easily repairable) mars in the finish (as you can see below) & blotches of paint everywhere), it looks gen. I would never ID this as an aftermarket bezel

Helpful to know what movement & case, but check for the hands (or another part of the movement) coming into contact with the crystal or, if a chronograph, for the levers that operate the chrono functions not having sufficient space between them & the pushers. Is the stem/crown in the movement while it is running outside the case? If the stem/crown is not in the movement, install them & see if the movement still continues to run.

There is nothing like seeing the embarrassed look on a haughty jeweler's face (who thinks he ID'd your watch as a cheap rep ) after his watchmaker has opened the case of your franken to reveal a gen movement. I only wish I had my camera with me. Priceless.

If you can locate a gen & have steady hands, you might also want to replace the crown on the dial (DJ dial is a donor)

I hope whatever it is is worth the suspense.

Do you know how to enter 'Rolex clock' on ebay (returns 3 Rolex clocks )?

Kind of old news, but still true, as I can attest to personally. The article is especially interesting for its comments on the passing (several years ago) of large, obvious watches in favor of smaller, classically understated models). I still have my 1st watch (given to me when I was 6), which underwent its last overhaul a couple of years ago (there is a thread journaling the process around here somewhere) My 1st digital from the 70s, which still gets worn every once in awhile (Yes, the 'Yesterday' button is missing)

ebay.

I ask at every jewelry shop I pass in my normal travels. You are playing the odds -- the more you ask, the better your odds of finding what you need. Of course, you only get lucky once out of every 10-20 tries, but that is the way to find hens teeth.

No, I did not try either of those, but I did hear Shure's top-end SE535s, which were nice, but a bit too bloated in the bottom end (like most better headphones). With headphones, my primary goal is flat response & it seems that few actually achieve flatness -- at least in the case of those that are designed to be flat. In the end, I settled on UE's Reference Monitors, which were designed in tandem with engineers from Capitol (Records) Studios, whose goal was to produce a flat-response for engineers & producers. These are customs (made to fit my ears), so it will be a few weeks before I receive them.

Your best sources are older/retired watchmakers who work on everything, not the guys who specialize in Rolex. The problem with older GMT parts is that, unlike other models, the GMT parts were not interchangeable with other non-GMT watches & Rolex generally only produced them for 20 or so years after production ceased. That leaves a tiny number of spare parts, which are rare & expensive in the hands of watchmakers who specialize in Rolex. To the older repair-anything guys, these parts are just old, commodity items. I cannot tell you how many times I heard 'Why do you want these old parts? No one uses them anymore. Why don't you just buy a new watch?' This is why (All gen except for the insert & repainted (gen) dial)

Sold. Here is the money Send me the car.