freddy333

This watch/dial is, by far, the best of the bunch & it still looks wrong (but I do like the insert). In my opinion, this watch would move into the acceptable range if retrofitted with a better handset (these hands all look fake, fake, fake) & if Ziggy relumed the dial with less obviously fake lume. Still, all in all, I think you would be better off with an out-of-the-box MBW.

During the initial research for my 6542 project, I noted that some of Silix's CG-less Subs had reasonable-looking (though not 100% accurate) bezels. The model I ultimately ended up using came with a bezel which, after enhanced patination, turned out to be a near-perfect match & fit for a 6542 GMT (but wrong for a Bond Sub). But the main problem with mixing bezels is whether the bezel from watch A will fit on the case/crystal retaining ring on watch B. Because rep factories tend to use whatever components are available (or cheap), trial-&-error (with no guarantee of success) is the only rule.

Looking at By-Tor's pic, I see what you mean now. But I have to say that, even now that I am aware of it, I would never notice on someone's wrist or use that as an indicator of gen vs rep since bracelets tend to develop spaces between the links due to the inevitable stretching that occurs with usage

I am a bit less whelmed than the rest of you. The cases all look like the same fare we have been getting from other dealers & the dials all leave much to be desired. The 5514, the best of the bunch in my opinion, looks like they got the Comex font nearly right (& it may even be painted, which is even better). But, then, the lume color is hideous & all of the hour markers are misaligned. In fact, looking at it again, even the white Comex block was printed at an angle All in all, I am not sure what all the excitement is about? Feh

Welcome to the forum, Alex. The GMTIIC rep is 1 of the most accurate out-of-the-box reps around & there are many threads discussing it in detail (both good & bad points) that you should search out before making your purchase from 1 of the recommended collectors on RWG.

Sorry to be the sole dissenter here (as usual), but I do not think the rep 'engraving' looks sufficiently accurate to warrant highlighting it. Until they at least get the engraving correct, I think the less is more (harder to see) approach of the original version is better.

Sub Wednesday

Ditto.

Wearing my 16014 today

What gaps? I suspect that it has not been commented on because most of the reps do not have the gap (mine does not). Can you post a good, clear macro pic of the gap in question?

I would start by asking some of the recommended collectors (check out their section for names/contacts) & ebay.

DW is working on a 6238 as we speak. As it is, since both watches use the same base movement (A7750), you can swap the dial from this watch onto 1 of DW's A7750-powered Daytonas & you have a very reasonable 6238 (with the all-important asymmetrical pusher layout) for not much money.

There are actually 3 different styles of Oyster pushers for 62xx Daytonas. The 2 I was referring to are what Rolex still has available as replacements. The original Oyster pushers have not been made/available for many years. Ofrei's pushers look like those on the gen on the right in the last pic.

Never been a Cartier fan, but love the OP, JoJo. It is quite suitable for a man (now that the decade of bulging look-at-my-watch watches is behind us).

The only way to tell for sure is to disassemble them. If the components in your pushers look this, then they are gen/Ofrei. If not, then they are probably not gen (ignore the red highlight)

Read this ('rep' is a DW fitted with gen crown/tube & Ofrei pushers)

The OP did not specify steel or gold, so I added the notation regarding gold. Ofrei's non-screw steel pushers are what I use & they are the same as the pushers sold by Rolex in Rolex packaging. Similarly, Ofrei's screw-style steel pushers are the same as some sold by Rolex. However, Rolex uses at least 2 different style screw pushers that I am aware of & I have only ever seen 1 style on Ofrei's site (you will need to research the details yourself as it is impossible to explain the differences without detailed pics of all of them). As for gold, the components of the non-screw pushers are, again, the same as Rolex's, but Rolex applies their own gold plating, which I am sure is considerably more robust than Ofrei's.

I have been planning to do that since I got the watch, but, due to the movement's infamously finicky nature, I decided not to remove the movement until/unless it stops keeping COSC time. But I think a gentle brushing would mitigate alot of the darkened appearance of the etching.

Wearing my Bond Sub today (Sunday)

The (steel) pushers sold by Ofrei are the same components that Rolex currently supplies (I am sure that Rolex uses a much higher quality gold on theirs). That is the reason I always like to replace the original DW parts with them.

Remove the all of the links & all the text between them.

I know what you mean. For nearly 2 years, I have had a (still unused) storage container taking up space (rear left in pic) that I bought with the intention of relocating most of the dreck you see cluttering up my work space into its neat little pull-out drawers. Just never seem to get around to the task of actually getting it done. My work space. And then some. If the Chinese can build reps where they eat, I can pay bills where I build watches.

Read this