freddy333

1 hour ago, Tribal said:

By the Way, with the right Drills you can drill the Lugholes by hand easily.

Gesendet von meinem MI 4S mit Tapatalk
 

7 minutes ago, Nanuq said:

Yes.... but go slow. Ask me how I drilled a hole clear through my right thumb.

All of the lugs in my project cases were done with a hand drill & I still have all 10 fingers (w/o holes).

38 minutes ago, dbane883 said:

Why wouldn't you just remove the crystal and retaining ring? I remove the tube as well.

Ditto.

There was at least 1 thread on this topic, which was inspired by an ad campaign several years ago -

The crown on the 1st dial is slightly off, but, overall, I think it is better than the 2nd dial, which looks like a standard aftermarket dial.

But, as always, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

2 hours ago, Timelord said:

As someone posted in another earlier thread, these replicas are far more water resistant than they are given credit for - even more so than some 6 digit priced dress watches.

Wrong. Any watch is only water-resistant when tested & proven to be so, & it is only water-resistant until it is not (ask Nanuq). Assuming any watch, especially reps (which are assembled with little or no QC), is water-resistant is an accident waiting to happen.

Overall great work, but you are far from complete. Mint is 1 thing, but, as many of us learned along the way, modification & assembly are the easy parts, relatively speaking. Making a new 60-ish year old watch look 'real' is the hard part.

Keep in mind that these are old watches that have likely been serviced (& polished) multiple times over the years. So there is likely to be wide variations of wear & finish. I think it is more important that all of the parts appear to have the same patina rather than worrying about getting a curve or individual detail 'correct'.
Most long-term Rolex collectors will tell you that a gen 'just feels right', which is another way of saying that everything appears to be the same vintage & nothing sticks out as being wrong.

22 minutes ago, automatico said:

Characters with a Warhol or Ferrari hanging on their wall will not return my calls for some reason.  

Maybe you need a breath mint?

Nanuq has a gen DRSD, which is 1 that I have used as a model before. I am sure if you ask nicely, he might provide an image or 2 (or you could just use the RWG search).

Looks good so far, but, as always, you should find & use a single gen as a guide & simply replicate the 'patina' on that gen. Otherwise, you are effectively somewhat blindly throwing darts at a dartboard.

14 minutes ago, automatico said:

After all, why should a common steel DJ with maybe $50 USD in materials and a few hours in production (one year...Ha!) sell for almost as much as a Harley D Sportster?  It's insanity...imho.  

For the same reason that an original Warhol print costs multiple millions of dollars or a new Ferrari costs hundreds of thousands - brand recognition, supply  & demand.

9 hours ago, lacour180 said:

Can anyone Chime in. Is it good or has it flaws ?

Here is a gen for reference & remember there are also minor variations -

If you want opinions on a component, post good, clear pics of the component. Otherwise, it is difficult to offer anything useful.
What I can say is that all of my 62xx Daytonas have MQ dials.

1 hour ago, Bart Cordell said:

Great picture of a beautiful watch.

7 minutes ago, J.S. said:

Bakelite is not only the brown stuff it's also in clear form too.

I think you are correct & I was wrong. Your comment reminded me of some Bakelite earrings I saw a few years ago that were translucent (red).

1 minute ago, J.S. said:

Didn't know Perspex until know. But ain't perspex and bakelite two different things? Perspex for crystal and bakelite for ring?

The only case that I am aware of where Rolex used Perspex was for the 6542's insert. Again, it was likely chosen because of its familiarity within the aircraft industry (the original GMT having been made for Pan Am). The xtal was acrylic plastic. To the best of my knowledge, Bakelite is an opaque material, so it would not be useful for components that require transparency.

A number of key players back on deck.
So what was it that beckoned you back?

1 hour ago, Nanuq said:

This "UV cement" mystery of which you speak... is this the elusive "G-S Hypo"?

Click me

2 hours ago, davethecat said:

Is Ubi or Nanuk still around?  

Both are still around - Ubi intermittently & Nanuq regularly.

4 hours ago, Nanuq said:

Nope... this crystal is just pushed in the front, and friction holds it in the bezel/insert.  No bueno.

I wonder if a dollop of UV glue around the base would hold it, seal it, and not be too visible?

A thin shmear of properly exposed UV cement around the perimeter of the xtal-to-case interface should do it. But, before allowing the watch anywhere near moisture again, I would have it pressure-tested (at least yearly); & I would also have the movement overhauled asap as the moisture you saw in the xtal may only be the tip of a slow wave of corrosion making its way through the movement underneath. A relative once of prevention now may avert a pound of pain later. At the very least, assuming the damage has not already been done, you might try placing the watch into an air-tight jar with some packets of desiccant for 24 hours, which may help to dry the innards out.

Thinking of our Italian members & hoping you are safe & untouched by the earthquake.

Wearing 1 of my Daytonas today

8 hours ago, Nanuq said:

Maybe I need to revisit the situation...

Does not look good. I hope you are going to have it overhauled asap before too much rust can take hold.