freddy333

I agree. I think MY outdid himself on this 1. And considering phase 1's humble (Silix) beginnings (ROLS176 at right & no, the bracelet in this pic is not the gen) I am amazed at how well it turned out

Teejay gets the cigar. Within minutes of my completing work on this stretchable 7206 rivet bracelet, my latest MY dial arrived in the mail (I also received another insert, but I am reserving that 1 for the 2 project). Nanuq, do I sense some eagerness?

The mainspring barrel in auto-wind watches is purposely designed to 'slip' the spring when it reaches full-wind, so, in essence, with this mod, you have the best of both worlds - a functionally manual-wind movement that cannot be overwound. As to the number of winds, I will defer to Rolex, who says it better than I can (& yes, this goes for most watches, including the faux-manual-wind 7750)

My phase 1 GMT got 2 new important updates today. Can you spot them?

Diesel - I am sorry to hear about the problems. Hopefully, they will all get sorted out in short order.

For pics, try google or timezone. To buy gens, try Stan, Andy or ebay. To buy reps, try the trading forum or some of the collectors.

Yes.

The ETA 7750 has a 46 hour power reserve, but I do not know if the Asian version comes fitted with the same type of mainspring the ETA uses. However, based entirely on anecdotal evidence, I would guess the springs (& power reserve) are effectively the same. You have 2 options when converting the A7750 into a faux manual wind Remove only the rotor, which disables the automatic winding functions, but leaves the auto-wind wheels in place. This is easier, but the downside is that since you must now manually wind the movement at least every other day (if the watch is to be used as a daily wearer), you will eventually damage the auto-wind components (see Ziggy's A7750 articles for details of the possible problems that may result). Remove the rotor & the 4 wheels in the auto-wind module & then replace the empty auto-wind bridge (or leave it off altogether - 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other). This is a bit more work, but since you are removing all of the components that might be damaged by daily winding, you can then manually wind the watch without worry. (A 3rd alternative might be to remove the rotor & the 2nd intermediate wheel, which essentially sits in between the auto-wind module & the ratchet wheel (which winds the mainspring). This would disable the auto-wind function (since its connection to the mainspring barrel (the missing 2nd intermediate wheel) is no longer there) without having to remove all of the components. Still, considering that you have to remove the auto-wind module anyway, you might as well go all the way.) I do not have a 7750 schematic handy, but the components are similar to the 2846. Either remove all of the wheels in this picture & reinstall the empty bridge assembly or just remove the entire auto-wind assembly (& leave it off) The 7750 is modular in its construction. That is, it was designed to accept a set of sub-assemblies (like the auto-wind module). So the movement will run just fine without the auto-wind module. Here is a picture of 1 of mine with some of the auto-wind parts removed. I chose to leave the empty auto-wind bridges in place because they add a small bit of heft to the watch, which is a bit too light compared to my Valjoux-powered frankens

Early 6239s were fitted with19mm riveted 6635-7206 with (permanently attached) 71 end links. Then, in the late 60s, Rolex introduced the folded link 7835 (also 19mm), which was fitted to the 6239 with (permanently attached) 271 end links. So either is correct. You are unlikely to find any of these gen bracelets &, if you do, you will pay a king's ransom for them. I use a folded link 7835 with (permanently attached) 357 end links on all of my Daytonas, which fit well & offer a very reasonable alternative. If you are going the rep/aftermarket bracelet route, I would go with the standard solid link & steer clear of the riveted bracelets. They are real crap & make even gen watch heads look suspicious when I have seen them fitted.

I have to agree with Ziggy, but I think many watchmakers go the dunk-&-run route because of recommendations from generally reliable sources like L&R or Bulova. My ultrasonic's manual includes this note - 'Partially disassembling watch movements will save many profitable minutes in servicing a watch. The Watchmaster Ultrasonic Cleaner will clean most watches thoroughly without the removal of cap jewels, balance, time train, dial train or setting parts! Ultrasonic cavitation actually scrubs thoroughly if watches are only partially disassembled. Inspection and oiling will necessitate further disassembly, however. With a little experience, each individual watch-repairman will soon learn how much time can be saved in this specific operation.' Note that it specifies 'further disassembly' for proper inspection & oiling, which means the shortcut is only relevant for known good movements that do not require servicing. Ziggy has covered all of the cons that I have always heard, but what seems even more troubling to me is your inability to thoroughly dry the internal components using this partial disassembly procedure. And that leaves all sorts of rusty nightmarish scenarios floating around my head. So, in answer to the question 'Is a quick shower better than nothing at all?', I would say yes, but with the reservations I mentioned above. I do know that journeymen watchmakers, those guys who either apprenticed with their fathers or went to a formal watchmaking school, always laugh at the idea of doing anything short of a full & complete disassembly (down to removing (& replacing) the mainspring from the barrel & separating the hairspring from the balance). But these guys operate in a world that says you either do the job right or not at all, instead of the bottom-line do-the-minimum-required-by-law world of today. As far as I am concerned, if Ziggy is unconvinced (to take the shortcut), that is good enough for me.

If you ask 3 people how they polish, you will likely get 3 variations on a theme. I completely coat the cloth wheel with green rouge & re-coat every few minutes. (If I am working on gold, I usually follow the green with blue rouge, but, for steel, green is all I use or require to produce a factory-like finish.) Run the dremel at its slowest speed & do not use force. Just hold the dremel firmly over the area you are working on & the weight of the tool should apply the correct amount of pressure. The rouge does all the work. One hint I will also pass along is to keep the polishing wheel moving. Heat can build up on the metal surface if you hover over the same spot too long (more than 5-6 seconds), which can 'blue' the metal. Bluing is a good thing when it is done on purpose, but you do not want to end up with bluish, pitted spots on the sides or caseback of your watch. If you keep the wheel moving, you should not have any problems. Sears (I usually buy them out as I use alot of them) or any hardware store (brick or online) that sells Dremels. Make sure you get the cloth wheel, under $4. There are a number of polishing wheels made out of felt & other materials, but the polishing wheel you want will contain the word 'cloth' on the package.

Because of the cavitation effects of ultrasonic cleaning, you can get away with slightly less powerful degreasing solvents. However, for hand or agitation machine cleaning, I think it is probably best to use a standard cleaning solution or, if mixing your own, higher strengths of the solvents since the solvents are forced to shoulder alot more of the actual cleaning than is the case with an ultrasonic. (By the way, you can get very acceptable results from 1 of the inexpensive ultrasonics designed for home use. That is what I started out with & still use for larger clock parts. Search for 1 of the Haier ultrasonics on ebay - about $40 or any of the other similar units. Highly recommended.)

No. I originally thought it was, but now that I look at it again, it is definitely not a gen Rolex. At least not the Rolex signed bridges (fonts are wrong).

Do not bring your rep in the store with you (or leave it in your pocket). You are there ONLY to gain experience with gen watches, not to do comparisons with reps. For that, there is nothing to be afraid of. Especially in the current global economy, the sales people should be more than happy to assist you. If they ask whether you are buying today, be honest & tell them you are just looking. But I would not say that you have no intention of buying. Who knows, you may some day.

True, there are some Super reps (the Patek Nautilus, CHS GMTIIC & your SFSO come to mind), which are very good, indeed. But even a Super rep, as good as it is, is bested when placed side-by-side with its gen counterpart & 1 makes a tactile (hands-on) inspection. At least, that has ALWAYS been my experience. This, as you know, is the reasoning behind franken-building.

Yes, but you are comparing apples & oranges. Now I would be the 1st to agree that Rolex holds no stranglehold on timing accuracy (any properly serviced ETA or Asian-made POS can be made to match a Rolex in time-keeping accuracy), but if 1 inspects & handles even the most basic of Rolex staples like my old 16014, with its 'cheap' bracelet, & compares it to any commercially made rep of the same model, I am sure that they would come to the same conclusions I have I wish I could find it now, but a year or 2 ago Ubi did a brilliant macro photo comparison of crowns - a gen Triplock compared with a rep. A number of differences were revealed, but the most obvious & telling was the crispness & definition of the gen crown's 'teeth' & the construction of the spring assembly that controls the crown's release functions (from the tube). Again, the difference is in the details, but those relatively small differences, when taken in tandem with similar differences in other parts of a watch, produce a fit-&-finish that just cannot be matched at rep prices. This is not to say that Rolex (& other luxury brands) does not overcharge for their goods. They do. But, then so do the rep makers who charge $200 for a watch that cost them $25 (or less) to make. You have to keep in mind that Timex, Casio & Seiko make watches. Rolex (& other luxury gen makers) makes jewelry that tells the time. And, while these 2 groups have overlapping purposes, I think their design goals are more tangential than parallel.

No offense taken (I have a thick skin anyway & rarely take offense from respectful commentary). I would encourage you to take this test - take a reconnaissance trip to your local AD & try on a few Rolex watches (do not worry about wasting the sales person's time, that is what they are there for - just do not tell them that you are comparing gens to reps ). Place the watches on your wrist, operate the bracelet clasps, wind the crowns & set the time. I think you will come away with a new appreciation of Rolex & a better understanding of the differences.

Fortunately, even Rolex themselves will admit that the differences between the types of steel used on their older & newer watches lie mostly in the latter's anti-corrosive qualities & not so much in visible differences. I cannot tell them apart unless I see them both together under controlled lighting conditions. But others may have better eyes than I do (the visual differences between WG & SS are another story altogether).

It is not just the type of steel that differs, but also, at least in the case of bracelets, the gauge of the steel used. Rolex uses a slightly heavier gauge of metal which makes a quite discernible difference in the feel of their 'cheap' clasps, especially on vintage models.

God, as they say, is in the details. And it is in those details that the differences between the very best reps & gen Rolex watches become apparent. The fit-&-finish of a genuine Rolex is several notches above a WM9 or anything similar. Real white gold bezels sparkle & glisten in a way that polished steel cannot match, no matter how well you polish or oil it. Genuine Twinlock & Triplock crowns/tubes have a smooth, quality feel that aftermarket parts cannot provide. Genuine crystals have a shimmer that few aftermarket crystals can match. Etc, etc. In my opinion, the sum of the gen parts adds up to a whole that no commercially made rep will ever match.

All watch parts houses sell something similar. Try cousinsuk.com.

The paint may have been removed by an ultrasonic cleaner. Sorry to hear about your car, but I am glad to hear you are alright Stephane.

I think the sharpness rule fell by the wayside when NDtrading & Jewelryandwatch & other aftermarket dial resellers began producing higher quality printing (NDtrading dial - 100% aftermarket - printing was very crisp unlike typical rep dials) Now you really do need to pay attention to the tiny details (distance between index markers & lume dots, squareness of rectangle markers, correct coronet shape per dial version, texture of dial face, etc).