freddy333

The owner of the 1st secs at 6 Daytona treated with powdered graphite dropped his watch the other day & just dropped it off to have the scratches polished out (done). So I am wearing this (until the owner picks it up later) today Here it is with a friend

Nice find & I agree about the dial. Pity.

The gens all have flat sides The Silix case arrived with rounded sides, tiny lug holes & slight points on either side of the crown The lugs have been worn down a bit from 'years of polishing'.

Thanks, RG. The donor watch (2893-2 & dial) should be here within a week & I am still awaiting a crown, which should also be here by then. If I do not run into any roadblocks along the way, the watch could be complete this weekend.

This gen has rounded tips (probably from years of polishing), but I have lots of pics of other gens that have more pointed tips. So I decided to leave them as is for the time being. I can always go back & round them later if I decide to go that route.

No, I agree that it sucks. I wish the engraving was more accurate. But considering that this is supposed to be a Sub case & the last thing I ever expected to find engraved between its lugs was '6542', I just thought it was worth mentioning. Especially, since this case is being marketed as a Sub case & I took a chance in thinking it might be amenable to being 'prodded' into use as a 6542. Just sort of added support to my suspicion that the case was better suited for use as a 6542 since the gen & MY 6542 parts fit it so well. Here is the freshly completed rols176 case, now with appropriately flat sides & properly sized lug holes to accept gen 2mm dia springbars A gen for comparison

I cast my vote with the others - GMT.

Me likie. Camera details, please.

It IS a 6542. Until today, after seeing the '1066' engraving between the lugs at 12 I had no reason to even bother to check the other side of the case because the watch was designed as a vintage Sub, so I just assumed the case was designed to be a vintage Sub (even though, strangely, gen 6542 parts seem to fit the case as though it was made for them). So I had long ago accepted the fact that the engravings were wrong (for a 6542). But, once again, I have learned my lesson - Never Assume Anything. As I was about to begin the modification work on the case, I found this between the other set of lugs (which explains alot) Boy, are the Silix kids missing the boat by marketing this thing as a 'Cartier Sub'.

I find them this way - open the local telephone book & look under 'watch & clock repair' (or similar). Then phone a shop & ask if they will work on an ETA-powered rep watch (assuming your rep is ETA-powered). Some will, some will not.

Beauty, panache & an eye-catcher. About 5 Gs (in steel)

That & we would then have a ready supply of new movements to use instead of having to peruse auctions & hope you get a working (or repairable) 20+ year-old, used movement. The price is on his main Rolex 6263 page (350,000 yen, which translates to $3,272).

Some sellers (like Honpo) are not real accurate in displaying the same watch on the same page. So, in general, you need to be careful. But if the watch contains that movement, it has asymmetrical pushers. And they look properly asymmetrical in all of these pictures. Yes, that is correct. Quite expensive, but considering the ever-increasing prices of vintage Rolex, not altogether surprising.

Nanuq, can you clarify your comment a bit? Are you saying that A is more period correct, but B would make it look different than a Sub case?

Yes, but you are not going to like the answer - Honpo.

Yes, it lacks patina. But that is not the thing that caught my eye or inspired me to post the pic here. What makes this 1 different from all the other V72s I have seen is the similar grain on ALL of the parts, not just the usual (aftermarket) chrono bridges, but ALL the parts. And if you look below the balance wheel, you can see that the pallet plate itself has the same unfinished texture that we see in the A7750 & some recent ETA copies. I have never seen that on any gen V72 before.

Funny how that 1 grows on you.........

I have handled enough of these -- vintage OEM & modded with aftermarket parts (a la Phong), but this 1 looks entirely new. Not just new chrono bridges, but all the bridges, plates & gears look like they were made with the same grain & surface finish. The pillar plate also has that unmistakable cheap look (rough finish) that many other Chinese copies have. Of course, since they have copied many ETA movements, a Valjoux should not really come as much of a surprise. But imagine the possibilities...........

Very confusing. The gen 6542 was apparently made with 2 (& possibly 3) different bezel variations, depending on which vendor's stock Rolex had on hand that day. 1 version looked very similar to my A (like Avitt's 1st link, but which has deeper beveling from the bottom of the teeth to the bottom of the bezel) & the other version is very similar to B (like Avitt's 2nd link). Initially, both were made of brass with a zinc plating (which lasted about as long as the average 'gold' plating does on a rep watch, tending to fade/wear off & for the same reasons) & later made out of steel. So, either version is actually correct. The question is which of the 2 bezels -- A or B, as you see them, will be best on this project watch? Before posting the poll, I was pretty sold on A, especially, since it already looks naturally beat up. Then, when the 1st comments started rolling in, I was persuaded that B was the better options. But, now, I am confused again.

Ah, white lume.

6239 non-Daytona Daytona Sunday

Another great review, By-Tor. Too bad the rep is not more accurate - the gen is a definite head-turner.

The bead-blasting turned out great. The case looks like titanium & the strap completes the picture. Have you thought of bead-blasting the snaps in the strap to make them match the case? Might be a nice finishing touch. Anyway, very nice work, Avitt. No wonder you have been so quiet.

You presuppose a spam-free world, which is about as unlikely as a rep-free world.