freddy333

Thanks for posting the pics. Interesting, but not my cup of tea.

The only reps I have seen, so far, of the DSSD look like the 1 that Mark is selling, which is crap From Mark's description POS Asian movement, incorrect case dimensions, too-small CGs (never thought I would be saying that about a rep), fake-looking dial (with the old depth rating), etc., etc. I am sure the factories have or are near to releasing a much better version. Hopefully, it will be made to the same standards of quality/accuracy as the new GMTIIC & will be available with a gen ETA movement, but time will tell. Here is the gen for comparison

TWS -- Thanks, but US ADs do not stock or sell Rolex parts 'over the counter'. They refer you (me) to Rolex, which does not sell parts (to retail customers) in the US either. I have had the screws on back-order from Jules Borel for over 2 months & I was told yesterday that it will be at least another few weeks & they cannot guarantee that. Like you, patience is not my strongest point either, so I am trying other options.

Ofrei's dot (pearl) is better suited to vintage inserts (without the metal surround) where it more nearly matches the original vintage Rolex pearl & stands proud of the insert plane

With nose to grindstone

I have seen or owned a number of really nice reps over the years, some truly amazing in their detail or replication of a complicated design/feature. But using my definition of super rep (a rep which, out-of-the-box, is nearly indistinguishable from the gen & goes beyond merely matching a gen's appearance/features, actually providing a glimpse into that elusive tactile experience of handling a genuine high quality luxury watch), there is only 1 replica watch which merits the title of Super Rep............. The (Correct Hand Stack) Rolex 116710LN GMT-Master II Ceramic While not perfect by any means (the date font is inaccurate, the index markers not quite as wide as the gen's, the rehaut etching is not quite as precise, the bezel intermittently resets .5mm off from its proper null position, etc.), but its minor sins err more on the side of omission than commission & they are truly overshadowed by the watch's resplendent grandeur. A classic. A legend. A true Super Rep.

I think you lost me........ The top picture (the 1 with shoes) is my chs rep. And I really do not see any difference in the space between the inside edge of the bezel & the crystal between the gen & rep. Can you be more specific or do you have closeup pics of both that show what you are seeing?

Hand stack refers to the order in which the hands -- hour, GMT, minute, second -- are installed. In the case of the gen GMTII, the lowermost hand is the hour hand, followed by the GMT or 24-hour hand, followed by the minute & second hands, respectively A correct hand stack (chs) rep would have its hands ordered the same as the gen. The incorrect hand stack (ihs) GMTII has the GMT & hour hands reversed.

Thanks. Mine averages about +12 on the timer, but that translates to about -2 or -3 on my wrist, which is within COSC standards & quite acceptable for a rep that I have done nothing with beyond the initial 40 winds to get it going In spite of its relatively minor flaws (san serif (incorrect) date font, slightly narrow index markers, etc.), I continue to be mesmerized by this watch. And that is saying alot since I am not generally fond of modern watches. As you can see, the output is relatively consistent (pretty good for an unserviced ETA) with nearly 0 beat error (the evenness of the balance's rotation in each direction) & a good, strong amplitude (the degree of rotation of the balance). All in all, quite respectable.

To answer your question -- yes. The sweep on any 28.8k bph movement (in proper working order) will be smooth & this 1 is no exception. However, I forgot to mention in my previous comments regarding the chs (correct hand stack) GMTIIC that this beauty arrived within 1 week of my placing the order. My dealings with Josh/Andrew have always been satisfactory, but this transaction definitely stands out as 1 of the best in my experience -- delivering a stunningly beautiful watch at near warp speed. In fact, to call this watch a 'rep' seems almost unfair.......it is that good. On the slightly negative side, after making my 4th reconnaissance trip to an AD to do yet another rep vs gen comparison (trying to find that 1 big flaw that mars just about every rep), I suddenly spotted a flaw that I never noticed before (though I am not sure how I missed it). As others have correctly noted, the date font is printed slightly too large, which brings the date a bit too close to the edges of the date window. But that is not a big deal since it is not really noticeable unless you know what to look for & have a gen close by for comparison. But what is noticeable, at least now that I have become aware of it, is the font itself, which is sans serif. The gen font is slightly serifed (the legs of the numbers terminate in small, perpendicular legs) as can easily be seen in these pics of 2 different gen GMTIICs As far as I can tell from the pics on the collectors' sites & the 1 ihs rep I have seen in person, all versions of the GMTIIC rep use the same date wheel with incorrect sans serif fonts.

In the case of salespeople, especially those in car showrooms who tend to make their living on commission, I think their differing treatment of you (based on your appearance) was due more to their perception of you as a potential sale than to how successful they thought you may or may not be. Having spent alot of years in sales (including car sales), I have done this many times myself. Either you look, to the salesperson, like a potential sale or you do not. I am not suggesting that this is correct or even a proper way to be successful as a salesperson, but it is simply just the reality of the way human nature & the sales game usually plays out.

Thanks, Alex. Excellent post.

The stems are the same, but the DJ & Seadweller cases are different dimensions, so you will probably need to trim the stem to fit the case. I purchased a set of 3 new 1570 stems from ebay. I think they cost something like $35 for the set. The stem was fit with a gen Triplock 702 crown/tube. Unfortunately, I misplaced the dial screws (the 2 screws that clamp the dial feet inside the movement) when I overhauled the movement, so I have not been able to complete the project (with gen silver flat-3 DW) yet. So if anyone has a spare pair of 1570 dial screws, please let me know.

Some of the confusion may be due to the fact that the Seadweller was based on the Comex 5514 (Helium valve no date Sub)). However, unlike the 5514, which was designed as a true 'tool' watch for & sold exclusively to the Comex diving company, the Seadweller 1665 was a commercial retail product designed & available for sale to the general public (although it was still intended for professional divers). Rolex felt that because the public had requested a date version of the Sub, the lack of a date feature might limit potential 1665 sales, even among professional divers, so it was included. It is possible that Rolex produced a few no-date Seadwellers, but, if they did, they were intended for internal (market) testing purposes only & never officially released for sale or listed in any of their product catalogs.

I will second that. In the really good old days, you used to be able to buy OEM Rolex parts (over the counter) from just about any AD. Those days are long gone.

To the best of my knowledge, Rolex never released a Seadweller without a date. If a Seadweller rep exists without a date (or with a cyclops), it is a fantasy watch (designed by the rep maker & not based on any official Rolex design).

The major difference between the Swiss & (most) Asian versions is the fit & finish of the parts/assembly. I have seen at least 3 different versions of the 28.8k bph version of the A7750 & 1 of them (in a secs at 6 Daytona) appeared to have been manufactured to near Swiss standards. Not exactly the same, but surprisingly close. The finish quality of the parts was, to my eye, the equal of the ETA & it had a similar feel as well. But most of the Asian 7750s are built to less stringent tolerances, which is something you can feel.

I suggest you use the Search feature & do a bit of research, beginning with By-Tor's review of the Noob GMT 16710.

Yeah, you do not find good Daytona reps/frankens hanging around just any old place.

After reading this, I started to chuckle to myself. But, then, I thought, 'Why am I laughing?......If there was ever a case of the kettle calling the pot black........' Back to the beater

Modern Daytona today

Every time I pay an outrageous price to buy a gen Rolex part for use in a franken I say to myself, 'Think of it as an investment, because in a year or 2 that same part will cost twice what I just paid for it.' Looking back, that seems to have been right on the mark. Same thing with V72s.

I noted the same bezel misalignment a couple days ago, so I guess it is a (minor) design problem & not a defect in my watch. There seems to be a bit of play in the centering mechanism, which I think is the problem. The white material you see on some link screws may be GC crystal cement, which alot of watchmakers use in place of loctite because they always have it on their bench. Unfortunately, GC is not intended for use in moving parts, so it does not last very long. Loctite (blue) always works with these screws for me.

I would glue the lume onto the marker & then, after letting them dry over night (or for as long as the glue manufacture recommends), glue the marker/lume back onto the dial. I would check all of the other markers on the dial to see if any other 1s are loose before you reassemble everything. The dial does not 'snap' onto the movement (unless it is a VERY cheap rep, in which case anything is possible). There should be 2 dial 'feet' (actually 1/8" long pins) that stick out of the rear of the dial. The feet fit into corresponding holes on the front face of the movement plate. Just align the center hole & date window over the movement & you should see where the feet fit into the movement plate. The dial feet are held in place either by 2 small 'C' shaped friction locks that swing in against the sides of each foot or by 2 screws that enter the movement from the side (near where the feet enter).