freddy333

I think the Admin fixed whatever it was for now. He took the system down for several minutes a few hours ago & it has been running better since it came back online. I suspect there was a process or 2 running amok that had to be shut down. Hopefully, that will be that.

I think for most people, the hand stack issue is a non-issue. But as your knowledge & experience (about these watches) grows, you find that when YOU know your watch is lacking an essential feature, it becomes uncomfortable to wear. Or at least less of a joy. Once you know the difference it is kind of like walking around with 1 black sock & 1 navy blue sock -- most of the public would probably never notice the different shades & as long as YOU did not notice the difference when you put them on in the morning, it probably will not spoil your day. But if you walked out of your house knowing you were wearing mismatched socks, you probably would not be on top of your game that day. It is the same with these relatively minor details on watches -- once you learn/know the difference, let us just say that most people would rather not risk being seen wearing mismatched socks - no matter how difficult they are to see. At least that is the way I feel.

A real beauty. After I receive the GMTIIC, this 1 is next on my rep list. By-Tor has done his work well.

This is the picture on cubic-works website This is the part I just received from cubic-works Here is the link It is alot closer to the gen 3035 datewheel than the stock 2836-2's is, but it definitely will not pass close scrutiny (the gen is serifed & cubic-works is sans serif, & the printing quality is 'spotty'). But, for $19 & for an ETA-based franken-just cobbled together mostly out of spares, I cannot complain. Though if Borel has gen 3055 discs available, I may consider using that instead.

Yes, like I mentioned above, no one, least of all the Chinese rep makers, would invest the time & money to tool up to produce a new model & then produce only a relative hand full of them before changing the design and/or discontinuing it. At least, not unless there is a serious problem with it (serious to their bottom line I mean). Actually, I find it somewhat hard to believe that production runs are limited to 500. I would expect an initial run of something more along the lines of 5,000 or more.

Hopefully, 1 of the members who already received their watch can chime in, but it could just be the ambient lighting in the pictures.

150x & 160x DJs had flat-top 3s & the initial runs of 1601x DJs had them.

He forgot to mention the bed wetting.

Not to belabor the point, but this picture better illustrates the fading effect of the original black (to brown). Look at the Sub in the bottom right corner as well as the 1 above it However, I bet if you let Ziggy perform his magic on it (lume & vintagizing)............

I was trying to be kind, but Doc is exactly correct. Gen (with appropriately faded bezel) in top left corner I still like the watch though. Just needs a better dial. You have to be very careful with NDTrading dials -- a couple are pretty respectable, but many are obvious aftermarket jobs.

I was looking at that dial too, but the colors look off to me. I guess it looks better in real life. Love the watch.

Have you been talking to my analyst?

Right after the ratings system was removed, RWG seemed to load pages a bit faster. But over the past few weeks, it seems to have slowed to a crawl again. It takes longer for pages to load now than it did when the ratings system was active. Am I the only 1 who is experiencing this (from 3 different computers)?

I just spoke with Julesborel & they have received a number of white, flat-top 3 generic date discs for Rolex 3035 movements Click here Stilty -- I forgot to ask if they received any 3055s. Sorry.

Beautiful, except that the date is not centered, which I never noticed in anyone else's pictures of this rep (Lani - this is why I wanted to see more dates). I hope this is the exception to the rule rather than a hint of things to come (my way). An off-center date can turn a super rep that looks like a gen into a nice rep that looks like a nice rep.

You may find this interesting - click here

Hmmmm..... I did notice the darker appearance of the engraving, but, actually, when I see them side by side, the rep's darker engraving looks more 'gen' (I was planning to lightly sand the rehaut while I have the movement out to install the gen Triplock & I think that should lighten it up a bit). As for the alignment of the engraving at 3 & 9, you are right (never noticed that before). But, then, I have never noticed it (or bothered to look) once on any gen ever since Rolex started engraving the rehaut. It would be nice if they got that right, but, as you know, they ALWAYS get something wrong on an otherwise near-perfect rep. If this is that 'something', I can easily live with it since they did get right the part of the engraving I DO always check -- the engraved crown should be dead-on at 12 with the 'X' centered over the 59 minute mark & the 'R' centered over the 1 minute mark, which they are. But, as always, my benchmark is that the watch pass for a gen from a viewing distance of a few feet. And from that distance, especially the way light tends to cast either shadows or glare spots on the rehaut, I doubt that anyone would be able to see that much detail. Even so, if that is the biggest flaw in this rep, I think I can live with it.

That will do fine, Lani. Great work. Thank you. Except for the wide spacing between the '3' & '1' (By-Tor's 16710 has the same funky spacing on that date), I am sold. Where do I order? No, wait.......I already ordered. I can see why not. And as long as the index markers are the correct size & in the right locations, the brightness of the lume is pretty much a secondary issue to me.

Bergeon 5444 satin finish bar.

It sounds like the tang at the end of the mainspring that sticks out through a small hole in the barrel wall may have either broken off or become dislodged & the mainspring is just spinning, loose, in the barrel. In either case, you probably need to replace the mainspring, which is not an expensive part (approx $10).

I will end Sunday wearing this And begin the work week wearing this

1st, Josh/Andrew were reported to have said that there would be no more chs versions after the initial run ran out. Then, glory be, there was a 2nd run, but no more after that.....then a 3rd run, but no more after that. Ok, wires get crossed, mistakes can happen, s-h-i-t happens. I get that. But, now, there will be more chs versions in 6 to 9 months????????? And someone else said that another seller would have them in a week or so????????? WHERE IS MY THORAZINE??????

The '1' is usually very easy to copy because it is just a line. I agree that it looks centered. But the more complex numbers, with twists & turns, are alot more telling of how accurate the date font is. And since we have the gen pic of the '22' (with the watch on its side), I think that would make or break the font issue. At least for me. My thoughts exactly.

The more I look at this picture, the more I think that if you heated/removed/AR'd the underside of the cyclops & threw a gen crown/tube on there..........I will be damned if I would be able to tell it apart from the gen (assuming the rest of the datewheel looks as good as the '1'). And I am starting to think that that is the reason so many of us have been mesmerized by what is otherwise a rather unassuming (and, for me, uninspiring) watch. These things just look so much like the gen that I cannot stand it.