freddy333

What 16528?

Getting some mysterious wrist time

The Silix version is highly inaccurate, but horological inaccuracy on a woman's wrist is rarely held against her (or noticed). Joshua sells a version that is highly accurate (nearly indistinguishable from the gen), but powered by the highly unreliable secs at 6 7750 movement. The former looks like a fake & the latter may be a ticking time-bomb. Choose your poison.

I have been collecting watches (both gen & rep) for many years & my tastes have changed as I have aged & learned more about watches. I began, like many people, with an eye towards the more fashionable, popular or high tech end of the watch market, with yellow gold factoring in as the common denominator throughout my collection. But as my style of dress has morphed from fashionable to classical, so have my tastes in watches. But I think the deciding factor that best set the direction of my current collecting habits came, one day in late 2000, when someone on TZ posted a picture of his all-steel collection of about a dozen vintage Rolex watches. Instantly, I recognized the understated sophistication & monochromatic purity of these steel antiques & quickly began to realize how much testicular impact my 'power-pop' grouping lacked in comparison. The image of that all-steel vintage Rolex collection has since become ingrained into my psyche & has forever changed the way I look at & collect watches. So within the next year, I had sold, traded or tossed my Royal Oaks & Pans as well as most of my yellow gold watches & embarked on a mission to re-educate & re-direct my collecting around a more Rolex-centric, steel theme. Today, with a few notable exceptions, my collection is right where I want it to be -- mostly vintage Rolex steel with a few non-Rolex or non-steel models whose beauty I have always appreciated, but rarely wear (because yellow gold looks ostentatious on me).

I had pretty much said all I have to say on the general subject of reviewer compensation, but By-Tor's comment opens another can of worms that I feel merits a separate discussion. When it comes to referencing sources within a 'review' (I draw a bold journalistic line between what constitutes an uncompensated review & a compensated promotion -- the compensation (whatever form it takes) being the key here), it seems to me that a reviewer has 2 options -- 1. either leave out all references to the source of the item under review, or 2. include (as part of the research/reviewing process) all RWG sellers that offer the same model, so the seller who provided the item for review will not receive a boost in their sales as a direct result of the 'review' & the taint of seller/reviewer collaboration cannot be raised. That, to me, is the only way for a reviewer to be able to honestly & accurately state that their review is neither a promotion for a particular seller/source, nor does it directly benefit the seller or source of the item under review.

If Pugwash follows the guidelines, then it makes no difference.

Having done a bit of (audio) reviewing myself, this is the general guideline I follow: To avoid any appearance -- real or imagined -- of special consideration or impropriety, the item under review must be returned to the seller immediately after the review is completed. If the reviewer wishes to keep the item, he/she must purchase it (at retail or whatever is the generally advertised price) through normal distribution channels. The seller or maker of the item under review may not participate (beyond answering questions that may be posed by the reviewer) or be present during the reviewing process, which includes any article that may result from that process. As a consumer, I tend to discount (or take with a huge grain of salt) any commentary from a reviewer who received the item under consideration for free or at a discounted rate below the currently advertised price.

Wearing this gen 1601 with black 'Mystery' dial for a bit until I transplant its motor into my Double-Red

The Venus/Lemania movements have symmetrical (not asymmetrical) pushers. I agree that the dial is not this watch's best feature, but the watch looks nice & that Venus movement is smooth, silky and a self-winder like the Valjoux used in gens or DWs. Not a bad piece for the price.

He popped in, briefly, a week or 2 ago, but I got the impression that he is busy with other things (life) & not really focused on watches or RWG right now.

If customs is holding the watch, they probably already know it is a fake. I do not know what the laws are in your country pertaining to the buying of contraband (fake trademarked) goods, but I suspect the watch was held for that reason. Therefore, I would either let them have the watch & contact the seller. If you really want it, I would find some way to claim it without admitting that you purchased it. Maybe send them a letter stating that you are a journalist and the watch was sent to you (by the watch company) to review for an article you are writing (make sure your letter is well-written & spell checked or they will never believe you are a journalist). That way, you have 'plausible deniability' & it is difficult for them to prove that you purchased contraband goods.

Does anyone know if the caseback from Josh's 7750-powered 6263 (Dia 39mm x 12.5mm Thk) will fit his 116520 (Dia 40mm x 13.5mm Thk) The reason I ask is because the caseback on all 1165xx rep watches is wrong -- they all come with a beveled caseback similar to this one (though the width of the bevel may vary) The caseback on gen Daytonas is completely flat across the back, similar to this (though 11652xx Daytonas are brushed instead of polished) Here is a picture of the caseback on 1 of the Daytonas given as prizes to the winners of the Daytona 500 race (note that this is a picture of a gen 'Winner' caseback, not the well-known rep with a similar, but fake engraving on a beveled caseback). Gen 1165xx casebacks look like this, but without the engraving I have 1 of these pre-Daytonas that Josh sells (Dia 37mm x 12.5mm Thk), which has the correct flat face, but its diameter is about 2mm's too small Fitting one of these flat casebacks to a modern Daytona rep would not only improve the appearance of our 1165xx reps (since the caseback would look the same as the gen), but, more importantly, it would allow the watch to sit lower on your wrist, which helps to offset the slightly thicker case used for most of these reps.

Ending the workweek with the beater (the weekend begins tomorrow, Saturday)

I am rarely able to make it through an entire album from most artists, but I have been listening to the Violent Femmes for most of the day, especially the song 'Blister in the Sun'. Great tune. At this very minute, I am listening to a demo recording of a tune I penned many moons ago that I just received from an old friend. With apologies to George Gershwin.......wacka-doo.......wacka-doo.

I hope your link is selling them for a more reasonable price than Phong's.............

You can also track ems via usps.com, but neither site is likely to update until the day (or day before) delivery. Whether a signature is required depends on how the package was shipped, but most of our collectors specify a signature in order to leave the package. If the local delivery company is unable to deliver the package, they will usually leave a note and attempt redelivery the next day. I think the policy is to make 2 delivery attempts & then the package is held at the local shipper's office for a week to give you time to contact them. If they are not contacted during that time, the package is returned to the sender. But check the ems site or your seller to be sure. Generally, about 1 week is the norm for delivery in the US.

That just stretches the stretch out even further. Seems pretty unlikely to me.

No. I thought of that, too.

You can try any epoxy that is made for steel (check your local hardware or automotive parts store), but my guess is that with such a small point of contact between the 2 parts & the frequency of stress they receive (whenever you use the clasp) it will probably break off again. The only permanent fix would be to weld the 2 pieces together or replace the broken parts with a single piece as on the gen bracelets. I do not wear modern Rolex watches, so I cannot be too specific, but you might check with some of the other collectors to see if they offer a better quality rep bracelet (or search ebay for a gen).

There are some Viet Nam sourced Sub & Seadweller cases that appear to, but I have not seen one of these in person.

Depending on the dial color & the amount of attention you can handle, you might try something a bit more bold (Red lizard Di-Modell with gen steel Rolex buckle)

Thank you Repaustria, but this I know. In nearly 25 years of collecting, I have never handled a Rolex movement that sounded like this 1. But I suppose it is possible that everything in the movement was recently serviced (as evidenced by its near pristine condition), with the exception of the automatic device module. But that sure seems like a stretch to me.

'Blue'?????? Take the filter off your monitor.......the 1601 dial is midnight black.

I bought it from a reliable reseller & he did not have any history on the watch. But I am still waiting to hear back from him about the 'swishing'. Judging from the fact that the hands & dial contain yellow gold & it resides in a steel case with a steel crown, the movement was obviously re-cased at some point. And if it was re-cased recently & the movement was serviced at that time, that could explain its near pristine condition. But I would just consider its pristine condition to be a bonus were it not for that ETA-like 'swishing' sound it makes when its manually wound. I have never seen a Rolex movement, especially 1 of these, that sounded like an ETA. In its favor, the gears & (blued) hairspring appear to be made of the right stuff & it reads more like a Rolex (very stable) than an ETA on my timer readings, which I would not expect to see with a clone. So I am truly stumped.

If a watch is poorly made or in a poorly state, manual winding will only exacerbate an already bad situation. Otherwise, I am not aware of any problems inherent in manually winding an automatic watch. I have 3 or 4 self-winders that lost their rotors (because I removed them) which have been wound at least weekly (though not daily) for up to 4 years without any ill effects. This is 1 of those questions like 'Which is worse - running my watch on a winder for long periods or letting it wind down & sit idle?' -- opinions vary.