freddy333

Try here

If you are referring to the expense of the gen Milgauss (the new one), the relatively high price tag is due, in part, to its magnetic shielding. I am sure that Rolex is also well aware of the popularity and high auction prices paid for vintage Milgausses & they are simply good business people ('if the customer is willing to pay more, then charge more'). I would consider the anniversary version (with the green tinted crystal), but I have absolutely no use for a watch with an orange color scheme. Yuk.

Gio -- I bought mine on CQout a few years ago (you can find alot of additional & very useful info here). The crown (and pushers) is gen on my watch and I purposely countersunk the gen tube so the crown would not sit flush against the case because I have a number of gen pictures (from TZ) having returned from Rolex service that way. I could have installed it normally, but I like the look and do that with all my watches (with CGs) when I upgrade crowns/tubes. I am not seeing what you are seeing about the 5 minute markers. I have compared my watch to many gens and have never noticed any difference between the markers, but these all are reps and Rolex is well known for having dial variations. So anything is possible.

You might want to check out my comments following Ubi's mini-review of his friend's 116520 (which is the same version you have). I think it was back in April, but you can probably Search it out based on '116520' and my handle.

Thank you. The restaurant was not dark and, after messing around with watches for 20 or so years, I guess you get a bit anal.

Thank you. I think I mentioned in a couple other threads that I want a gen dial, but the only white one I have seen sold for nearly $1,000. Not sure I am with you on the bezel, but I will try to locate a couple more pictures of gens with similar bezels (to mine) in my hard drive archives. The crown (and tube) & pushers are gens, but the metal spacers that are supposed to go between the pusher body & the case were out of stock and I did not want to wait for them, which may explain why the pushers appear a bit too close to the case. The 'chrome' appearance I would, again, chalk up to what you get for an approximately $230 watch. But some of that may also be due to the successive applications of automotive polish that I applied following the dremeling, rouging & buffing.

Thanks. The sub dial spacing & Daytona font (particularly the "A"s)...... I think the only way to make a $230 (original price paid) watch indistinguishable from an $8,000 - $15,000 (depending on your luck and patience threshold) one is to replace the quite beautiful rep dial for a gen, and, believe me, I have been searching. The bezel, however, is pretty dead on. Rolex originally issued these watches with the earlier 16520 bezel and narrow hands and then, later (around 2002 I think) updated the bezels with smaller & slightly bolder fonts and replaced the hour/minute hands with wider versions (which I think was a step in the right direction since they make the time easier to read). The gen 116520 I included in the original post is one of those early versions (pic came from one of the long-time TZ'ers).

Delta - Thank you for the kind & encouraging words. I have written a good deal about this particular watch due to its unusual longevity. I did a quick search and found one rather lengthy (and VERY informative) post (here) that contains alot of background & describes some of the differences between the various versions of these seconds at 6 Daytonas (my comments begin towards the end of the first page).

Since I spent the past 2 days working on its CGs (and had to repair a brake problem (with input from the Zigmeister, in case anyone is keeping score) along the way), I think it only fitting that I end the week by taking the Daytona to work today

Try these

Zig -- I think the previous posters' (positive) comments pretty much sum up my feelings as well. So I will just say that regardless of what anyone says about you, you are alright in my book. p.s. Oh, one more thing: Wherever & whenever you land, remember to keep the shiny side up. Merry Christmas & Ho Ho Ho!!!

A few months ago, Pugwash made an observation about the way the crown on gen Rolexes with CGs sits closer to the perimeter of the bezel (where it overlaps the edge of the case) than the crown on a rep does. At first, the whole notion struck me as a non-issue & I dismissed it thinking that no one could possibly ever detect the difference out in the wild, even at close range (arm's length). So I happily went about my business without giving it another thought. Until last week............... While walking to my table in a restaurant, I passed a guy sitting at the bar wearing a Daytona -- a twotone version of the white 116520 that I had on. So, obviously, it caught my attention. It was yuppie night at this restaurant and the guy (and his lady friend) fit the part to a 't', so I just thought, 'Huh, poor guy probably got tired of waiting and waiting and waiting for a steel one, and took the steel & gold model. Still, Cool'. Our table was not that far from the bar, so I caught a few glances of his watch while we ate our dinner. But something odd kept catching my eye, the way something that just does not look right keeps tugging at you even though you are not really aware of what the problem is. Maybe it was the light in the restaurant or my mood or my viewing angle or sun spots, but it finally dawned on me that Mr. Success is wearing a high end Daytona rep (like mine). Once I focused in on this, I started to look more often & was able to detect the telltale problems with his CGs, which were covering too much of the crown (he had one of the later versions with wider CGs like Ubi's & Stephane's). He was far enough away from me so that I could not be positive, but I think most of the regulars here would have been able to pick it out. But as I kept checking the guy out, trying to get a better view of his dial, it hit me like a ton of bricks that there was too much metal between the crown & the curve of the case......just like my otherwise beautiful 116520. So there it was, The Pugwash Complaint, and it was staring me right in the face (note the bit of metal between the '240' on the bezel's scale and the bottom of the crown) (This is the watch with its original CGs) Ever the neurotic perfectionist, I set about to address The P'laint (cute, huh?) so I could go back to wearing my favorite piece of chrono-bling without having to look over my shoulder to see if some well-informed WIS had ID'd the incorrect crown distance spec of my watch. So, finally, tonight, after spending more time filing, sanding, dremeling, buffing & polishing, I think I got my 116520's CGs pretty close (it may not be apparent in the picture, but I even maintained the curvature of the case below the crown as on the gen). (This is the watch after I modified the CGs) Not quite the same angle, but here is a gen 116520 for a general comparison (This is a gen 116520 for reference) Opinions?

This (the watch on my wrist, not the one in the book) got its innards from a mint condition ENICAR SHERPA GRAPH VALJOUX 72 that cost me $1,200 several months ago (sorry Avitt). And on a more positive note........... This will soon be re-appearing in future wrist shot days. And, yes, V72-powered watches are, with a rare exception or 2, now routinely selling for between $1k and $2k. I predict that as more V72-powered frankens make their way onto ebay, the value of these movements may soon double or triple. So if you think it is expensive to construct a Franken-tona now...........

Gio - Nice work. I posted something similar several months ago, the main point being that there are at least 3 different versions of 116520 reps floating around. It looks like you have the one with the 'F520117' serial number between the lugs at 6 (this is same one that Ubi and Stephane have & which By-Tor recently reviewed) and I have an earlier version with 'X41900' between the lugs at 6. Mine has a more correctly proportioned case (narrower CGs & a lower profile, which translates to a more accurate rehaute), but a more pointy 'A' font in Daytona (As you can see, the rehaute depth is quite accurate on this case) Here is a quick & dirty pic showing the profile/depth of each case ('F520117' on left & 'x41900' on right) (Although the thickness of the 2 cases only differ by 1-2 mms, it makes a noticeable difference in the way the watch sits on your wrist) I did some work on one of the third versions several months ago, but I forgot to take pictures before it left. As I recall, it had the same (thicker) case you have, but with the same dial I have--it had the worst features of both, but it had a very realistic/accurate rotor.

I imagine it is a switch going from wide angle to macro shooting, but not bad at all.

Vintage Rolex was often signed 'Swiss'.

Welcome, zmankillian. I hope you do not mind my offering some friendly advice regarding your rep purchases, but I have to second Corgi's comments to you. It takes a very special person to wear gems on a watch (the type of person who drives a high-end luxury car, wears expensive (or very flashy) clothes & generally lives life large), and, even then, most people will assume such a watch is fake. And that assumes the gemstones are genuine and they have that unmistakable sparkle that only genuinely precious stones have. Wearing a rep containing or encrusted with CZs or other non-genuine jewels is tantamount to shouting LOOK AT ME!!!!!!!!!! I AM WEARING A FAKE BLING-BLING!!!!!!!!!! (FOLLOW ME TO WAL-MART!!!!!!) Now, some people want that kind of attention and if that is you, then please accept my apology for wasting your time, ignore the rest of this post & do not let anyone talk you out of whatever breeze gets your kite airborne. But if your goal is to be taken seriously, I would try to fly under the radar, so to speak. Avoid reps with gems (they never look real) and, if you plan to be able to wear your rep over the long haul, stick with stainless steel whenever possible (plated/flashed/wrapped/laser-clad gold always wears off leaving you with a spotted door stop). And let me say again that my comments are offered as friendly & constructive advice (based on experience) and are not meant or intended, in any way, to be a put down.

Try julesborel.com

Your tube is probably stripped -- a common problem on rep watches. You can check with the seller to see if they will sell you another tube (it will probably also fail soon after replacement). If not, your options are to replace the tube & crown with a matching set of genuine Rolex parts, which is a popular mod for Sub reps (the Rolex parts can usually be found on ebay & the pair should cost around $80-$100), or replace the watch.

I forget to check out the Photography area for a few days and then, behind my back, Delta posts something worth checking in for. I do not know what magic the Zigmeister weaved over it, but nice touch with the 571s. Whatever you do, do not make the same mistake that TT did. And fer chrissakes, do not wear it to chop kindling wood like certain Alaskan types might do.

I have not seen that before, but I have come across RWG members' photos (like mine) posted on ebay & other sites. Because of this, I have begun watermarking most of the pictures I post.

Sorry, but the 'refinished' dial is s-h-i-t-e (just look at the chiseled crown), the seller's previous sales are mostly model cars (no significant history with collectible watches that I can see), he accepts only money order or cashier's check & I am not even sure the pushers are asymmetrically situated in the 'gold replacement' case. This one spells trouble from the get-go.

Yes. Matching of accessories is generally only relevant for items in close proximity to each other. It is far more important to match your metals. Not a good idea to wear a steel watch with a yellow gold wedding band, belt buckle or cufflinks.

You & a star-studded cast of thousands.

As much as I would like to help you, I always find these 'What should I buy....' posts a waste of time because I have absolutely no idea what you like. Your best bet would be to visit some ADs or peruse ebay watch listings to get an idea of the types of watches you like (modern vs vintage, high tech vs classic, sophisticated vs simple, multi-colored vs monochrome, etc.) and then post a list of the types or models of watches you like along with a description or photo of your style of dress. That way, people can offer you useful advice.