freddy333

I was wondering the same thing?

Same thing here.

True, but you have to learn what the rules (of style) are from somewhere. For me, a number of books like Flusser's provided the missing answers. Now I know why a large sports watch is not the best thing to wear with formal clothing. And considering how often these types of questions get asked, I thought this book (which I consider to be the best of the dozen or so volumes I have on the subject) ought to be highlighted & easily accessible since it would be difficult, at best, to locate via Search.

Isn't it ironic, how you tripped over my planet?

Nice watch, but what kind of car is that......a Benrus?

Moderators - This ought to be a sticky.

I know that few people adhere to established rules of dress these days, and as nice as this watch is, I think it would be better suited (no pun intended) if paired with sports (informal) clothes. But if you do decide to wear it with formal shoes (I assume along with a suit), I think the watch's presence will overpower whatever strap or bracelet you choose, so I would wear whichever strap you like.

I agree with Nanuq about the 6541, but the 1019s (with the smooth bezel) are another story. These can be made into fine watches with a standard crown/tube-ectomy & crystal upgrade. I have another 1 in the pipeline, but there are a few other (more important) projects ahead of it in the queue.

Sweet. You should have a very merry weekend, Mezz.

I would like to see a better (closer & clearer) picture like this, but from what I can see, they look great. In the meantime, you might find this useful (A black dial gen 116520)

I would really recommend using gens as models for your mods, but several people have requested additional pictures, so here they are (pardon the dust & debris) All of the actual shaping was done, by hand, with a set of small hobby files. The dremel was only used for the initial buffing (with green rouge), which was followed by hand-buffing with my usual Meguiar's Number 7 (Show Car Glaze) to remove the tiny marks left by the rouge. I hope that helps.

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.