freddy333

Brook - There is a reason for the difference between them -- Ubi's Daytonas are based on the previous model (16520 with secs at 9), while rag9fx's are the current model (116520 with secs at 6). The current Daytonas have the wider index markers.

You may very well be right, but I will have a better handle on the stamping possibilities in a few weeks. I just ordered a custom metal stamp designed for use on stainless steel to imprint a serial number on my Comex rep caseback (there is a separate thread about this). I sent the stamp factory photos of the font I want as well as a picture of a gen caseback showing what I am trying to achieve. They said the stamp would produce that type of indented mark with a few knocks from a standard hammer (with the caseback sitting on a wood block). I will be amazed if it turns out to be that easy, but I will know soon enough. Unfortunately, they are unable to replicate a stamp for the entire DRSD caseback with any guarantee of font size/style accuracy. But if the basic process proves successful by hammering a metal stamp into a caseback, I think it will just be a matter of locating the remaining stamps and perfecting the process. In the meantime, I appreciate all of the input so far (very helpful) and welcome any others.

tonyp1 -- I would love to know the source for that watch. Do you have a link or contact info?

Avitt -- As usual, a well thought out answer and one that I have considered as well. But, unfortunately, that option does not address the main issue -- how to replicate the sunkin effect of the characters on the gen casebacks? Somehow, the characters would still need to be hammered or pressed in, and that is the part that I am having trouble with. After that, engraving as you described, followed by a good sanding (the sanding would accelerate a few decades worth of polishing), polishing and antiquing should produce an acceptable result. But the question remains how to create the sunkin effect?

Just wondering if the new (or relaunched) version will have the proper lug holes in the case (sorry if this has been addressed, but there are 12 pages in this thread)?

The Mission: To make the WM/MBW DRSD caseback look like the gen caseback. The Background: Many of us have been struggling with ways to mod the caseback of the WM/MBW DRSD to more closely replicate the vintage appearance and feel of a 30 to 40 year old gen DRSD caseback. As most of us know, the caseback that comes fitted onto the current crop of WM/MBW DRSDs was engraved with equipment that did not exist at the time the gen watches were originally manufactured. The lettering, which was engraved onto the caseback of the WM/MBW, is sharp, flat and quite detailed. Meanwhile, the lettering on the gen caseback (in its original form) was relatively more rounded, deep (looking as if it was pressed into the caseback (an important point, which I will go into in a bit more detail below) and dull in comparison. And because of this, the WM/MBW caseback, even with the paint removed (an absolute requirement for the modder or owner seeking any pretense towards authenticity), remains a weak point. So, for many weeks now, I have been considering ways to re-engrave the text to make it appear more like the gen. To this end, I have taken the caseback to 4 jewelers in an effort to see if they could offer an improvement. While all said they could round out the lettering, none were able to replicate it exactly or to recreate the sunkin effect of the gen lettering. I have also seen some very good engraving work done by a couple of the better modders here. But, still, none of these got the pressed-in appearance of the lettering either. So I was in a quandry -- why did all of the gen casebacks have this sunkin appearance? Recently, while browsing a local estate sale shop that had a watchmaker on the premises, I got the answer I had been looking for. It turns out that the text on the gen casebacks was stamped into the steel, not engraved as I had always thought. And because the stamper was applied with force, it slightly dented the area around each character producing that telltale sunkin appearance that only a true vintage caseback has. (The timing of this news could not have been better, because I was about to have a Comex caseback engraved with a serial number. With this piece of the puzzle solved, I immediately canceled that plan and set about ordering a custom metal stamper.) Since it is unlikely (not to mention prohibitively expensive) that a custom metal stamper could be made to exactly replicate the content & layout of characters on the WM/MBW DRSD caseback, another alternative must be found to achieve a similar stamped result. My initial thought was to use a small flathead screwdriver and hammer to carefully and slowly hammer out each of the characters to deepen and round them out. In theory, at least, it could work, but it would also be alot of work and the likelihood of ending up with a caseback that looks like it was hammered with a small flathead screwdriver seems high to me. The Big Question: Can anyone suggest other options?

Kruzer -- For whatever it is worth, I think your watch looks amazing. But I have to agree with TWS on the dial. Whether it is gen or not, it looks somehow odd and out of place in that otherwise fine watch. I think what bothers me about it is that it looks repainted, very similar to my own attempts at dial refinishing. The visible 'handwork' draws my eye directly to it and that immediately makes me question a watch's authenticity (which is why I have been unable to use any of my own repaints). But I think it is clear that there is a wide variance in opinions on what passes as an acceptable level of quality for dials.

I certainly agree with you about this one, but some of the better 116520s are among the most accurate Rolex reps I have seen to date. They look pretty respectable to me.

My experience has generally been that the people who are most ignorant about watches are owners of gens. As I have mentioned previously in other posts, according to numerous polls of luxury watch brand buyers, most gen watch buyers buy primarily for status or to be seen wearing the latest and most fashionable watch accessory. Rarely does the average luxury watch buyer base his purchase on brand loyalty (Rolex, being the sole exception to that rule because it is the name that most people equate with luxury watches) or watch knowledge. And most of what they know about reps comes from what they hear in the media or by word of mouth (often from equally clueless friends and co-workers). Your friend may or may not have been wearing a gen, but it does not surprise me at all that he missed all of the details and focused, instead, on something like a buckle.

Stilty -- Anything here of interest

I have had my share of artificial stimulants over the years and I cannot even draw a straight line (never could, so I cannot blame it on stimulant use). So if I can drill lug holes by hand, anyone can. But if you already have a drill press and the competence to use it correctly, I would use that since that is what you are used to. But I would tell you that I have even done two sets of lug holes on fully cased watches. That is how easy the process is. Just be sure to wrap the watch in a thick, soft (I use Viva) paper towel so none of the metal shavings scratch the polished case or crystal and you should be fine.

Ubi -- This is one of those cases where version matters. The 116520 that I have, which I got from a UK auction site a little over 2.5 years ago, has the same narrower case profile and shallow rehaut as your frankenstein 16520. My 116520 also came with more accurate crown guards (narrower & cover less of the crown), but, on the downside, it also has a slightly less accurate DAYTONA font (the color of the font is wrong in the photo because I did not white balance the camera before shooting the pic). From your photos, it looks like you have the 116520 version that Joshua sells (which I referred to in one of my previous reviews). I always knew that my case was slightly thicker than the gen 116520 case (but just by a millimeter or two). But now that I see how thick your case really is, I would definitely recommend buyers to suffer the less than perfect DAYTONA font and go with the version I have (I do not remember which one, but I have seen it listed in one of our watch collectors' collections). As an option, you could buy both versions and swap the movements, so that you end up with Joshua's dial (with the more accurate DAYTONA font) in my case. With that combination, I think it would be very difficult to tell the rep watch from the gen without a very close inspection. I am seriously considering that myself. I need to add that these photos were taken before I replaced the crown and crown tube with gen parts. But both crowns look about the same from these angles.

Mojo -- Your points are taken, but I have to agree with Avitt on this one. In fact, I go even further -- I drill lug holes entirely by hand. Hold the case in one hand and the drill in the other. Slow, steady and lots of oil. I have done about a dozen cases so far and have not lost a single drill bit or case. With lug holes it is really easy since you are just enlarging an existing hole and the bit follows the path of least resistance (the existing hole). For this project, I am drilling out a new He valve, which is a bit of a noodle since I am drilling into virgin metal. And that is why I need to find a drill press or something similar to hold everything steady and press the drill in the right direction. If you are interested, you can find the basic outline of my DRSD MBW He Valve Project about a 3rd of the way down the page.

Mojo -- I appreciate the input on that tool. That is kind of what I thought when I looked at the box in the store. But I never took it out of the box, so I was not sure if it would work or not. It is only lack of space that keeps me from picking up a small standard drill press. I found one that is just over a foot in height, which would work fine, But it weighs 75 lbs, which is a bit too unwieldy to be lugging around for such a limited project. Maybe I can rent one.

Avitt -- Yes, that is exactly it. Do you have one of them or did you locate the photo online? And if you have one, do you think it will hold a hand drill stable enough to drill holes through the side of a case (this is for the He valve mod)?

The watch will be mounted in a rubber jawed hobby vice (sitting on the floor) and the drill will be mounted into the frame which is what this tool is (it is a frame that holds a hand drill and allows it to run, up and down, on a track that keeps it straight. That is the theory at least. If it works as advertised, it should do the job just fine. But since I have never used one before and I have learned many times that the promise of a tool often does not live up to the pitch, I thought it best to see if anyone else had used one of these tools before I risk damaging an MBW case.

Has anyone ever used one of those tools you attach a hand drill to that allow it to work like a drill press? I need to drill some holes through the side of a stainless steel case and I do not have access to or room for a standard drill press. I saw one of these things in a store, but the picture on the box showed it being used to drill holes in wood. So I am wondering if anyone knows if it would be able to hold a hand drill steady enough to drill a straight hole through a watch case?

You might try these Review: Daytona 116509 & Dealer Bottom of 1st page Comparing Triplock crowns (used on recent Daytonas)

$35 is a very good price, if it is gen. Best if you can post a clear close-up photo of the dial as well as shots of the side of the case showing the numbers between the lugs (you will need to remove the bracelet for this). If it is a vintage MBW and the insert is gen, it should fit. Otherwise, it can probably be made (with some modding) to fit most standard rep cases.

Kingkitesurf -- Did you use a dremel 'engraving bit' to smooth the caseback engraving?

You are right. There is alot of variation in the gen DRSD dials. doubleredseadweller.com has a dial section that shows some of differences. I always compare the rectangular hour marker at 9 with the round markers above and below it (at 8 & 10) to be sure the 9 marker is the right length. I think the problem is that the round markers are smaller on the rep dials and so they had to shorten the rectangular markers to maintain the proper perspective. If they made the 6 & 9 markers the correct size (to match those on the gen dials), they would stick out too far (in either direction) beyond the smaller round 8 & 10 markers above and below it. I guess the factory chose to shorten the 2 rectangular markers instead of just making the round markers the correct size to begin with. Like I keep saying, there is always something obvious the rep factories miss (or purposely get wrong) that leaves me scratching my head.

Hi Avitt -- Yes, I saw the same Timezone thread and it looks like the same dial or at least from the same source. I do not think that all of the tritium dials had that canvas texture. At least not from what I see in some of the other Timezone posts and Rolex books. The one thing that does seem to be common with all the tritium markers is their grainy appearance, which is lacking on the OEM WM/MBW dial. This is one of the things that aftermarket dial got about right. I noticed the slight difference between our MBW dials too. Since your MBW dial is older than mine, I think that is the reason for the variation. It looks like the variations are just variations and not improvements. Different factories maybe?

Yes, I was just going to inquire as to the source of a $250 (working) V72. But if there is one, please PM me asap. Seriously.

Hard to see the pearl, but the rest of the insert looks good to me.

There is apparently some confusion regarding the differences between the OEM WM/MBW DRSD dial and a generally well done aftermarket dial that Polexpete used in his watch (I purchased one of these dials as well). So, to try to clear up some of the confusion, I am posting side-by-side photos of both dials so everyone can see the differences between them. Unfortunately, the comparison is not 100% fair because I did not have a second WM/MBW case & movement to fit the aftermarket dial onto. So I placed one of the vintage datewheels that was recently produced by RWG members under it and a gen T39 crystal over it. In this way, the two dials can be seen under similar conditions. There is some difference in the way light is refracted through each crystal, but when viewed from straight-on, the differences are minimal. The dial on the left is the OEM WM/MBW dial with OEM datewheel and crystal. The dial on the right is the aftermarket dial with the recently modded datewheel and gen T39 crystal. Some of the most noticeable differences are * the width of the index markers at 6 & 9 * the color of the lume (you cannot see it in the photos, but the lume in the aftermarket dial looks very much like tritium in both color (slightly whiter around the edges) and its 3-d shape * the printing on the aftermarket dial is crisper, but somewhat uneven (note, as one example, the spacing between the H and R in CHRONOMETER (on the other hand, there is too much spacing between the letters in SEA-DWELLER & SUBMARINER on the WM/MBW dial)) * the coronet in the aftermarket dial is narrower at the bottom (which is incorrect), but also crisper and more detailed at the top (which is more accurate) * the font in ROLEX is more correct on the aftermarket dial (note, for instance, that the sides of the O are wider than the top and bottom, which is correct) There are other differences to be sure. But, all in all, and as good as the aftermarket dial is in many ways, I think the OEM WM/MBW dial comes closer to matching the gen DRSD dial. For comparison, here is a gen version IV DRSD dial Opinions?