RobbieG

Hey Willcrests funny you should mention that. I went to the RWG Collector section to pick out a watch for my father's birthday and found that section to have a large variety of collectors with hundreds of replica Rolex watches waiting to be shipped. It took nearly an hour to finally choose the replica Rolex I wanted. When I finally made my decision on which collector to use and the watch I wanted, the checkout process couldn

Does anyone know whether the strap elements are in Ti like the gen or if they cut the corner and used brushed steel. I only ask this because their excuse for not repping the Ti Aquatimer like mine was a shortage of Ti in China and its expense as a result. Hopefully that hasn't spilled over to this rep for accuracy reasons - although I never understood why UN does these in Ti anyway. It doesn't match any of the watches they put them on. They are all steel. Only the hiiden parts of the clasp should be Ti so they don't bend...

You just made me think of something. My college roomate's Step Father was a real a*s and I forget but he did something real bad to Dave (my roommate). I forget what it was, but Dave never liked the guy and whatever it was ended up being the last straw I guess in his eyes. So he goes home for Christmas to CT as usual. He was kind of a rich kid. Grew up in Greenwich. It turns out his mom had bought his Step Dad a brand new S500 for a gift. On Christmas eve Dave waits until everyone is asleep and carries out his plan. He eats a high octane meal consisting of Mexican food, french fries and ice cream and a few hours later the rumblings hit him. He takes a massive sh*t in a brown paper lunch bag and puts it aside outdoors. He then proceeded to take the entire dash apart on the new Benz, then takes the bag and buried it in there somewhere and put it back together. The story goes that the Step Dad was going crazy trying to figure out why his car was smelling so bad. He literally couldn't even go in it. After a day or two he called the dealer and returned the car refusing to pay for it and the dealer said whatever was causing the smell was his problem and didn't want to take it back. There was a huge fight and I forget what the outcome was. But to this day nobody but me ever knew what Dave did. You might want to give that one a shot TJ. PS: Dave loved to do stuff like that ever since whenever he was mad. Later, a hotel gave him crappy service and wouldn't credit him so he welled up a whole roasted chicken inside the television set in his room and checked out...

Right or wrong in terms of the AR on the gen or not, that will probably do the trick and get the desired affect. I'm looking forward to getting the watch again (the rep this time) once this all gets figured out. Thanks Cheif and Lani for all you have done on this. I'm sure everyone is still greatly appreciating this labor of love.

Baddass! Yes, it is my cup of tea. Love cool sterile watches like this. Vac does great work. He has done a lot of stuff for me over the years and I have nothing but the best to say about him...

I didn't catch this. Can someone explain to the old man (me) what that is all about? Thanks.

Oh yeah, I agree 100%. I don't believe it either man and I don't dispute what you say. No body knows for sure not the least of which me. But what do you think then? Do they have different crystals or what because the pics I think really illustrate that Rolex has really upped the llegibility lately. So if it isn't AR what are your thoughts on that? Maybe the dials or date disc materials or inks are different or there is something else with the sapphire? Whatever it is, it wasn't around 5 years ago and I would be interested to hear everyones thoughts, because again, this whole phenomenon certainly will be "helping" any AR isolated to the cyclops.

The discussion is about getting a rep to look like a gen Jake. Everything we do is based on strife toward genuine counterparts on this whole forum. Again, what are you taking about? I ask once more, do you have anything to contribute or must you go on ruining Freddy's thread? Let me take the high road gents and try this another way. Jake, what are your thoughts on what the gen might have that makes it so difficult to achieve? Will you concede that my gen DJ has less glare than previously seen and as such maybe the crystal itself (and yes, maybe some process Rolex does to achieve that affect other than an external AR coating) is adding to the perceived depth of the AR on the cyclops? And I'm sorry if my gen offends you in some way. I thought it might help in the discussion about AR and the clarity which seems to be hard to duplicate on the rep. And since the original run didn't nail it, what do you think the best way to go about it is? Rolex isn't going to solve this problem in the project, you have to, so what can you suggest to help everyone, since none of us seem to know? All we know how to do is ask people who we guess might be in the know and to that end I thought I would share something I have heard to try and help. Maybe you have a better way bro?

Right. That is all anyone is contributing to it. If we knew the answer we wouldn't be talking about it - er, speculating - discussing - with opposing views on this um, discussion forum. There are three other truths here: 1. Nobody thinks I'm making the thread about about anything but AR - and yes, my gens are in it as they related to these questions. Otherwise I wouldn't be offering any theories (which if you notice both Chief and Lani seem to recognize also, and like me - they admittedly have no idea why - hence the discussion). 2. I owned the genuine watch for a a time and as such I am familiar with the piece enough to have a meaningful contribution to the discussion from that alone. 3. You absolutely don't ignore me, as evidenced by what you posted in the first place. Everyone can see what you are doing and your pointless sarcasm and knows it has no place in this thread. I'm sure they are also wondering why you seem to harbor such hate for me continually, and why in God's name you always do seem to care what I say or think. Nobody else does. LOL. Even I don't listen to me too much. LOL. In the end, everyone (except you apparently) is perfectly fine with just taking it all in and forming thier own opinions. How about you join the rest of us and do that too from now on - at least when it concerns me. M-kay?

It is also amazing how easy it is for certain members to spit in the eye of another member for no reason other than that he is a cry baby who carries a some stupid vendetta around with him about a replica watch which has no value to either party but yet he somehow sees the need to continue it. Or maybe his own limited mental capacity prohibits him from seeing that the member he spits on is clearly only trying to help out of the goodness of his heart, given he has no vested interest in this project himself. Despite this fact he is still happy to lend his own pics, time, and effort to help his friends get to the bottom of the issue. The single greatest irony of all is that the very vendetta he holds against this member was created over the exact same watch and the exact same information and the exact same sources and that no statements from anyone, including him, have ever been proven to be either reliable or unreliable - hence the discussion on this discussion and opinion forum which only exists because people have varied opinions. So lucky we are to have different views and information that can all come together and be sorted out in the hopes of learning something, huh? Moreover the member he criticises has in every instance made it ridiculously clear that he claims no knowledge whatsoever on the subject, but rather is simply communicating what he has heard in the interest of helping others to the point os spelling it out in nearly every post - then (at the inception of this vendetta) and now I might add. And finally, as per usual, the critical one offers nothing in the way of help to the matter at hand and is content to put forth only useless and utterly witless sarcasm havin no value to the thread or helping anyone get closer to solving the modding issue. Sigh...

Well to that end I suppose we could take anything anyone says with a grain of salt, but I appreciate all you have said. Keep in mind one of them was a watchmaker who was trained by Rolex who claims to have gotten that info from Rolex directly. He actually called them kind of in front of me - i.e., I asked - he left the room and came back saying he had talked to someone who told him that bit about the F serials. He certainly didn't make it up, but maybe whoever he called did. Who knows. Likewise, who or where he called I have no idea. Then again, who or where Dowling called is also a mystery as well I'm sure - or maybe he claims to only have researched this issue just as it relates to the GMTIIc. In any case, I'm always more trusting of my own eyes than what anybody says and I wouldn't even be having the discussion if I weren't certain something is going on that is different. To that end, I do know with high certainty that while I have no idea what it is, but there is absolutely a difference in the reflective nature of the crystal on my current Datejust as compared to the half dozon or so older Rolex watches of varied models I have owned over the years. Period. There is no question in my mind. It may be that the sappire material itself or its finish is different and isn't AR at all - I have no idea - but again, it is less reflective. So if it isn't some sort of AR so be it, but again, there has just never been a glare free date viewing experience in any lighting conditions for me before owning this watch with any other Rolex. What can be seen in those pictures is present in any lighting conditions, indoors or out and at most all but the most extreme angles. As I said, it makes no difference to me what causes it, but nobody can argue that whatever it may be is very real and measurable both in pictures and to the naked eye. Of course how it all relates to the GMT piece is anyone's guess hence the thread, but I have just been trying to offer that whatever is different about the new Rolex crystals might be contributing to you guy's issues with getting this right. In any case it sounds like nothing concrete is afoot but I'm rooting for you all to get there. It sure is cool whatever it is - both on my watch and the major improvement of that on the cyclops of the watch in question. A MAJOR improvement for the brand to be certain...

BTW, all this is making me doubt my sale of this watch. I want one again now - thanks Freddy, just what I need. You just had to bring all this up didn't you?

Sorry for my ignorance if there is something I'm missing, but doing a single light AR on the underside of the whole crystal and then doing a single AR on the underside of the mag then gluing the mag on won't do it. Seems like that would give the desired depth with the density of two seperate layers of AR then? Or, how about if you double AR'd the whole crystal, did nothing with the mag, then stripped the AR of the top of the crystal after the mag glue was cured? Seems like that would give the right effect if ARing the mad on either side won't work andif we are in agreement that Rolex does do single AR on their crystals now you will want that anyway - just need to get the strength right and I have no idea how that works or if it can be varied easily...

On another note, I offer this old pic that was circulating around a while ago. Gen on left obviously - but notice the look of the main crystal other than the cyclops and the difference between the two. It looks to me like there is a slight colorless AR effect (about like that on my DJ) seen making the gen crystal less reflective as evidence of this AR mystery maybe. No doubt they are different and obviously the lighting and angle are the same. It is subtle but it is there IMO. The gen dial appears much more clear and deeper in color like you would see with a light AR job. In any event, what are your AD's saying? I have now had a Rolex watchmaker from Congress jewelers, a personal friend AD who I will not name, and now a guy from both Mayor's jewelers as well all say that Rolex uses a single underside AR on all their watches now and from some of these pics I am finding it harder to refute that claim...

So guys, what is the concensus on the standard Rolex AR in addition to whatever may be going on with the cyclops on the GMTIIc watches. Could the "overall" AR that Rolex claims to use on newer watches be adding to whatever the AR is on the cyclops to be producing that clearly major AR effect on the gens that would seem hard to do with a single AR layer on the underside of the cyclops? I say this because obviously we can all see how far toward that result my DJ already is. Seems like if you added AR to the underside of the cyclops, then there was the other AR just under that on the underside of the crystal then that is the most likely story? I just didn't hear from the experts (Freddy / Chief) as to what you guys think about the look of those head on DJ pics and whether you agree that something is different there than you remember on older gens...

No, just like the UN AR. Absolutely colorless...

Ahh, so those slots on the keepers are just cut from the button closures on the flap of the old pouch then. Cool...

I should also add that I'm sitting here with the watch in my hand moving it all around in the morning light - inside and outside on the lanai and I can't get it to reflect so bad that I can't read the dial or even wash out the WG indices. I don't remember ever seeing older Rollie crystals act that way. I'm also wondering more and more what Lani and I were asking which is whether there is a way to build some kind of AR material directly into the glass itself?

I answered my own question. Here is dluddy's near perfect UPO dial without any rounded edges. I guess that relumed dial from the OP must have been from an Asian watch that wasn't technically the "ultimate" version? I never knew the dials were different. I thought all the 45.5MM version dials were basically the same except for the logo feet, which dluddy swapped from a Silix version I think. So now I guess we know some of the Asian version dials have these rounded edges then...

But do all the 45.5MM versions have those rounded edges? I seem to recall the UPO dial being more correct than that when I had my UPO before getting the gen. Both the 42MM and 45.5MM gen dials have very sharp DW and centerpost edges as shown in this pic...

I always took the opposite view. I never wind anything nor did I ever want a auto winder because for me, half the fun is having to set the watch and start it with a few winds (if it is an auto) or wind it fully (if it is a handwind) when I decide to wear it. I cherish the time spent putting in the work before getting to wear my watch in the morning. My watches are kept at the office (which may as well be my home) anyway and sometimes I come in in the middle of the night if I have to put something on or manage something when London opens. So for me, a nightly ritual wouldn't be practical anyway I suppose. But my friends with autowinders think I'm crazy. I can say though that if I ever own a perpetual calendar I will get a single autowinder as the whole fun there is seeing how long you can go without touching it...

Also the new lumed dial has this funky rounded edge thing going on at the window and the center post. The unlumed one is more like the gen dial in size and finish...

Nice V. That is the nuts right there. Love the richness and depth of that color. Excuse my ignorance, but do you call it an ammo strap because you can store a couple rounds in those slots in the keepers?

Hey guys listen, I'm not trying to sell anything here as I don't really care given I'm not in on the GMT thing anyway - just trying to help with what I have heard. By all means take it at face value. As we all know Rolex can be cryptic about stuff like this and it may be years beofre we know the truth. But I'll defer to the Chief for starters here being the AR expert. But when I look at photos like these two taken head on in natural light and I see the clarity of the date like this and the fact that a super shiny dial like this doesn't just disappear into the crystal I have absolutely no trouble believing there is some kind of colorless AR on it. This watch is an early M serial. I have seen a million defintely non-AR'd Rolex crystals on both older gens I have had and plenty of reps and I have never seen anything that looked like this. And what is happening on the GMTIIc appears to be all this and more too. I'll be interested to hear what the group decides and of course will accept whatever it is. Not looking to disagree with anyone per se, but thought I would help with some relevant gen pics since I was able to find these two...

MMD today...