bones

Is it possible to convert an SEL bracelet to non-SEL? Reason being I have a TT 14k wrapped 93250 bracelet that I'd love to use for an older 16613 build and i'd rather not have to go down the gen route as it's a very well done bracelet.

Have both Blue and Black ceramic subs and fingerprint magnet on the black is an understatement. I wear it on a black nato for work and I think it looks damn nice, wish i could get over my OCD over the fingerprints and marks though

Speaking on the bracelet. I have a 16613 old style noob with 14k wrapped oyster bracelet. I held it side by side with a gen just two days ago. The only minor tell in difference is on the SEL. If you look very very closely you can see that it's wrapped instead of solid. The midlinks on both were hollow and apart from a very very slight colour difference between the golds they are identical. Weight is pretty light on both but that's to be expected and it's the older style clasp that always seems to feel a bit cheap. Other than that they are pretty damn decent. I would definately go wrapped rather than plated if I'm honest.

Both of those are very nice

Reckoned I might re-post my thread from RWI over here to see if I can't stimulate some more discussion and hopefully find the perfect 116610 LV rep. I know you guys are probably more focused on vintage Rolex's (or so it seems) but I really do love this watch! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It has only just crept onto my radar that there are now some dealers offering the Green Bezel / Green Dial (sunburst) LV Ceramic watches. I detailed a few in another thread which I will copy over here for reference. First of all a pic of the lovely gen watch to drool over All photos in this post will be pulled from TD sites and gen sites on the net. Comparisons and opinions are my own and do not reflect 100% accurate details as I am still new to this. Hopefully we can stimulate some discussion on the best of these LV reps. These are the first three reps in questions that I will look at. The Pearl As we can see the dealers shots are pretty bad and we can clearly see two different versions, possibly three. Lets have a wee look at the distinguishing features. First off is the pearl. From left to right we have Puretime, Perfect Clones, Timeshops and then Gen. All look slightly different. The first pearl from Puretime looks 'ok' as per the last generation of sub pearls. But it's nicely centered and the pearl triangle looks flat topped as per gen. However the outer rim of the pearl seems very thick and of course it looks matt as opposed to the gen pearl's crystal top. Perhaps a little epoxy layer could bring this out nicely. The second pearl is from Perfect Clones. His pearl is almost similar to the current Noob Black Ceramic sub and Blue ceramic sub. Images below pulled from Lay's site. I know that the pearl on my BK noob blue sub definately looks quite like this. Although this one seems very very pronounced and bubble like rather than a gentle dome of the Noob ceramics. In relation to the size it's probably about right, it's just overfilled with Lume it seems and sits too high, its also decently centered and the pearl triangle looks reasonably flat topped. The third pearl from Timeshops looks slightly different again, and possibly the best out of the three. It has a very thin outer ring, although it's slightly off-centre in the triangle. The triangle also looks to have a curve to the top portion. Out of the three it looks to be the best rep compared to the gen although it is a little shallow in depth. Ceramic bezel Next up lets have a look at the 'Ceramic' bezels themselves. First up we will look at Puretime. It's the only one that doesn't claim Ceramic bezel and it shows. This is their description "green sandwich bezel (ceramic-like finish)". Both Perfect Clones and Timeshops claim in the advert that this, as per the Black, Blue, TT, GMT etc that they are "Ceramic Sandwich Numeral Bezel". In the Black and Blue versions this is very easy to spot, the hour/minute/pearl diamond and numbers are obviously recessed to the rest of the bezel. The bezel themselves is also extremely shiny and reflective in most lights. Out of all of them, construction wise, Puretime is the worst. The numbering and markers are too thin, non-recessed as per old non-C subs. It's a good thing they arn't claiming ceramic as they would get called out immediately. It's very likely that this is the same bezel from the 16610 LV, the green bezel black face 50th anniversary edition model. Second up is Perfect clones. The dealer shots are terrible and the only one that shows any reflective qualities to the bezel are around the pearl triangle. This shows the reflection of the pearl on the surface. This is actually the only indication of its 'ceramic' claim. You can also see that the bezel markers and numbers are recessed, of a good colour and of decent width as per gen. Timeshops (please ignore the actual colour for the time being) actually shows the best indication that these are Ceramic bezels as per the other current models. Font, depth, colour of markers are all pretty decent. Of course none compare to the gen but out of the 3 the Timeshops and PC versions are better. I guess we should also discuss the colour of the bezels here since we are looking closely at them. I'm not going to make any absolute judgements here as dealer shots are notorious when it comes to colour balance. We can see a wide variation here in all three models. PT is a nice green, but i've almost ruled it out at this point because it isn't Ceramic. PerfectClones shows good colour, reflectiveness, depth to markings and a reasonable pearl. TS has possibly the worst colour balance on the dealer shots I have ever seen and has made it look like a camouflage military green rather than the beautiful rich emerald green as per gen. On all three counts I would say none are up to scratch, but absolutely none of these shots should be taken as gospel to what the real article actually looks like. The Dial Lets take a look at the dials now. This is the only dial that shows any hint of 'sunburst' although this doesn't mean too much as it is notoriously difficult to capture, especially for our dealers it seems. The 5 minute and 6/9 markers appear of a decent size, this is definately maxi-size style markers. However the metal border on them is awful and very very thick in comparison. On the gen the white gold surrounds of the circular lume dots is very very subtle, slightly more pronounced on the rectangular and triangle markers as per usual of course. The minute markers around the edge of the dial are also incorrect. On the PT you can see the 5 minute markers as a pronounced 'I' and noticably thicker than the others. On the gen none are 'I' shaped but there is a slight difference in thickness on the 5 minute markers. The 'Swiss made' writing at the bottom of the dial is consistent with the gen. Perfect Clones dial is slightly better. The minute markers around the edge are correct, the dial is again a maxi-markered dial. Some of the surrounds are a bit too pronounced as per the PT dial but overall it's not too bad. No hint of sunburst on the dial face as per usual. I'm not going to go into the nuances of the lettering, spacing, or accuracy of the crowns and fonts as I dont know enough to differenciate. All I can say is that none of the dials show the same bright white and crisp lettering of the gen, but that is no huge surprise when looking so closely at them. Timeshops dial, terrible colour balance aside is probably the best out of all of them. The maxi markers, whilst the surrounds are a bit more pronounced than gen, are shiny and don't look too bad, the minute markers are crisp and accurate. The triangle and rectangular makers are also very nicely done. Out of all three I think the TS dial wins. Crownguards and Crown Crownguards. Forever the bane of the Rolex rep collector. Full size version of this picture HERE So first of all I must say that to my newbie eyes all of the crownguards actually look pretty damn decent compared to the gen. The only real difference between them all is that Perfect Clones have a slightly fatter tip to them which might echo the gen slightly better. From the photos I have the only stand out dimension to me is the gap between the Crown and the CG's, all of which look ok, and the height of the CG's compared to the Crowns (all, including gen come about half way up the crenelations on the crown). The Crowns themselves are 'ok'. Puretime's crown crenelations look well defined. The raised crown logo is not perfect however. The area above the 'O' is too fat and the stems leading to the 5 points should taper. The 3 spots indicating a triplock crown are also too far down the crown face, whereas on the gen they are equidistant from the base of the crown logo to the edge of the polished face. Perfect clones has similar issues. Crenelations don't look very sharp, crown stems don't taper towards the end and the triplock dots are too close to the base of the crown logo. Timeshops Crown looks decent with good sharp crenelations, what looks like similar sized lip prior to the polished surface with the logo. The logo is again slightly incorrect with the triplock dots too close to the base of the crown 'O'. We can see however that the crown stems DO taper towards the top but that the 5 crown tips are far too slight and should be better defined. There's no clear winner on this one I think. CG's are all of similar quality and dimensions, but all the crowns have issues. From personal preference I would say that the Timeshops crown / CG's looks the best. The Hands Another difference I noted between the three versions was the correct/incorrect hands. Only the Timeshops version has the correct larger minute hand / smaller hour hand combination (see below for Gen). Both of the others have the maxi hour and minute hands which is incorrect for this version. The Bracelet All three of these watches have the new Rolesor Clasp Osyter / Diver extension on the bracelet. Puretime and Perfect clones have the brushed bracelet exactly the same as the Black C sub (116610 LN) which is correct for the model. The Timeshops version however is using the Blue ceramic sub bracelet with the polished midlinks. So, conclusions? - Puretime $258 Swiss ETA http://www.puretimew...-green-eta2836/ * Has correct sunburst dial * Terrible lumed markers and minute markers * Non-ceramic bezel * Incorrect hands - Perfect Clones $198 Asian ETA http://www.1-pc8838....836-p-9216.html * No evidence of sunburst dial * Correct minute markers but poor lumed markers * Better Crownguards * Strangely bulbous pearl * Incorrect hands - Timeshops $228 Swiss ETA http://timeshops.net...id_product=7325 * No evidence of sunburst dial * Good pearl * Terrible colour (could be pics only) * Excellent dial, both minute markers and lumed markers * Correct hands * Incorrect polished mid links bracelet * Good crown A New Contender Thanks to another LV thread I came across this watch on a Japanese website. Use Google Chrome browser to automatically translate the page. EtayaHonpo This looks to be a fourth version of the Ceramic LV. It also has some very nice qualities to it. Pros * Excellent minute markers * Excellent lumed markers * Correct Sunburst dial * Ceramic bezel with good depth to markers and numbering * Fantastic pearl and triangle marker. * Crisp clean dial text * Correct glidelock clasp * Good crown with well defined logo and triplock dots Cons * Incorrect hour hand * Incorrect 'Swiss Made' spacing * Horrible green colour of bezel * Incorrect polished mid link bracelet * Incorrect lug engraving 16610 T instead of 116610 LV (T stands for no lug holes on Sub cases) The Watch Eden Contender So spending some time browsing Watch Eden I found another possible contender for a decent LV. I hadn't noticed this before and has possibly only just been added to the database. It's obviously one of the newer reps as it comes with the modified 3135 movement. This is a nickel plated asian clone movement working at 28,800 bph as per gen movement. It is a poor attempt to make the movement look closer to gen but anyone who's opened a gen caseback will tell it is fake very quickly. Watch Eden 116610 LV Asia ETA 3135 Automatic Movement - $308 So let's take a loot at the pro's and con's to this version. Pros * Passable sunburst dial * Possible Ceramic Bezel * Passable bezel colouring * Correct 'Swiss Made' * Good pearl * Correct brushed bracelet * Correct smaller hour hand * Good length minute hand * Correct glidelock bracelet * Correct maxi markers Cons * Bezel and dial colour still a little drab in colour rather than bright Emerald as gen * Bezel numbers and markers too thin and grey in colour * Lumed marker edges still too thick * Crown is too small * Logo on crown poorly defined * Crownguards too small for maxi case * Crown on bracelet clasp is poorly defined * Rolex crown on dial incorrect * Very slightly 'wokky' rehaut * Rehaut engraving looks roughly done and not aligned * Incorrect 'I' at 5 minute markers on outer dial In conclusion this is one of the better ones. Pearl is nice, bezel colour is getting better and it also has the sunburst dial. It's an expensive version using the 3135 movement so might not be to all tastes.

16613 noobmariner on grey NATO today.

I'll be waiting for a decent TT WM9/BK sub to pop up on the selling forum but have decided to ask MR to pick me one up. Should be getting QC pics in a few days. Will let you know how it looks when I get it.

Ok mate, thanks for the response. Was hoping someone had reviewed the new ceramic bezel TT subs. Will keep on hunting

Wonderful review mate, thanks so much for taking the time to do stuff like this for the community. We're seeing a crop of Ceramic bezel TT subs and I was wondering if you have handled any of these and/or if you have any thoughts on them? Dealer shots are hard to judge by and I can't see any threads on folks that have bought these most recent versions. Just wanted a heads up for an issues before i pull the trigger. Cheers, Bones

Wow, that is shockingly poor looking.