By-Tor

Wow! Daytona looks really small on your wrist.

Now there's a lot of classy watches. Great variation!

Cool.

PS: That Regatta is the only PAM I could ever consider wearing. Nice.

It's still fairly good replica.

But if you don't wear it, sell it to someone who does. Just my 2c.

No I wasn't on the IRC. But I saw the heyday of this era.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaKcUoycVzk

My AD swapped the insert for my 16710. The price was 50 Euros. They let me keep the old insert too.

The old one had a different font (Serif). All the newer GMT's (post 2004 and the service inserts) come with the standard font.

Actually I had several "bling" reps in the old days too. 4 different TT Subs and a TT Navi.

I always liked "subtle" bling and if I had some extra, I'd probably get something like this:

You mean this?

Not bad.

Diamonds are a girls best friend

Ahh... here we have a manly-man tough guy UFC/MMA W4R3Z d00d telling us mortals what watches are acceptable to like and what not. Again.

RWG is a forum for ALL kinds of watches and we discuss them in a friendly manner. If diamond/bling watches aren't your thing, stop crapping these threads and let people enjoy the watches they like. Or is someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to view these?

It's probably because I turned 40. Bling is cool.

But those bezel diamonds Dave... that takes another 20 years.

Here's another good tutorial.

http://www.chronomaddox.com/article/mason_a/bracelet_refurb.html

I once measured my rep and gen 16710. Rep was 2 grams heavier. The older reps were even heavier because of the solid middle links on the bracelets. And there's no weight difference between the clasps. How could there be... I mean, they're both sheet metal which feels cheap and light anyway.

Generally... all that usual talk about weight differences is total and utter crap as well, spread by people who don't know what they're talking about. I don't know where this myth comes from and why it's still alive... maybe from the 80's when quartz-powered reps really were lightweight. Same thing about the "dramatic" steel color difference... you gotta be a real Trekkie bastard to see any. "Rolex steel"... they're so special... it takes a year to make one, etc.

It's true that the bracelet "feels" different on the gen. Mainly because of the smoothed, rounded edges. But that's for another discussion.

Uggghhh

Thanks for your thoughtful post and contribution for this thread. Well done.

Others: What do you think about this Carrera?

http://www.yourtrust...750-p-7907.html

Pretty much the same style and size. The problem I have with this watch is that there's no real contrast between the gold subregisters and white dial. The dial is too "plain". The size is good for the dress attire. Does anyone own this replication so I could see better shots?

It'd look much nicer with black subdial surroundings though. That's why I like the Ebel TT more.

Yeah, but YM uses the old Oyster clasp.

Actually I read from somewhere that 2012 YM models have the new clasp.

Personally, I never quite warmed up to the Yacht-Master. It lost its appeal after a few months. It's just a blinged Submariner... and if you want a blinged Sub, get the 16613. Now that's a stunner.

The reason no rep Rolex has ever had any staying power with me (besides the fact that I own four gens) is hat they have always felt light as a feather compared to my gens. This one should be about right I imagine

I also have own genuine Rolex models, and in my opinion the major tell in the weight is in the clasp. It feels and sounds thin in comparison. I do not know if this model will adress that issue. The movement will add to the overall weight, but the clasp on the rep just pales in the hand of anyone who has owned the real deal.

D

.

How is the sheet metal clasp weight on the gen Oyster (without diver's extension) any different than the rep sheet metal clasp?

I don't understand this statement at all. Or are you referring to the new style "Daytona" clasp?

Maybe I'm breaking the rules or something... but I've been mostly looking at those 90's style vintage watches lately. I'm extremely bored of the new huge and thick 45mm watches anyway. Most of them look ridiculous, imho... especially when people with small, anorectic wrists wear them.

Two-tone chronograph with white dial is a great combo. And personally, I think 40-42mm is the perfect size.

I have always wanted to add a two-tone watch into my collection and I always considered this to be the one of the most beautiful.

I like the BTR/Discovery line but this early 2000's model has the perfect size for a TT watch at 41mm.

There's no rep so...

http://tinyurl.com/cujrsur

Can you still get the Noob version, which was pretty damn good for the price?

To be honest, it looked MUCH better than the watch in the initial post.

Hey... just found this pic from the wild. Don Johnson/Miami Vice wearing the older 1911 model. Cool!

Indeed. That 1675 is my favorite. I also like the orange Doxa.

Of course the Double Red is the crown jewel.

Thanks for sharing!

Yes... definitely. Your Rolex collection puts everyone into shame.

Impressive collections & watches!!

Keep 'em coming... among the best threads I've seen lately.

Excellent shots... beautiful watches!

This is what RWG is all about.

That is really nice.

If I ever get a vintage rep, this is the one.