By-Tor

Wow, wow, wow!!! Wanna sell it?

Speedy:

That looks really nice with the strap. Good choice Vric, beauty watch too.

This search function is amazing. I found this in 3 seconds. Wow! http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=4853

@Category 5: I saved the pics on my hard drive. Best looking watch in the world? Hmm, that's difficult to say...but it's not far from that title. This blue dial version is a real stunner. I know what you mean about not being able to capture it to the pics... I've seen the genuine and pics don't do it justice. I would love to see this properly repped. @Usil: There's a rep of black dial version available, Andrew has it. But it's quartz (which wouldn't bother me) but the reports also say it has quite a lightweight and cheap feel.

That 2'o'clock marker is definitely upside down. And shouldn't the dial have markings T Swiss - Swiss T? Just a wild guess.

Needless to say...I love your collection. Which gets the most wrist time?

Beautiful watch, great pictures. This watch is very high on my list. I still haven't decided the dial color though. Thanks for the exceptionally good review.

No, thanks to you. And if you review and post new pictures of the watch... just edit your original post and add them here (so the link stays the same). I've been thinking about Aqua Terra or Railmaster myself. They both have seriously been growing on me lately.

Very nice and classic look. I like it. Members haven't purchased many Railmasters, and it has been difficult to find any reviews/pictorials of them. So I added this link to my Omega Guide.

Sean (ETASwiss) posted this at TRC: http://www.replicacollector.com/members/in...c=24367&hl= Datewheel is still white.

This guy just can't be serious. http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-Submariner-with-...1QQcmdZViewItem

Wonder how I missed that post... Well anyway, like I said, that white SD of yours is light years better than any average MBW 1680. It's light years better than my fully modded 1680 as well...which again proves that it's the best MBW base watch to start with. Like I said, I couldn't call it out as a fake. Especially not from that angle. I could never, ever haven't been able to tell from your franken-Tudor, either. Didn't you put genuine dial in it...and the SD too?

@Ubi: I have no idea what incident you're talking about...but someone from the forum once posted pics of my CN Sub to WatchUSeek Rolex forum. Actually I think it was the guy to whom I sold the watch. He was a noob and perhaps he just wanted to "test the waters". Only the fifth or sixth poster called him out though. I found that quite amazing because looking at that rep now... it was rather bad. Needless to say it was an embarrassing thing to do, and I made a thread about it in the old RWG.

Ditto. All excellent suggestions. Personally, I'd go for a Tudor or Heuer Carrera because PO rep is so good. TAG Aquaracer 2000 Chronograph is a beautiful watch too.

DEAR ALL, DO'NT WORY: This is just another episode of the endless Paul soap opera. He'll come through (maybe it takes 6 days, maybe 6 months) but I'm sure it'll be ok.

No problems. I'm not that easily offended. I speak up my mind but try to avoid getting too "personal". And I make mistakes too. I read your reply sloppily and didn't examine the pics very carefully. That's true. And I have never been so anal about the flaws. One of my favourite rep watches, Speedy BA Venus is a half-fantasy watch, a hybrid model, not accurate at all. Some people obsess much more over little inaccuracies. Of course it's nice to get a watch that's better in accuracy department, but for me the overall quality and "feel" is more important (besides the good looks of course). And perhaps we require more from the Rolex reps because they're automatically always "suspect" in people's eyes. I was just thinking how beneficial it is to invest large amounts of money to create a rep that's 80%, or even 90% accurate...if it won't pass the "expert eye" anyway. I think people underestimate the knowledge of the collectors in places like TZ. If someone posts a pic of his MBW there (which I hope never happens) I'm sure 4 out of 10 Rolex guys there would spot it right away. Perhaps even more? Partly because I have a feeling that most of them read these forums too.. and they are aware of these reps. So the question remains: why do we modify them... for who, and is it worth it? Everyone can decide themselves. I also find it strange that there's still no competition to MBW if people want a good vintage Rolex. Those other vintage reps don't come even close. Maybe outside the hardcore rep circles there's no real market for them? I also wonder why Breitlings, PAMs and Omegas are (generally) better reps than Rolexes. Or perhaps I've lost my perspective... we've become ultimate geeks and "watch Trekkie bastards" and we're discussing about ridiculously small flaws here. Rep will always be a rep, and they'll probably never become perfect. Maybe that's why they're so fascinating too? Just like Randy says: Everyone can walk to an AD and buy a Submariner. Where's the fun in that? I agree, paying $4000 for a watch isn't sane. It's much nicer to get 20 nice watches for the same price.

@Bill: Sorry about that my friend. My purpose isn't to put them down...far from it. They're still utterly amazing watches. They feel completely different than your average Rolly rep, even unmodified ones. Don't regret buying them, they're worth every cent. And with that (inaccurate) solid link bracelet they feel even better than a genuine Rolex (never tried on a gen 1680 though). Still, nobody ever suggested my 1680 to be a rep (despite those inaccuracies). Who would, just look at the dial job Tommy did. How many reps that look like 50 year old watches you see? Same can probably be said about ANY vintage MBW watch. They have the "feel" of an expensive watch. Only Rolex experts can call them out. I think we all are "experts", more or less. When I did the review of my Navitimer (which I found extremely accurate in many ways, but extremely inaccurate in many ways too) I tried to be totally honest with it and point out the flaws. Of course, when I get my new watch I'm always excited (who isn't). But when I look back my initial review and impression I sometimes notice a bias in my writeups. That's why I'll try to edit them accordingly... as I get some new information. But the original question was "are the MBW's the most accurate reps out of box"? My opinion is: No. Especially the red 1680 model. What "Sherrington" fails to understand is that I'm not doing the reviews (or examine these watches) because I want to present myself as some kind of Nostradamus... it's just that I'd like that everyone gets accurate and subjective information. That's what this forum has always been about (for me): You learn something new every day...especially from your mistakes...and the community benefits from this knowledge. This is just pure fun for me, I don't want to take any stress about it. If someone's watch gets insulted because truth gets told I really can't help it.

So you think that white version of the SD is the best base watch to achieve closest possible result? I think I agree, I don't think I could spot your white Dweller as a rep. But then again, I'm still not an expert.

Check the pics again. There were some probs with the Imagedump. @Ubi: Yes, rep is a rep (except your Daytona). And MBW's are amazing reps. But I believe many newbies have unrealistic exceptations about them. Do you think the rep factory used the standard 16610 dial with the 1680 rep, and just painted the SUBMARINER red? Based on the pics I've seen of the MBW 16610 it looks like they use the same case as well. Are there better redials available...or do you have to go with a gen dial (if they're even available)?

Thanks guys...back to the original issue: Talk is cheap so I composed 4 different pictures comparing "out of box" MBW RedSub to the genuine...and then a modded version. Let me know what you think...and can you give me your honest opinion whether the MBW 1680 is extremely accurate compared to genuine or not (despite the case dimensions of course). Let's just forget the emotions and look at them objectively. Here's the first comparison. The 600ft-200m are reversed on the gen here (weird). Notice the bright red SUBMARINER text which is small and narrow. Also notice the coronet and ROLEX printing...and completely different shape of the crown guards: Second comparison. Notice the different shape of crown guards. I agree, there's variation but they're again like small "chops": Third comparison. Fourth comparison. This is the only one I have managed to find that has almost similar coronet with the rep. It's the closest I've seen...and the only one I've seen. Which makes me think of a redial or just newer watch model. Everything else applies, though... including the small SUBMARINER print & cg's. Fifth comparison. Here's my Palped 1680 (that I used to own). Probably the most convincing replica watch I've owned (cheers Tommy, you're a genius!!!). The aging job was superb, just awesome. The watch was wonderful, no argument against that. I didn't exchange the crown and datewheel (and it's true that many old watches have white datewheels). But again, look at the dial and modified crown guards: immediately spottable. The guards start to "curve" downwards on the rep almost straight from the case. So I rest my case: how can you modify them properly if the shape is wrong to begin with?

If it turned out like that... sorry. That wasn't my intention. Whether I'm right or wrong doesn't matter, I'd just like to get the facts straight, that's all. And I have a feeling this discussion is going off on a wrong track. Let's forget the egos now and try not to make it personal. Crystalcranium asked a good question and this could be potentially informatial, good thread. Let's not ruin it.

Well you got me on that. Pat yourself on the back now...10 points for you. I didn't call myself an expert, I just post what I see. Obviously I made a mistake this time and didn't look the small pic properly, so what? And frankly, I seriously don't care how big of a Rolex expert you (or any others) think I am (if you look at my previous post I never claimed to be one). But it doesn't break my fragile little ego if someone "insults my watch", either. I just want to help members to look these watches objectively. Now... what if you come down from your high horse, stop acting like a child and attempting to take this discussion into personal level... and show me a proper (decent sized, unlike the previous ones) picture of a genuine dial that looks like the red 1680 MBW dial... (The one that looks like modern Rolex 16610 dial with red colored SUBMARINER font). That was the original question which you avoided. I'm not saying such dial doesn't exist, I just said that I have never seen one. This thread's purpose is to serve the members, not my massaging my ego or my "expertise" (or lack of) in Rolex. That has nothing to do with this whole discussion.

People often confuse these watches. They say that a Speedy can be obtained for very low price...but they're all these "reduced" versions. They also make midsize watches of most Seamasters...that cost MUCH less than the fullsize versions. If you buy from Ebay look the dimensions carefully. When you just take a quick look they look very much alike.

I get the old RWG without any probs. All works perfectly. Very strange indeed.