tonyp1

I Guess Im a minority here. I actually think It would be humorous to be called out on a fake. What is worse the guy who wears a reasonable fake or the guy who has no life and spends his whole day looking at watch magazines in order to spot people with fakes to expose them. As for pulling off a fake I think when im driving the 512 or 930 I could be wearing a $20 fake Daytona and nobody would question its authenticity. This Is going to seem snooty of me but some people couldn't pull off a GEN. The way they dress, the cars they drive it just screams cant quite afford it. Theres a gentleman on the Finest Rolex forum with a Beautiful TT blue sub that drives a $1500 dollar ford and dresses like a garbage man now hes the nicest guy and has taught me much about the Rolex hobby. I am sure that everyone he meets thinks his TT sub is a $50 fake.

Are they date or non date? Honestly thats only ever is $500 difference at most. Ive probably chased 40 of these things on ebay. Most SS Subs with light use are in the $3500 to $4000. The watch thats only 1 week old id go to $4500 a new one is $5100 from the AD.

I guess this is what is considered solid gold 14k mid links by rep standards. The gold is close in color and to really tell a difference you have to put it next to a gen 18k TT. Im told that a gen Rolex band has around 9 grams of 18k in the MID LINKS. 18k is 75% gold content and at around $19.00 per gram Rolex has something like $150/160 of 18k gold in a gen mid links depending on market prices. Again I cant say what they have in the SELs. So if 14k is only 58% gold content the reps have around $95 to $105 in gold content. Again this is all theory lol.

These watches amaze me. What would happen if a Rolex AD got one of these in for service? Would they still take out the 8lbs sledge hammer and destroy it?

This day date what movement did it have. I know the 2836-2 really has awful date function at least every one I have encountered has had misaligned date wheels.

WOW, Ive heard of cheap fakes but a Daytona with Rolex 24 on the back for $50. I would hate to see the build quality on this thing!

The more I look at this whatever material their using its not sandwiched its solid. So this is not plated its something else. I recent found out from the guys at Finest rolex forum that rolex only uses around 30 grams of actual gold content on a TT. Thats only slightly more than 1 ounce. One ounce of gold is $657.50 but rolex is charging $2650 extra for the TT version.

I have read allot about gold reps having awful gold plating. While allot of times this is true what I've found with this TT SUB bracelet is that even when it does wear through its very hard to tell. Not like those cheap SEIKO gold watches that once it does happen you see bright stainless steel shining through the tarnished gold. I destroyed this band link with a dremel and a file you can see I took pictures in different light sources to try to expose the color difference. Really I could not tell I think this is mainly because the brass they are using is not the typical reddish hue but a very gold like yellow.

How did you do this? If this is a sapphire this is next to impossible. I used a hammer and screw driver on mine to take the cyclops off and not a scratch. These things dont scratch or crack but they can shatter into a 1000 pieces.

Well Ive posted a bunch about this. Ive been quite curious about the flaws of my TT subs. So I went to the official rolex dealer I never wear my fakes in there as the gentlemen that normally waits on me ( servicing of the 1680 and GMT ) might inquire about my watch. Any ways he saw me staring at the new TT SUB and offered to let me see it . This watch last year was $7300 now its $7800. I dont if he was trying to get me to peel open my pocket book but he informed that the TT Subs will be going up 10% a Year for the fore seeable future. Rolex seems to think that its TT Subs are too much of a bargain considering the money that some of the lesser known marks are charging. Back to the watch, my first reaction is that my fake has almost spot on blue. Second thing is the Rolex is now using a printing technique that is almost three dimensional when I say three dimensional I mean the printing is so thick that the letters are actually raised above the dial. Whereas on the fake they are flush. Finally the date magnifier is no longer 2.5 Id say 2.0. Over all the the watches looked very similar even the weight to me seemed similar with the fake only seeming to be slightly lighter. The Gold on the Gen was the exact same color as my fake what was noticeable was the finish. The Gens gold is not as mirror finish as the fake but I had to stand with it for almost a minute in bright sun light to spot this. These are my observations if anyone has anything to add or contradict I welcome you. BTW I found this amazing. I tried to find out how many ounces of gold are in the TT subs and for humor I suggest it might be plated. The watch maker over heard and became offended and stated "Rolex has not plated watches since the Mid 70s datejust . Even then the plating was so thick it was label CAPPED" So Rolex did plate watches at one time.

No I have not. I vacillated about this purchase for months from Andrew.

I know these things arent suppose to have a purple tint but check this out !!!!!!!!!! http://cgi.ebay.com/LIKE-NEW-SOLID-18K-SS-...tem110089425803

Maybe this helps not saying the color is perfect by any means. Also here is a (borrowed) pic from By-tors article showing gen verse fake. Gen on the left Fake on the right. The Gens gold is whiter than the fakes but i have been noticing variances from year to year. It seems that older rolex models have a decidedly yellow gold whereas the newer models seem to be a whiter shade of gold.

To me the Gold looks spot on. In sun light it has a buttery look just like the ones I see on ebay.

Thanks, I have a really cheap camera that barely has a micro setting. Pug I used to have a F4 and a F3 but I sold them on ebay because they were just so complicated. Thats how I ended up with the cheap point and shoot.

Im up for both! Is my photography that bad?

I posted pics of these watches on both RWG and TRC in the Rolex section. Nothing was said. So I figured Id come here.This is what I love about this place I can get a honest opinion about the reps Ive bought. You guys have caught things the guys on Finest Rolex forum didn't LOL

Im sure some have had good luck with these. What you find is that on these cheaper Subs they dont have correct dials the printings very bad and theres no quality control.

Im no expert but for a $149 I would not expect much. Something Ive noticed with all these cheaper subs is the is the poor print quality on the dial and date wheel.

$250 a piece. Thanks I think the blue Sub has nice CGs too. They are Andrews 14k subs.

Thanks anyone else care to share pics of their tt subs. I know I cant be the only one with interest in these.

After much anticipation my two TT subs Arrived today. Im not going to wear these much not because there bad reps but because there really good reps. There are flaws as with all reps. Both blue and black TT subs are beautiful with almost spot on gold. The blue is almost spot on too its kind of hard to tell in some pics as im not using sun light but a high intensity fluorescent halogen bulb. All in all not bad .

well I vintagizied my bezel insert on my 1680 CN. Not sure whether I like it yet but most of the watches I see on ebay have pretty shabby bezels so maybe this could be considered patina.

Sorry It was unclear to me whether they meant scuffing of the case or the case back itself.

Should the case back be polished or sanded? My rep is a DW but its case back is polished. I believe mine is suppose to represent a circa 74.