r11co

And yet there are still so few votes in my poll. Get over there and vote, people!!

And of course Mr Daltrey has been the Star in the (old) reasonably priced car. He was pretty average AFAIR.

John's feeling left out again :D

I did, actually. Isn't it handy that most of the cars they review are RHD, putting the camera in the perfect location to catch the watch wrist!

Some say his eyes are superlumed, and that he can repair and service a seconds@6 Daytona just by rubbing it between his thumb and forefinger. All we know is that he's called......

I have it on good authority that The Stig is a member of RWG.

Nice price if you want a wearer and aren't too interested in re-sale.

That'll be the whole watch then...?

Well, looks like I've started something.......

Does this mean I get a freebie?! PS. At the time of writing this thread proves the 'democratic process' is [censored]. PPS. No 'Asian ETA' crap please! Put the 21J Miyota copy back in it like before. At least it'll be proven mechanics and beat right. Some people will never learn.......

Good info. As long as we are all agreed the thickness of the 2892/1120/ST-18 is the same!!?

The first one has got bugger-all to do with the movie And, as I said, I ain't talking about the watch. Should I start a new OT thread entitled 'How hard does Leo DiCaprio have to work to get an Oscar?' PS. Still think the film is Ace!

So where's the first one, then? Oh, and I wasn't talking about the watch......

Loads! Something didn't sit right with me about the comment on the ST-18 as I'm sure I'd even read a non-rep watch forum report on it commenting on how similar it was in dimensions and design to the 2892. A+J's assertion is totally contradictory to all other information we have - including your eye-witness!!

In their reply to the 'little white lies' thread.. This was the first time I'd heard it suggested that the profile of the Seagull ST-18 was thicker than the ETA2892 movement of which it is supposed to be a clone. I didn't think any more about it, until today I was looking at a picture of a standard Omega SMP that I could determine was genuine because it had shallow 'low-profile' caseback. Reps of this model always had an ETA2824 movement which is 1.2mm deeper than the Omega calibre 1120 movement - necessitating a deeper caseback which is a good 'tell' of the rep. The only rep SMP that didn't suffer this flaw was the 'closed factory' 40th Anniversary 007 SMP which initially came fitted with a genuine ETA2892-A2 - which is identical to the calibre 1120 in thickness - and latterly with a Seagull ST-18 clone. Both these watches had the shallower caseback fitted. I strongly suspect that A+J's 'excuse' for not using the Seagull movement in their B+R rep because it was thicker than the ETA2892 is a 'mistake' on their part. I am sure both movements are the same profile. I know members here have worked on these watches (MVB, The Zigmeister!) I know some even have both movements in their posession. I for one would appreciate this confusion being sorted out!

That is 100% real. The date-window is spot-on, and the 'perfect' pearl is only a recent development on reps with the advent of the SMP chrono and uPO. Plus no standard SMP rep came with such a shallow caseback - only the 007's ever sported 2892 which would allow such a fitting and the caseback on them is of course a different design. Rounded end-link access holes are the sign of a later model 'closed factory' rep (ie. 2824 based one). This is quite funny actually, and indeed suggests that some people have ended up with gen watches with aftermarket bracelets attached. Having said that, the closed factory bracelet was a masterpiece anyway - as good as the gen and I have my watchmaker's word for that - and the rounded access holes are nothing you can't fix with some care and a square needle-file.....

The case-back is correct in the pictures, but make sure you ask the seller a ton of questions about every detail of the watch you want confirmed before buying (for example, is that really 316L SS...?)

Finnaly caught the movie last night. Poor wee Leo. He's a cracking actor, so how hard does he have to work to shake off the pretty-boy image and win an Oscar?!?! Great film, despite the Hollywood set-piece at the end...

Fair enough! It is interesting though that we can be absolute over one of our own rule infringements without having to prove intent to mislead, yet vague over something that is potentially more damaging - actual proven incidences of deception. I am grateful for the work that goes on behind the scenes to root out the potential bludgers - I won't call them scammers as real scammers wouldn't last 10 minutes (anyone remember RolexAward...?!)

I know Kevin's had his knuckles rapped for another minor rule infringement, but I think in this case Ken was a bit harsh. As long as no-one is circumventing the dealer process by advertising specific items while posing as a 'lay member' as it were I don't see any problems with p9b (Kevin) chipping in. In fact the information on exclusive contracts, relative costs of movements, and supply of certain watches is quite enlightening. It is brave of a 'dealer' to share that sort of info with us as it damages their ability to hide their markup. Honesty and all that....

I don't think that will happen. However, I do think that their coats are on a 'shoogly peg' in the dealers' section. If that means anything to them then now is the time for gestures of goodwill. If it doesn't then there are others waiting to take their place. I'm sure that they will be welcome to remain as registered members of the forum. We can't change what goes on outside here, but the paid up members of RWG aren't stumping up to give charlatans credibility and advertising space. I don't like to think that my subscription is adding legitimacy to people who hide behind weasel words.

Indeedy! In terms of reps, this.... this.... and this... were all built on the same slimmer case and were about as good as it got. Sadly, no more...

Hear here! There are two watch purchases I regret not making. One was a (genuine) ETA2892 powered 40th Anniversary 007 SMP from River. At the time (before I knew of watch forums) I thought it was ridiculously expensive for a rep. As I found out it was expensive for a quality rep, but with good reason... The other is the ROL187 from Silix. I wish sometimes they'd take it off the site and stop taunting me. (Actually, ROL170 would have been even better, save the glaring misprint on the dial).

Some people have the patience and tolerance to take time to build your trust before stabbing you in the back. Others can be two-faced! My experiences were brief and to the point. I didn't seem to matter enough so was treated accordingly..........

I don't. The whole raison d'etre of this forum (and its predecessor) was to reveal the truth behind scams and misrepresentation of products in the selling of replica watches. If you don't agree with that then what is your reason for being here?!?!