rionrlty

Thanks guys, appreciate it.

I just wondered about the proper pronunciation of the word. Its apparently a German company so I would expect it to be pronounce like "Block'n", but others have said "Black'n" like the color black. A third option would be "Blake'n" with a long A, like the name Blake. I looked on Youtube but could find none where they actually say the name. Since I now own a "Blaken" rep I guess I should learn how to say it.

Does anyone know the correct pronunciation for the name "BLAKEN" ?

Does anyone know the correct Clarks Part number for a 116710 Sub GMT II-C. I've tried to ask on EBay, but got no response. I would also consider a used rep crystal if anyone has one for sale.

Quite a while back a member here was nice enough to provide a copy of this book to those of us who requested it. It was sent via email and arrived as an Adobe Acrobat PDF file. It is in both Italian and English, and all illustrations and photos are included. It cannot be searched but one can scroll through page by page. I'm not very good with computers and I have tried to send this as an attachment to an email, but it is too large. I believe I can figure out how to send it using Microsoft One Drive. At least I can try. I may be able to send it direct from Acrobat also. If interested please send me a PM with an email address and I will attempt to send it on.

Thanks guys, although it isn't a slam dunk I believe the yeas outnumber the nays at this point. I kind of believed it was gen too, but wanted some more informed opinions so I could be more certain. I've also learned a lot along the way from some of you. I'm leaning right now toward having the movement serviced and putting it in one of my Rollies with a clone movement. The only negative is that they all seem to be running fine for now and I always believed that if it ain't broke don't fix it. Does anyone know what it takes to put an ETA based movement in a watch that came with a 2816DG? Do you just need a movement holder and hands, or something more that I haven't considered yet? Thanks for all the response and I will check back every day or two to check out additional replies. Happy New Year all!

I just checked some records and determined that the watch this came out of was purchased in 2006. As I did not even know what a TD was at that point I can't claim that origin, but other than that I don't know for sure who it came from. It is a GMT II with adjustable GMT hand, but it worked quite well as I remember. The watch got little use during that time, until it was disassembled about 4 years ago. The movement was sealed in a dust proof container since then. As I said earlier the plated case was damaged and I sent it out to a fellow who said he could replate it with thicker plating. Of course I never saw the case again. It had the bezel on it, but I still have the insert, which is a cheap copy. The watch itself was beautiful and seemed to have fairly thick plating, but alas it received a deep scratch on the side of the case, which went through to the SS. So far my responses, on two different forums, have yielded about even results for both gen and clone so I no better off than when I started. I don't want to sell this as gen if it is not, but neither do I want scrap it as a clone if it is gen. I will say that my watch smith, who is not an AD, has been critical of the clones, but he is convinced this is gen.

I have another one with nickel plated ETA 2836-2 and the markings look right on. If its gen I may keep it and look for a good GMT with a dead Asian movement.

Here are the pictures. The movement came out of an all gold anniversary edition GMT. It ran great but the case was damage and it scratched through the gold. I sent it out to be replated but never received it back. I've written it off. It's been about 4 years now. I took it to my watch smith and he said it looked gen to him. The rotor had a fakey Rolex glue on overlay and thats wht glue residue that discolors the rotor. Thanks for the advice.

Hi Guys, I could sure use some advice from some of you Rolex fans. I have a nice gen ETA 2836-2 GMT gold plated movement that is surplus. It comes with a green rep dial, gold hand set, including GMT hand and is marked 25 jewels Swiss on the rotor. I cannot find the stem and crown that came with it although I'm still looking. It is in good running condition. I'm thinking of posting it for sale on the forum, but I have no idea of it's value. I would appreciate some input on this.

Thanks for the reply sneed12. I think you're on to something with that second statement. Why else would so many watches with slow beat movements be as smooth as a 28,800? Could it also have something to do with the special gearing to switch the subdials around, at least in the Navitimer01? I just think it is not as simple as high beat/slow beat. Even on my gen. B13 fighters I wouldn't call the movement completely smooth and I swear some of the cheap 22j chinese watches are as smooth as it is.

I just read the recent comments on the low beat/high beat question for the thousandth time now I believe. I just purchased the 01 Navitimer a couple of months ago and I love it, it keeps excellent time, but sure enough, there seems to be a jerkier movement of the center chrono seconds than on other A7750 chronograph watches. Having made that observation I have a few more comments… I’m not an expert but I know an old time watchmaker who is and has been around from the old really low beat pocket watch days thru the present. He says that he doesn’t believe the human eye can distinguish visually the difference in second hand movement from 21,600BPH to 28,800BPH??? OK, but I can see it, with my own eyes, there is a difference but…I have numerous reps, some with gen 7750 movements, some with non chronograph ETAs and many up to 15 years old with cheap Chinese movements (these have proven very durable and reliable by the way). Some of these have the old 17j movements and some have the newer 22j A2813 and all are non-chronograph, but have calendar movements. Most are large diameter watches (40mm or larger) so the old excuse that a longer second hand shows the jerkiness more just doesn’t fly. Strangely, what I observe with these watches doesn’t fit the scenario. While none of the confirmed 28,800BPH watches have a jerky (large) second hand, neither do any of the cheap watches with 17j and 22j, they all move nice and smooth. Now I’m certain none of these watches are higher than 21,600BPH and I suspect that some of the 17j are even slower. I also have a couple of 1960’s bulova automatics with slow beat movements and they are silky smooth, but of course they are only 35mm watches. In light of these observations I pose the question…could it be something besides the beat calibration causing the jerky movement? Otherwise how do you explain it? I tried to get a discussion going regarding this in the general discussion area, but no one responded. I’d love to hear comments on this, especially from some of the experienced watchmaker types.

Thanks to both Rolexman and SSteel for that. I will now see if my watch repair knows how to fix it. Appreciate the advice.

UPDATE! On the Corum, after finding that I could reset the hour counter with the chrono reset without starting the chronograph I find now that it stays at zero. So to reset properly after the chronograph was stopped and reset, the reset button would have to be pushed a second time to stop or reset the hour counter. This just gets stranger and stranger.

UPDATE! On the Corum, after finding that I could reset the hour counter with the chrono reset without starting the chronograph I find now that it stays at zero. So to reset properly after the chronograph was stopped and reset, the reset button would have to be pushed a second time to stop or reset the hour counter. This just gets stranger and stranger.

I’ve been collecting reps for a long time and have many in my collection that use the A7750 movement. I’ve had most of the variations used in different brands of watches. I’ve found them to be fairly reliable, but poorly lubricated from the factory, particularly in the winding train, which has so far been remedied by a partial or full service. Out of over 25 reps with this movement I’ve only had one that was completely terminal. However I have now run into a very strange situation which is completely new to me, not in one instance, but in two different watches with two different modifications to their A7750 movement. The first one came up last week. I’ve been working on getting an old style Breitling Blackbird put together. Although the case is old school, the movement is fresh, taken from the latest generation obtained from Toro. From the start it had problems, stopping often for no apparent reason. After a service however it seemed to run fine. This is the A7750 with the big date modification and the seconds @3. Whenever I receive a watch I always run the chronograph for day or so just to make sure all of the subdials are registering and resetting properly and this watch performed fine. A couple of days ago I ran the chronograph for a few hours, to time a sale on an auction site. When I reset it, all dials returned properly. An hour or so later however I notice that the hour subdial (although it reset properly) resumed running, as if the chronograph had been restarted, counting off the hours as if it had never been reset although the minute dial remained stationary at zero. A couple of weeks ago I received a Corum Admirals cup (old style) purchased M2M. It was in near new condition and when tested worked beautifully. A few hours ago I put it on and noticed that the hour subdial (@6) was not reset to zero, although the minute subdial was stationary in the zero position. I started and reset it and both dials reset to zero properly, but again the hour subdial resumed counting down. I then found that I could press reset without starting the Chronograph and the hour subdial would reset to zero. Under this scenario, for along timing interval, you would have to reset the hour subdial before starting the chronograph. Both of these watches share the same unusual subdial layout with minutes@9, hours@6 and small seconds@3, but the Blackbird has the big date @12 while the Corum has the small date @6 . Has anyone experienced this situation before? Is this something that’s always been there and I just never noticed it until now? Can it be remedied? The Blackbird is in the shop now, but attached is a picture of the Corum about 45minutes after the chronos were reset. Note the position of the hour counter.

I’ve been collecting reps for a long time and have many in my collection that use the A7750 movement. I’ve had most of the variations used in different brands of watches. I’ve found them to be fairly reliable, but poorly lubricated from the factory, particularly in the winding train, which has so far been remedied by a partial or full service. Out of over 25 reps with this movement I’ve only had one that was completely terminal. However I have now run into a very strange situation which is completely new to me, not in one instance, but in two different watches with two different modifications to their A7750 movement. The first one came up last week. I’ve been working on getting an old style Breitling Blackbird put together. Although the case is old school, the movement is fresh, taken from the latest generation obtained from Toro. From the start it had problems, stopping often for no apparent reason. After a service however it seemed to run fine. This is the A7750 with the big date modification and the seconds @3. Whenever I receive a watch I always run the chronograph for day or so just to make sure all of the subdials are registering and resetting properly and this watch performed fine. A couple of days ago I ran the chronograph for a few hours, to time a sale on an auction site. When I reset it, all dials returned properly. An hour or so later however I notice that the hour subdial (although it reset properly) resumed running, as if the chronograph had been restarted, counting off the hours as if it had never been reset although the minute dial remained stationary at zero. A couple of weeks ago I received a Corum Admirals cup (old style) purchased M2M. It was in near new condition and when tested worked beautifully. A few hours ago I put it on and noticed that the hour subdial (@6) was not reset to zero, although the minute subdial was stationary in the zero position. I started and reset it and both dials reset to zero properly, but again the hour subdial resumed counting down. I then found that I could press reset without starting the Chronograph and the hour subdial would reset to zero. Under this scenario, for a long timing interval, you would have to reset the hour subdial before starting the chronograph. Both of these watches share the same unusual subdial layout with minutes@9, hours@6 and small seconds@3, but the Blackbird has the big date @12 while the Corum has the small date @6 . Has anyone experienced this situation before? Is this something that’s always been there and I just never noticed it until now? Can it be remedied? The Blackbird is in the shop now, but enclosed is a picture of the Corum about 45minutes after the chronos were reset. Note the position of the hour counter.

I know that some brands had cases supplied from sub-contract suppliers at different times down through the years. Does anyone know if this is true of Rolex too?

Hi Markiemark, I want to thank you for commenting on my Rolex 16610 Sub that I posted on the Rolex forum. I you don’t mind I would like to discuss your comments a little more. Please understand that I don’t want to be argumentative, but just want to understand the exact inaccuracies that you brought to light. I have a copy of “The Rolex Story” by Mondani, which is supposed to be the definitive authority on Rolex configuration. In case you haven’t seen it there are many very detailed pictures of actual confirmed original examples to use for comparison. On page 126-129 is the 16610 that I have. I bought this is the late 90s so it has the through drilled lug holes but solid end links on the bracelet. The end links have slots, but on the watch with drilled lug holes they should not so this may be a slight inaccuracy, unless it was made right at the transition when they had already started using the new end links with slots. According to Mondani this was known to happen. Regarding your comment on the borders of the markers being too wide; In comparing it with large picture on page 127 of the book I cannot find much difference in appearance to the original at all. In addition the font on the dial appears to be spot on in both size and location with one exception. The crown seems to be slightly closer to the 12 marker than the original, maybe ½ mm or less. Everything else seems to be exactly correct. Concerning your comment that the case is the wrong shape; Again, comparing it with the side and top view pictures on page 127 and 128 it appears to be extremely close with just 2 minor descrepancies that I can see. It’s hard to tell for sure but the crown guards may be slightly too thick at the ends and the holes in the lugs appear to be too close to the end of the lug. However, I have noticed this same variance on a number of frankens pictured on the forum that are considered high quality. Concerning your comment on the bezel knurls being wrong: I’ve looked and I’ve looked but I just can’t see it. I’ve counted and it has exactly the same number as the gen. and to me they look the same shape. The end links and lugs fit extremely well, better than the gen, but appear otherwise almost exact. Concerning the bezel insert; As I stated in the description I liberated this from a very cheap rep because the original was pretty scratched up. I believe you said the font was too thick and shaped wrong on it. I looked at the scratched original and sure enough the font was thinner. Imagine my surprise when I looked at the picture in Mondani’s book and found it matched this newer, cheap bezel almost exactly. What do you make of that? The pearl on the cheap bezel looks closer to gen than any other I’ve seen. As I said this is not argumentative. I really want to hear your response on this. Sincerely, Mike

Any good watchmaker should be able to source a replacement.

markiemark, Thanks for the comments. It would seem the Sub is not very good. With the YM the pictures could be part of the problem though. The mid links on the bracelet and clasp are polished, but I can see in the picture that it doesn't show up that well. Perhaps that's why the dial color appears off too. I had an opportunity to compare it to a gen Rholesium quite a few years ago and the dial color and texture seemed very close at the time. The insert does in fact have a matt/blasted background with polished raised numerals and it looked a lot like the gen too, except the color was off because the original was made of platinum. Where the bezel marker just to the right of the triangle is nicked you can see brass showing through so while the rest of the watch is SS the bezel insert is obviously plated, probably to make it look more like platinum. The ETA movements should be worth something although they probably need servicing after this long. Oddly, although confirmed gen ETA, neither of these has been all that accurate, even when new. They probably weren't regulated properly.

Hello Rolex fans, I need some help. I am not a Rolex expert. I’m actually more into Breitling and IWC at this time, but when I first started collecting reps I liked Rolex best and still have a few. I have two watches here, a Yachtmaster Rolesium, and Submariner 16610. These were actually my first 2 reps ever and I bought them 15 years or more ago, maybe closer to 20. I’d been collecting vintage watches for quite a while and when I first got the internet, back in the 90s sometime, I blundered onto a web site selling Rolex reps. That was the only brand they carried and by today’s standards they were very expensive. I believe I paid over $500 each for these. I also had a gold Yachtmaster that I sold on the forum a while back and found out after the fact that it may have been an MBK or MBW, which I understand are premium brands. It had very thick gold plating and I paid over $700 for it. They both have ETA 25J movements, but I don’t know exactly which model number and I don’t have a tool to open them right now. As I mentioned earlier I am a novice when it comes to Rolex, so I need your opinions on what I have here. If it’s typical junk then so be it. You’re not going to hurt my feelings, but if it’s anything special I would like to know that too. I should mention that on the Sub the insert got all scratched up over the years and replaced it with one I had laying around off a cheap rep. If it is worth it, I plan to replace it with a better quality one. Anyway I appreciate your input.

Thanks Rolexman, I thought of asking you first but didn't want to impose myself on you're time. You're the best and I know you are a busy guy.

Can anyone tell me how to remove and replace the lock down pushers on my Breitling Blackbird. I think they are the same as on the EVO and I have a spare case but can't determine how to remove and replace them.

I'm looking for info on removing and replacing the screw lock pushers on my Breitling Blackbird. I believe they are the same on the Blackbird and EVO and I have a spare case, but I can't figure out how to remove and replace them.