Jump to content
When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.

TeeJay

Member
  • Posts

    10,951
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Posts posted by TeeJay

  1. I don't understand the comments about the dial being illegible, honestly... Who looks at the dial when telling time? There are watches out there with no dial markers at all, as long as the hands are visible telling the time is fairly simple.

    I'm guessing you've never worn a 1655... Dials with no markers are fine, but the 1655 dial is a nightmare to read, because the eye picks up on the additional 24hour markings instead of the main ones. For example, the eye sees the first marker past 30, and thinks 35, but it's not, it's actually 32.5, and then the mind re-calculates, and it gets a bit :blink: rather than simply looking at a glance and easily reading the time. You may well be one of the lucky people who can wear the watch and tolerate the dial. The effect is impossible to tell from photos, only possible to experience while wearing the watch, but is incredibly pronounced.

    Lets put it another way... If the dial format for the 1655 is perfectly acceptable, why do you think Rolex discontinued to use the dial, and proceded to built the next generation of Explorer II's with GMT/Submariner-style dials and continue that style to this day? :whistling:

  2. Which one? Come on, those are Skillz... make them Mad Skillz.

    And tell the crowd why you think it's a 'Flake?

    Doesn't this angle make you think 1680 Sub???

    post-32-0-32754700-1288647242.jpg

    I can't think of the model number off the top of my head, but the no-date variant like I'm working on building :) As to why I think that... Well, that's the most recent watch you've mentioned purchasing, I can't see a cyclops on the crystal, so that's making me think it's a no-date watch :yeah::drinks:

  3. You are absolutely right TJ. The McQueen is an absolute nightmare when it comes to telling time at a glance.... but the unique dial is what attracted me to it in the first place

    I know exactly what you mean there, the dial looks sooooo good in photos, I thought "I'll get me one of those... :victory: " But trying to read the time quickly... That's just :blink::unsure::wounded1: I know Rolex took design feedback from divers when the Sea-Dwellers and Submariner lines were being updated, I wonder if they took feedback from Shepard, which led to the 1655 becoming the modern Explorer II we have today (which otherwise should be dubbed Explorer III :whistling: ) Yours really do make a handsome pair, wear them well :drinks:

  4. I didn't know a rep of the X-33 was produced? Do you have pics you could share in another thread?

    I don't have many, but here's what I have :) This was a funny watch, and I have very mixed feelings about it. I mostly wanted it because its commection to Minority Report, but I never really bonded with it as a watch till I put it on the rubber strap. I would normally say that a rep is as good as a gen, but in this case, because of the digital functions (and insanely loud alarm) I think this may be an instance of the gen being a neccessity if the functions are to be used. As an aesthetic representation of the X-33, it's not too bad (but far from perfect :whistling: )

    DSCN0581.jpg

    DSCN0583.jpg

    4c7f4a47.jpg

    DSCN0437.jpg

    DSCN1070.jpg

    DSCN1069.jpg

  5. Absolutely fantastic pair, they look great together :good: Nice idea to put a 2893 in the 1655, as you say, it's not accurate to the original specs, but it is providing proper GMT function, so that's an improvement over the original specifications :) Can't wait to refit mine to look like Oliver Shepard's , it might actually see some wrist time then :whistling:

  6. Here's my guess of the situation:

    Guy A has a watch. Over time, he might replace a damaged bracelet with an aftermarket replacement, but as far as he's concerned, it's still 'a real Rolex', as he's only put a new strap (which still says Rolex :bangin: ) on his 'real Rolex' watch. and he later sells this watch as such, on to Guy B, who doesn't know any better than to accept Guy A at his word that it's 'a real Rolex'. Guy B is now selling the watch under the same misconception he purchased it under. Or, he might just know exactly what the watch is all about, and trying to pull a fast one... :whistling:

  7. Something new for the man from Alaska... yes the 455 endlinks are wrong but hey, you gotta do what you gotta do.

    post-32-0-93294400-1288378367.jpg

    Even though I'm not yet a fully fledged member, welcome to the Snowflake Club :drinks: How're you finding the visibility of the hands and indices compared to your other Subs and S-Ds?

    925pb925pp1000979.jpg

    w925pb925pp1000982.jpg

    Always nice to see something custom :good::victory:

  8. Gotta say this is the only thing I've regretted letting go. There was a rumor it had once belonged to Clapton but it was unprovable. It sure played nice though! :tu:

    f50.jpg

    :tu: :tu:

    I once went to school with a kid who's dad went to art college with Clapton, who said that Clapton got kicked out for playing his guitar all the time :lol: The kid was a douche, and his dad was an abusive control freak, but it's always made for an amusing anecdote :)

×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up