TeeJay

Thanks, and glad you agree Many thanks As you say, for the price, it could definitely have been worse, so I think it's a fairly good result If I'd been keeping it myself, I'd've flamed off the cyclops, but that's just how I feel about cyclopses Emily likes it She's not a watch enthusiast, so not as enthusiastic about it as some might be, but I can see it getting quite a bit of wrist time, as, when she put it on before it fell apart and got sent back, it went with everything she had on, despite two wardrobe changes

Thanks indeed, my friend Indeed, although the watch has a few flaws such as the dial printing, and the crystal, I think for the price, it's a great watch, and might certainly make for a good project base

Thanks bro This is, size-wise, what Freddy would refer to as "a gentleman's watch", and, different options, such as black dial, oyster or jubilee bracelet, and the DateJust is certainly a watch which could be someone's daily beater, although personally speaking, I prefer a bit more lume and visibility in my beaters Nothing's going to be done to this one, as I ordered it specifically for my wife, I've only been wearing it to 'test drive' it, to make sure it's not going to stop/fall apart during wear like last time I had previously been tempted to order one for myself, but I think if I'm totally honest with myself, it's just too blingy for me to wear, even as a dress watch, and I think I would rather a black-dialled DJ on black leather, as worn by Captain Jack Harkness: (although I do have my suspicions that that watch is actually an AirKing with date window, rather than a DateJust...)

Some of you may remember my first mention of the budget DateJust I bought for my wife, which had to be returned to the dealer following a bracelet failure, which then led to the movement self-destructing... Well, it arrived back today, with a new movement, and a new bracelet, so, as promised, I am reviewing the watch as a budget option. Excluding the costs of having to return it (just one of those things) the watch was £26 shipped. About my review: In writing this review, I am going to follow the style of a review which ultimately led to my interest in Omega watches, and ultimately reps, John B. Holbrook, II's excellent comparitive review, Omega Seamster Professional Vs Rolex Submariner. I am going to be judging the watch as objectively, and honestly as possible, giving justifications for my reasonings as I go. These scores are purely based upon my own observations and opinions about the watch, people are free to agree or disagree as they wish. A note about my 'scoring system': I will be scoring on a scale of 0 - 10, with 5 being the mid-way score. A score of 5, would mean that the 'aspect' performs its intended function. And no more. A score of five, in academic terms, would be considered 'a pass', but the lowest possible pass, and single lower mark would have meant a failing grade. Respectively, a 0 reflects a total failure to perform the designated role, and a 10 represents a performance of the designated role which goes 'above and beyond', and could not possibly be better. The watch I am reviewing is, as mentioned above, a Rolex DateJust. The watch is fitted with a Seagull movement, but I will not be judging this watch based on it's movement or time-keeping abilities, as it is an irrelevence to the overall watch. It is an automatic watch, and it tells the time, to use a quote from a British TV advertisement "It does what it says on the tin"... So, let's get started... CASE: Contrary to what some might believe or claim about 'budget watches', the case of this watch is not chrome-plated brass, but stainless steel. The sculptured sides of the case are much more elegant and tactile than the squared-off functionality of a Submariner's case, and the size of the watch makes it ideal for men or ladies to wear. I am not aware of any flaws in replication, so I am happy to give it a full score. RATING: 10 BEZEL: A mixed bag. The bezel on the DateJust is purely decorative, and performs no usefull function, as say the bezel on a Diver's Watch, or a GMT Pilot's Watch would. It is however, visually appealing, and echoes the shape of the links of the presidential bracelet. For these reasons, I am giving a double score with an overall average. RATING: Functionality: 3 Aesthetic Appearance: 7 Overall Average: 5 CASEBACK: Caseback features a green holographic sticker. Sticker is actually holographic, rather than just the two-tone green stickers seen on some budget reps. From the partially erased numbers on the sticker, I can tell that this is the same watch I sent away, which has been repaired, rather than a replacement watch. The caseback screws down sufficiently to provide a water-resistant seal. According to the internal engravings, Monarch Polfy SA built the watch in Gelena, Shitnerand RATING: 9 (reduced from 10 due to interior spellings) CROWN: The unprotected crown features indented ridges as a gripping surface, and the logo. The caseback screws down sufficiently to provide a water-resistant seal, but is not as easy to grip as a trip-lock crown. RATING: 9 DIAL: Definitely the highlight of the watch. This replicates the Rhodium dial, and, accordingly, displays a variety of blue/grey/silver tones, depending on the light source. All dial printings are correctly spelled, and clearly printed. I am not sure if the lettering is bold enough compared to the gen, and if I had to pick a fault, that would be it. The dial printing could certainly be of more even letter thickness, but, that said, the printing could definitely be worse... RATING: 9 MARKERS: Markers are polished Roman numerals, and add a really nice air of elegance and class to the watch. The edges of the markers catch the light in a very pleasing manner. Upon viewing the watch, my father in law (who is a quartz-worshipping philistine) said that he felt the dial/hands/markers were too indistinct from each other for his own use. Having worn the watch for a few hours now, I would disagree. I have observed that the contrast between the polished markers, and dial texture/pattern is actually quite noticeable: When the dial appears bright, the markers appear dark, and vice versa. I would accept that the markers are not as distinguishable as the markers on a Submariner, but, that is not the aim of the DateJust. I feel luminous markers (or dots above the markers) would improve the visibility of the dial in low-light conditions. On the genuine dial, the markers are not solid. RATING: 8 HANDS: Simple stick hands are the order of the day with this watch. My comments above, about the visibility of the markers, is mirrored in my observations of the hands: They do contrast depending on lighting conditions, but, are certainly not as noticeable as the hands on a Submariner. But, one must remember that this was never designed as a diver's watch, so that in itself, while not really a weakness, cannot be ignored. The minute and hour hands have luminous material, allowing for approximate time-reading in the dark. RATING: 8 CRYSTAL: Definitely the weakpoint of this watch, and the aspect which I consider most belies the watch's budget status. The crystal is sapphire, so that is a plus. However, the magnification cyclops is set 1mm low, and offset by 2 deg counter-clockwise. Ignoreable, and probably not something a non-watch enthusiast might even notice (certainly not a casual observer) Also, the crystal lacks the laser-etched Rolex Coronet at 6. While I do not personally consider that to be an issue in so much as rendering the watch 'unwearable', it would certainly make it impossible to try and pass the watch off as gen, to anyone who knew what to look for, as would the misaligned cyclops. Of course, a crystal transplant would be a relatively simple solution to this issue, and while it would enable the watch to pass for gen more easily, from a functional point of view, a replacement crystal would not actually serve any practical purpose. The crystal is not AR coated, and while I'm unsure of if the gen is AR coated, an AR coating would definitely serve to make the dial more visible. As I mentioned in my review of the Rolex Yacht-Master, the lack of AR is irritating, in that it actively obscures the watch's most attractive feature, and an AR coating would only serve to enhance that feature. Rating: 6 BRACELET: The presidential bracelet is incredibly comfortable, and practically moulds to the wrist. I feel that the bracelet makes this a 'dress watch', rather than simply a 'smart watch' to wear with a suit. Fine for a party, but personally, I would not wear a presidential bracelet on a daily basis. My one criticism of the bracelet, is that the links 'clink' against the clasp during wear, which does require the bracelet to be worn more on the snug side than I would wear a Submariner on an oyster bracelet. RATING: 9 CLASP: The Coronet clasp certainly only adds to the elegance of the presidential bracelet, and the solid leaves are certainly more sturdy than on an oyster bracelet. However. The lack of a safety clasp do make me feel somewhat uneasy that the bracelet could 'burst open', even though the action of the clasp is firm and positive. That said, I guess that is the difference between a 'dress watch' and a 'tool watch'... RATING: 8 CONCLUSIONS: Personally, I do not consider this to be a particularly versatile watch, as the 'options' make it too 'dressy'. Other DateJusts might indeed be considered as versatile, universal watches which go equally well with a suit or jeans, and I would agree, but, I do not think the same can be said about this particular model. I've never really been one for 'bling', so as much as I can appreciated this watch, it's not really to my personal taste, and I think looks much better on my wife's wrist than it does on mine, but, that said, I do think it is a very nice watch, and certainly excellent value for money POSSIBLE SCORE: 100 OVERALL SCORE: 81 As stated above, these opinions are solely my own, and others are free to agree or disagree with them as they wish. I hope this has been an informative review, thanks for reading

That looks awesome Nice work indeed

The usual for me, but I felt like a little change, so threw on an old chunky strap

Absolutely If you were going to have just one watch, to wear with all wardrobe variables, (and have it looking like 'a smart watch', rather than 'a tool watch') I would certainly consider that watch as fitting the criteria

I don't know about anyone else, but I want that for myself What's not to like? Square indices (awesome visibility) good sized hands, and GMT function :victory:

Dang, that was quick Many thanks

This is the only pic I have, and I know it's not the clearest... I believe the watch has a PVD case and bracelet, and is most likely a quartz chronograph, but can anyone else shed any light on it? Thanks in advance

Dates only need changing No-dates are the best for 'no-frills/no-attention-needed' simplicity, they just tell the time, day after day

Fantastic, thanks for the link Good to see that you were able to put the clasp to use as well

I wouldn't personally consider it as a dress watch, because it has the chronograph. I think it's a very nice watch, and would probably look good with a suit, or with jeans and a T-Shirt, but personally, I feel a dress watch should be just a dial and hands (maybe day/date) but ideally, as simple as possible Welcome to the party

Awesome, do you have the link to hand? I have to admit, I'm quite keen to take up Demsey's challenge I needed to get a Turn-O-Graph as a case donor for a watch I'm planning on building for my godson Awesome that I'll be able to put the dial to use in another project

I though it was pretty fitting, given how the hobby can have that effect on people

"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will." - Master Yoda

This is where I got the info from From what I read, it sounds more like it was given as an award, rather than regular issue

As mentioned, as long as the diameters are close, if you use epoxy, you should get a secure fit Of course, if the worst comes to the worst, you can always re-install the original crystal

I'm sure I've read that the Turn-O-Graph was a US military-issued watch, and also refered to as a 'Thunderbird'... I think a vintage rep might be quite tricky to recreate, but, It might be possible to combine a modern dial with Sub markers to come up with a modern homage

Not bad indeed, that's looking good

Fantastic, that's a really classy piece

None too shabby, my friend Not that I'd want to risk buying from Silix myself, but it's nice to see a Turn-O-Graph featured on the forum, I can't recall seeing one exhibited before

I wouldn't like to say how easily the new crystal would fit, but, it could probably be epoxied into place Removing the sapphire crystal, should just be a case of pushing it out from the back while the movement is de-cased Another alternative, would be to remove the cyclops and retain the main part of the crystal, although of course, I realize that it's a different crystal profile

The untrained eye, (aka the general public) doesn't have a clue, so don't worry yourself about getting called out over such details, which only other watch enthusiasts can pick up on. None of your choices have 'Rolex' on the dial, so are not going to arouse the suspicion of the casual observer (as in the minds of the untrained, Rolex=Fake [as it is well known that Rolex watches are often faked, so there is always the potential for something saying 'Rolex' to be something other than 'real']) Of your choices, and if you're looking for something with 'everyday' wear potential, I'd say go for the 42mm Planet Ocean

As we've discussed, it's not a watch I'm hugely impressed with (in terms of what it is) but you've got yourself a fine example of it, there, bro, wear it well