TeeJay

I'm liking that finish What other finishes did you have in mind?

Looks fantastic and very interesting from a "heretic's" point of view! The real wood veneers are not that expensive and might be an option as well >Rocklers venner assortment

Thanks, and thanks for the link At the moment, I don't have access to the necessary tools to properly shape a dial, and then put in the holes for the markers to fit into, but a pocket knife, a pair of sharp scissors and a nappy pin are all I used to get the above result

Looks good, TeeJay. I know you are not usually after accuracy with your custom designs, but you might search out some of Rolex's wooden dials for inspiration (google or TZ would be good staring points).

Thanks, Freddy I don't think I'm going to be able to get dial printing onto the dial, but I have plans to use a budget Milgauss or even maybe a Date Just for Phase Two, as that would enable me to keep a coronet marker at 12, which will at least allude to Rolex I'm going to experiment with varnishing, and maybe using a pin to try and get a more 3-D effect (by following the 'grain' and indenting it slightly), than the untreated vinyl which is all the dial suface is at the moment

This is not a final product, but an experiment to see if the project was worth pursuing...

Personally, I'm happy with the results, so Phase Two of the project is now green-lighted, pending funds

I am liking the look of this, it's going to be an awesome project

Depending on price (and my spare cash situation) I could do with a set of those...

Yes, it is thought provoking, at least the thought provoked me for a while That's why I thought I'd get some more brains on the issue.

I think we're straying from the point slightly. It's not so much what Rolex think of a Franken, but what the legal situation is. For example in Italy where rep watches are highly illegal and large penalties are available for owning one. I feel sure that legally any collection of parts where those actually marked 'Rolex' are genuine, those not marked are aftermarket, is, while possibly not a gen in any way, not an illegal rep but a modified or assembled legitimate watch. To me the whole point about a rep being counterfeit is it is composed of parts marked illegally with the gen manufacturer's name or mark.

With reference to Rolex swapping out but keeping or destroying non genuine parts (or genuine for that matter) while servicing, I doubt they would actually get away with this in Europe (though please say if you know otherwise) based on the situation with for example car servicing/repair where it is a legal requirement that parts replaced are available for inspection after the job is completed, and will be returned to the owner if he or she wishes. Anything else is seen as fraud and theft. I know some companies in the guitar business for example, follow a similar process in that they will not supply you with a new part until you return the old part to them. However this is more a process of insuring that parts sold are for genuine use on the original guitar and not to be used for making a counterfeit.

I'm not too sure of the actual legislation, but I would hope, it would go something like this...

Guy orders a load of 100% gen parts off the Bay/some Rolex service center yard sale etc and builds himself a watch...

The Polizia get a tip that he's wearing a fake watch, so start the legal process (whoever tipped them off needs teaching a lesson in manners... ) Guy goes through his papers, and gets his receipts which prove that the parts are genuine and paid for. Polizia return his watch to him as being made from legally purchased parts.

Of course, it would not surprize me if the Polizia do not return the watch, but instead charge the guy with 'forgery', and infringement of trademark (even though he only wears the watch and never had the intent to sell it) In a country where the mere ownership of a rep is considered a crime, then I really wouldn't like to say how the courts would deal with a 100% gen-parts franken... I suspect, they'd come down with the letter of the law, just to that in the future, any other cases of copyright infringement cannot try and use it to cite precedent for someone getting away with it...

Thanks for sparking such a thought-provoking discussion

Just to point out, the above comment about Faisal Ali, is sarcasm. They don't call him 'Mr Slimeball' for nothing

Not saying the final product is going to look bad, On the contrary we already know your coating is tops.

I just can't get over the fact that someone is doing this to a gen watch.

Carry on

The fact that the watch is gen, is completely and utterly irrelevant, to the point that the owner wants it coated... It's the same as people who modify cars, or who build fantasy reps (or even fantasy gens, if their pockets are deep enough ) It's all about making something custom and unique. The fact the watch is gen, or its price tag probably never even crossed the owner's mind

On topic, I think that leaving the insert un-coated would make for a really nice contrast/key detail I can't wait to see the results

Hum... i see thing slightly diferently...

In my pereception a 100% gen parts rolex assembled by whoever (like me for the exemple), is a real rolex, that just can't get serviced by rolex.

And don't share the same values in a collector eyes as if did live the factory like that, with correct serial, paper, tracking service...

For me it would still be true if it had minor aftermarket part like crystall, gasket, tube, band, stuff like that.

So basically a gen as to be at least : case, dial, movement

On the other hand if your factory rolex had part remplaced with eta, it is not for me a rolex anymore, because rolex is producing, manufacture movement, so that would imply swaping the all movement.

And in watch with manufacture made caliber, the movement is the most important part of it to be seen as gen.

Now if we are talking of a Daytona for example, and you have to remplace some part of the movement with generique valjoux or zenith part, i agree with you that i would still see it as a true gen. Just with the warenty and collector value problem.

Now if you find a rolex movement and put it some no name case, with absolutly no branding, i tend to see it as some sort of rolex watch.

This is more acceptable as an example, if we are talking of a 1920 rolex pocket watch movement, without a RWC case ...

Well in the end this is very subjective, and a matter of personal perception...

Yes, I see what you mean, and yes, I personally would consider it a real Rolex as well, because as you say, all the components are there, and the person assembling it doesn't not make those parts any more or less 'real', so yes, it would be a real Rolex, but, I would accept that the world or ADs and Rolex Service Centers would never accept it as 'official'

Actually i dont think rolex did the DSSD to have a bigger watch in there range, but rather to recover the record of waterproof deeps.

You have to keep in mind that what rolex market is the "spirt" of diver watch.

That's what they made there reputation on, only few people knows what other inovation they made, but everybody knows that they are THE diver watch...

Absolutely

To come back to the topic focus :

I don't see how a watch, that comes with a true manufacture movement, can be considered as gen if it doesnt have the gen movement, if all parts are gen on a rolex expet the ETA inside, this is certainly not a rolex.

So for most rolex only the pre 2000 chronograph would be arguable (valjoux/zenith).

I would say that if it was a 100% gen shop-bought Rolex, which had then (for whatever reason) had to have a generic ETA fitted, that it would still be a real Rolex, but, I think there would then always be the answer, to "Is it real?" "Yes, but the movement is a replacement, not the original..." Where on the other hand, if it was built with all gen parts, but not by Rolex Manufacturing, then I don't think it could every truly be considered a gen, just, custom built with gen parts...

True, its very smart to check out the size first..I have had it before so i know its to big but hell big is trendy

Also the rep to gen value is great ,the gen is so overpriced its metal and a chrono function for 18k$..

Does it 'wear big'? 42mm isn't too large really, but if it sits quite high on the wrist, I might give it a miss

Sounds like you've got a good vacation planned, bro, plenty of photos for sure

According to US trademark law (which sides with Rolex), most aftermarket parts fitted to a Rolex watch sent in to Rolex for service are, like rep watches themselves, considered contraband & an infringement on the Rolex trademark. Therefore, Rolex has the right (but not the duty) to confiscate the parts & replace them with genuine Rolex parts. As I understand it, legally, this is similar to someone who, using a pirated copy of Windows that he purchased for 1/10th the price of a genuine copy, contacts Microsoft support via an online connection only to have them disable his pirated 'Validation' code & requiring him to pay for a genuine copy.

In the eyes of the law, these are simply trademark holders enforcing their trademark rights.

I can quite understand that from that perspective, but what I was meaning, was that, regardless of Rolex opinion that aftermarket modification renders the watch fake (in their eyes) the owner paid to have said parts (be it a crystal, or maybe a new bracelet...) and those parts, (as the watch is not being sold, but only serviced) are not being used to defraud someone, and the owner should have those parts returned to them. The same as how Rolex will update worn out parts on vintage watches with 'clean' parts... What gives them as a company, the right to say that the owner cannot have their watch looking a certain way (vintage) or if necessary, effect repairs with aftermarket sources? Of course, I quite agree, the warranty is broken, so they can always refuse to service it, but on a personal level, I would rather they decline the service to begin with (on the grounds of invalid warranty), rather than get hit by a bill for additional costs for them replacing parts which, by definition, void the warranty, and then keep the parts which I had paid for myself...

You actually just answered the question yourself - it is 'pure aesthetics'.

No serious diver (in his right mind) would wear a nearly $10,000 watch to work in the depths of the sea.

Do you think? Not to be argumentative, but if I was an industrial diver, I'd buy a watch which could meet the requirements of my job (and most likely use dive computers for timing, rather than a rotating bezel and a mechanical movement which could have the potential to fail, with potentially fatal results) but given the kind of money industrial divers make, I'd probably view the price tag as "Well, if that's what it costs, that's what it costs... "...

something a serious diver would wear (at least that is 1 of the reasons I like to wear my Subs & SDs).

That's very true... I have to admit the DSSD comes across as 'trying too hard', which may be why I'm not so keen on it as a watch for 'civilian use'. Sure, a Sub or SD is a tool watch, but they're pretty unassuming, but the DSSD... That's a different kettle of fish entirely

The point is that Rolex has not produced true tool watches for many years. They are in the business of marketing well-made jewelry that accurately (for a mechanical device) tells the time. And virtually every time Rolex has produced a radically new design (radical for them), uproar & proclamations of their eminent demise have followed. For every WIS that finds fault with the SDDS, there is another that loves it. I suspect that those of us (like me) who hold their noses & pass on the SDDS now (similar to the way Daytonas sat on AD's shelves 30 years ago) will probably be buying them (at 4 times their original price) as rare collectibles in 30 years.

I quite agree, but would say that with the DSSD, they've made all the effort to make it a technically viable watch. For me, it is what I would class as a tool watch, if it was owned by someone who actually works on the ocean floor, but as an affectation for any 'land-lubbers' who would never actually put it through its paces...

I suspect that those of us (like me) who hold their noses & pass on the SDDS now (similar to the way Daytonas sat on AD's shelves 30 years ago) will probably be buying them (at 4 times their original price) as rare collectibles in 30 years.

But that would be a case of actually buying one as a genuinely collectible item, rather than simply buying one as it's 'flavor of the month'

Know the felling 500$ for a rep is hard cash, i have 2 watches this days

I've managed to find a 'budget Safari' for 50 Eur. I know the details aren't perfect, but for that price, to see how I like it, I could just use a black marker pen to ink over the hour markers and hands to get the right color, and no big loss I'll see how much cash I get for my birthday...

I've only got the three decent watches now: One dress watch, and my two Submariners. Other than that, I'd be reduced to wearing my digital Suunto-clones

Not in terms of which one to buy, but I think my favorite SeaDweller, is the modern 16600. My reasoning for this, and as much as I love the look of the vintage models like the Great White, I feel that other than the HE valve, lack of cyclops, and the dial print, they are very similar to the vintage Submariners like the 1680, where the 16600 (while equally as similar to the 16610) when compared to something like the 1680, definitely looks like an 'improved upon re-working'... (at least, I think so )

Why not just polish the vintage crystal, they have a loverly look when they are old and polished and you will still see the dial. You can use brasso on the crystal too great effect, and if the scratches are really deep then use very fine emery paper under a running tap to polish the big ones out

I think the vintaging I've put into the vintage case is probably beyond my means to truly remove, (and to be honest, one of the things I like most about that watch) but also, the problem I found when I test-fit them, was the dial just looked 'too new' for the vintage case... I think it's just an instance where I must choose function over form, and clarity and visibility of the dial, definitely outweighs the more comfortable case and bracelet That's not to say that the Tudor sub is uncomfortable to wear in its current configuration, it's just that the vintage sub is more so

TJ the tudor looks very nice now it is not so weathered

Thanks, I felt it was about time that people were able to see the dial properly, and as the GMTII case was sitting around, I felt I'd rather mentally shelve the project for the case, and put it to better use with the Tudor dial I will eventually get the Military Snowflake project finished eventually, but for now, I'd had enough of the NATO strap

I have to admit, it's a real coin-toss between wearing the Tudor and the vintage sub now... The vintage sub case and bracelet are more comfortable to wear, the Tudor dial is clearer and easier to read... Sadly, combining the Tudor dial into the vintage case looks totally wrong

It may be time for the tinfoil hat my friend!

Indeed

Good point. But ask any gen Rolex owner with an aftermarket crystal, bezel or end link what they got back from their local US RSC (Rolex service) when they sent their watch in for service or repairs? Answer - they will either receive their unserviced/unrepaired watch back along with a disclaimer on the service ticket stating that non-Rolex parts were found on the customer's watch & Rolex will not repair or warrant a watch with aftermarket parts, or, depending on the part or parts in question, they will replace the aftermarket parts with gens & add the parts to the customer's bill (the customer will not receive any parts back).

Essentially, Rolex steals the aftermarket parts the owner has (obviously) paid for, then charges them for installing 'in house' parts. I remember years ago when my dad took a car in for some basic repair (I forget precisely what) and while the car was in the garage, they took the liberty of fitting a few new parts for some slightly worn ones (as Rolex is renowned for doing) (and did so without consulting my dad, or obtaining his consent to do so) I don't think I've ever seen him as angry as I did when he saw the 'extra expenses' added onto the bill. I forget the exact outcome of if he made them replace the original parts, but I know the car never underwent an 'official service' again...

Points well taken, but (if you replace 'DSSD' with 'LV' or 'Daytona' or 'Milgauss', etc) I have heard all of these complaints before (many times) in the time that I have been collecting (more than 25 years).

To be fair though, the Daytona and Milgauss all actually serve a functional purpose. I admit, the LV is slightly different, in that being a commemorative edition, it is a matter of personal taste, but the DSSD, is simply an over-engineered monstrosity of marketing... The only positive thing I would identify about its design, is the glide-lock clasp. Everything else, such as the blue lume, is pure aesthetics. It's not as if the dial itself is even any larger than an LV dial, so from that perspective, a totally missed opportunity to have a genuinely larger (so more visible) dial installed... Of course, I'd like to meet the skin-diver who pressure tested it to maximum rating

A little bend in the topic

legal or illegal.. imo this is what the heart of this hobby of ours is about..

The Hunt for the genuine parts .... the research into the proper parts to get it to spec.

It took me a liitle over a year for some of my projects and only for a good member friend did it come to fruition

My Ubifranken Tudor Snowflake is the pride of my vintage collection ..

I still would not wear it into an AD ... they would not appreciate it for what it is..

I have bought genuine vintages but they don't give me the same satisfaction as actually sourcing each part myself.. the reward is wearing it .. there is a difference in the joy of a franken vs. a genuine ..imo

I may be off base compared to the previous thread.. but to me there is nothing illegal about a franken.. I bought the genuine parts without criminal activity .. the case is a replicated version .. but in my mind set.. it's a bit different from a replicated brand dial.. etc..

then again I am prejudiced in my frankens..

Hope I didn't hijack your thread..

AC

Lani

I know my Tudor's not in the same league as yours, as the dial is only a reproduction rather than gen, but I totally share the sentiment there, bro It's going to be a long-term project, possibly as long-term as my GMTIICSubDweller project, but I quite agree, in that I wouldn't wear either watch into a Rolex AD, as they wouldn't appreciate either for what they are...

Feast your eyes on the IrishStar! Is this a counterfeit? Not according to the SFWIBB.

Oh man, that is sweeet

Not something I'd likely wear myself, but wow, it looks awesome, thanks for sharing the pic

Maybe that wasn't a speck of dirt under the crystal afterall...

Awesome link, my friend

Thanks bro, cant bee away to long get withdraws fast..

I know that feeling I think the time has come that I need to add an AP Safari to my collection (when I can afford to do so )

We have thiefs here in Oslo to, i know have they operate if they look eastern European and bump into me ill bump into them also..

We have them were I live too...

Thanks TeeJay.

Another reason I like it is it's waterproof. I was thinking about doing the same thing for my Fiddy. Why did you hardly wear it? Not because the strap was too stiff I hope.

w

It wasn't a problem with the strap at all, but what happened, was not too long after I received the strap, I had to take the watch in for servicing, and it was gone about 8 months. By the time I collected it, it just didn't feel like 'my watch' anymore, so, with my need to raise funds for my wedding, I sold it off with the rest of my collection. I do occasionally miss it when I see the 127 crop up in wrist shots, but, given I'm in 'the Rolex Zone' at the moment, I don't think I could comfortably wear a watch of that size again