TeeJay

I don't know much about the model, but the hands seem somewhat thinner than normal... That said, as long as you like it, that's all that matters

That's the spirit

Members like Freddy, Ubi etc who do build amazing watches, do not belittle the watches people have purchased which are less than perfect. I can appreciate that your posts might have been intended to provide reference material, but your first post, would have been very easy to take as being solely critical. As mentioned before, yes, some people enjoy building flawless watches. Some people just enjoy buying what they can buy. At the end of the day, a watch is just a watch, and people appreciate them for their own personal reasons. As above, even a bad rep, can be thoroughly enjoyed by it's owner.

I don't think anyone is saying that at all, and you're somewhat missing the point. It's not only just a case of obtaining a 100% impossible to tell from the gen replication (although some do enjoy building them) but a case of enjoying each watch based on it's own merits as a watch. Also, don't forget that the majority of the general public don't know (or care to know) the first thing about watches, and probably couldn't tell the difference between a Sub and a GMT unless it was pointed out and explained to them. Heck, a business advisor I know who has a pretty poor Explorer II copy, when I showed him how I'd rebuilt and aged my sub, asked 'why does it (the bezel) rotate?'! When I explained that it was because the Submariner is a divers watch, and the rotating bezel is a timing aid, he then said he'd 'be scared to take a Rolex under water' !! :bangin: Most people 'out in the wild' aren't going to notice a person's watch, and, if on the offchance they do notice it, the chances of them knowing the tells of that specific rep are pretty slim. Unless someone's actually trying to build a specific model 100%, many flaws just aren't worth caring about As before, James obviously likes the watch, which, at the end if the day, is all that really matters in this hobby, not 1:1 perfection

Absolutely fantastic

You're very welcome, it's a fantastic piece, a perfect balance between 'well used' and 'abused', in that it's clearly had a few knocks, but the case and lugs are still pretty clear Out of curiosity, do you recall what put the scuff on the insert at the 30 position?

Ahh, thanks for the input That's interesting to know that he did actually own a 1655 himself, I guess the photos available thus far, are pre 72, which would certainly make sense, given how photos of contemporary actors are often still widely seen years after they were taken... I think the 5512 would be a fairly easy vintage project, it certainly wouldn't require too much abuse. It's funny the prices a celebrity's name will attract on an item, if I recall, people were offering to buy OJ Simpson's rep Sub for the cost of the gen (just because it was his watch) but the attorneys wouldn't make the sales due to copyright issues With regards the bracelet links, I read that he did visit the UK at one point, maybe he picked it up during the visit? Indeed, I came across that site, and that was what started to get me really confused, as the photos coming up on Google weren't tying up with what the site was saying

Likewise, nothing is actually coming up to explain the naming...

I think I feel a new vintage project coming on

I didn't know he disliked them, but on a photo I saw, taken during filming but not on set, he was still wearing his Sub I'd just love to know the connection to the 1655 and how it picked up his name

I never knew any better, so just used the title others were applying to the watch, but when I did a little research, it looks like Steve McQueen almost always wore a Sub (other than the Tag, of course) Was it a case of him advertising the watch, like Pierce Brosnan was an ambassador for Omega? Can anyone shed any light on the subject? One thing the research did tell me, which I didn't know, was what a great humanitarian he was. What an amazing guy he was, RIP, Sir

Damn that's some awesome vintaging (naturally occurring, I assume )

Many thanks I've been collecting reference material of aged 1655s, so I'll have an understanding of how they age, or rather, how well they age, which seems to be better than how Submariners age

Indeed, better to be a little of something than all of nothing Awesome news, best of luck with your studies I forgot to ask, what subject will it be in?

It's not full gold, but it's very cheap, and, if you were to ask the dealer, they might be able to source an all gold version for you. Maybe not a forum recommended dealer, but I certainly can't complain about the service I got from them, and the escrow system is bullet-proof If they can't help you, then I'd also recommend Tony at WatchEden

+1 I'd be very interested to hear how you got that fade on the bezel insert

I think you're absolutely right, it would definitely be the more satisfying project, and overall, I think a more fitting watch to my other tastes This is the 1655 I've got my eye on. Far from perfect, I know, most obviously, the need for a bracelet swap, but I have one of those in my parts box, so no problem there... A few dings in the case, 10 seconds under the grill for the dial, and I think I'll have something vaguely presentable (in terms of aged appearance, not in terms of a watch to wear somewhere swanky ) It's a watch which has been on my radar for a while, but only now that one has been available at such a low price, that I've got the spare cash to actually buy, so I definitely think it's a trigger which needs pulling

Awesome photos Always fun to see watches in the water

Ahh, is it still in the pipeline? I knew that there'd been mention of it being repped, but I wasn't too sure on the timescale involved. That's good to hear your personal businesses are picking up

Now that's an interesting insight I had wondered why there hadn't been a decent rep of the MMD (RobbieG model) but I think your above insight is the most likely explanation for that

Nice vintagizing

Thanks for the feedback, guys 1655 it is then Thanks for the insight, as usual, you make perfect sense The ones I've tried on thus far, while nice watches for sure, really didn't do anything for me at all. Breitling is probably the one brand I could never see myself wearing I have to admit, had the result been for the not-quite GMTIIC, it wouldn't've been mangled, just kept as an out of the box alternate wearer, although I think I would have potentially found it more versatile functionally, rather than aesthetically Thanks for the teasers I think you're right that I'd get more satisfaction from vintagizing a watch as a project, than I would from just owning and keeping one 'as is' Thanks for all the advice, guys

Thanks for the suggestion, but bling's really not my style If I was to get an accurate GMTIIC with the polished mid-links, I'd brush them out of the polished look before wearing the watch, as that was something I really didn't like about the gen (or my less than accurate YachtMaster ) so I don't think it would be worth me getting a really bling watch, even for going out, as it would just be totally out of character for me

At the moment, I'm having the usual Libran conundrum of being able to balance both arguments, so I need my bros to settle it for me... A bit about me... I'm very much a 'jeans and white shirt' kind of guy. I can wear a suit and look smart, but I don't often have the need to. If it's hot, I'll wear combat shorts and a wifebeater, so something which goes with that would be prefereable... I do like vintage watches. I like that they don't draw attention through polished surfaces, I like that they don't even look anything special, so don't attract any attention, and, I like that I don't have to worry about keeping them pristine... At the moment, I have one Vintage Sub in permanant use, which I really enjoy wearing, and, I have a NATO sub project on the go, which will also be in the vintage aesthetic... If I were to get a GMT II c (actually just a black bezeled GMT II, (no ceramic insert) but with green hand and lettering ) then I think it would give me a nice 'smart watch' for special occasions/going out, (when I might make the effort to at least wear a clean white shirt ) And, it would also add a 'modern watch' to my collection, even if it wouldn't actually get much regular wrist time If I were to get a 1655, it would give me the opportunity to vintagize another watch, maybe try a few new techniques, and add a really iconic watch to my collection... It would certainly make a pleasant alternative to the vintage sub, but, would not be any better for 'smart wear', so would not give a 'smart alternative', nor would it provide the functionality of a second time-zone, which, although something I don't use often, is useful to be able to use if the need arises... So, bearing in mind what I tend to wear, which do you think would be better suited for my personality? Thanks in advance

Awesome I hope you'll enjoy you purchase