TeeJay

That's as maybe, but, if someone advertises something as being X rather than Y, they should sell the customer X rather than Y, not sell them Z and hope no one finds out, or isn't prepared to go through the rigmarole of returns/replacement and make do with what they've got. It's a case of being honest and ethical, not mis-representing a product or selling it at a ludicrous price, which is precicely the reason this forum was created. To advise and protect. Sure, dealing in reps is illegal, but there is still such a thing as 'honor among thieves', especially when people are dealing in an honest manner, and expect to be dealt with in an honest manner. Just my .2c

Thanks for the advice The model I was thinking of was military issue with square incices and the 'snowflake' hands. I'm juggling several options in my mind about what to do with my Submariner, like Great White, tudor or even a 1953 era 6200. As much as I love it, I don't like the cyclops, and I hate having to change the date. Also, I have to accept that at 28 and not exactly 'corporate smart', I don't generally look like the kind of guy who could afford a genuine Submariner, but figured something a bit more 'vintage' on a NATO strap might be more plausable, so I figured I'd swap out the dial, crystal and bezel, and just keep them in storage, that way, in a few years, if I wanted, I could always restore the watch to it's original state. I did consider the idea of trading it for a vintage sub, but, this was my first high-end watch, so sentimental value means I'd rather modify it rather than completely get rid of it.

Anyone wearing that watch better be into some Big Pimpin'

Funnily, that was what I enjoyed about the film. It was more like the original novels (which I prefer over the movies) so I thought it was great

In all fairness, there's quite a difference between refinishing a dial in a different color, and re-printing all the markings and text... It's not going to be cheap, and the results may not be so great. I agree, the parts for the tudors aren't cheap, but, that's the price you pay (no pun intended) for an obscure item...

I'm after one of these myself. From what I gather, it's a case of DIY Assembly. I was directed to this site as a source for parts: http://www.classicwatchparts.com/catpart/c...7mggtkf0d6jq4h3

I knew I'd seen those pics somewhere before, but couldn't remember where... Thanks for posting them, hopefully it will clarify the operation of the clasps

I was thinking about the Tropic 19 crystal... Would it not fit? Oh I know that now, but when I bought the watch, I did not have access to forums such as these That said, every detail I've ever found on a genuine Submariner, is present on this one. The only thing that could possibly be done (that I can see) is possibly the crown guards, and even they look better than ones I've seen on other reps available for sale... I think you're right though, probably best to leave it be

Now, crazy as this might sound, but I do not like the look of that. I don't like how the logo is a metal logo rather than printed. I definitely don't like how the letters in 'Omega' are all joined together. To me, it makes it look, well, fake... I definitely prefer the original version of the 2531.80.

Okay, this was not only my first rep, but also my first 'high-end' watch (cost me about $800). In terms of detail accuracy, I couldn't be more happy with it, but I hardly ever wear it any more though, as I prefer my Omegas, and, although I'm now going to be wearing it for a while, when I get my Planet Ocean back from repairs, that will be back on my wrist, and the Submariner will be back in the drawer. However, there are a few issues with it that I am severely tempted to modify. 1. I hate the cyclops being on the glass. 2. Having to change the date pisses me off. So. I am considering ordering a date-less dial (possibly even a Tudor dial), and a Tropical crystal. But, knowing that this will be going back in the drawer and hardly worn, would those expences be a waste of time and money? Here's how it is now, should I keep it this way?

As one of the strap pins broke in my project watch, I'll be wearing this for the forseable future...

To be honest, I've never seen an episode. I was refering purely to the information I have read on forums that Jack Bauer has a replica Submariner, and that it is considered 'a prop' rather than 'a fake'. The point I'm trying to make, is that Rolex, as a company, do not 'do' product placement. The thing is though, Rolex do not advertise full stop. They do not 'do' product placement. They also do not sell their products online, hence why there is no tie in to Fox.com. Any Rolex watch you see on screen will either a) have been purchassed by the wardrobe/props department, or, b ) is the personal property of either the actor, or one of the crew. Ever watch Stargate Atlantis? The watch Sheppard wears is about $800. As a production company, I'm sure they have the cash to spring for one of those for the actor to wear, but, it is a tad unsusual for them to spend so much money on a non-essential prop. My guess, is it either belongs to the actor, or, it's a replica. Take the pilot episode of Miami Vice. Before Jimmy Smits gets blown up, the guy says how he was thinking of getting a Presidential, but it just 'screams dealer'. Take a look at his wrist. He is wearing a Presidential... Ferrari specifically sprayed a car white to appear in later episodes of the show, but I'll bet Rolex never provided a watch for Don Johnson to wear. Casino Royale had Omega product placement. If it did not, however, there would be nothing preventing the production using a replica watch as a prop. Kill Bill for example, and Uma Thurman's replica Daytona. The character James Bond would never wear a replica. But. That would not mean that Daniel Craig portraying James Bond could not wear a replica intended to be genuine, in the same way Keifer Sutherland portraying Jack Bauer wore a replica intended to be genuine. If Omega had not given them a watch to use, they might indeed have had to use a replica. My distaste for commemorative, or more simply, inaccurate merchandise, extends to all aspects of collecting. I think the Hasbro toy lightsabers available are a joke, and an insult to the intelligence of the people who buy them, as they are wildly inaccurate to the screen-used props. I view it as little more than 'shooting fish in a barrel' because they know that people will still buy them. I have similar distaste for Rolex as a company, because they only produce a set number of peices per year, and only issue two Daytonas to each dealer, so they can create a false exclusivity for their product by making sure supply never meets or exeeds demand. This is why, as much as I like the aesthetics of Submariners, I would never buy a genuine one, because I disagree with the business practices of the company. As far as I'm concerned, replica watches provide the aesthetics of the genuine watches for a reasonable price. Unless someone has the kind of money P Diddy has, they are not going to be able to afford a dozen high-end watches to swap out every day. But. Having that money, and buying that product, does not give the person class. Half the gangsta rappers out there would pay the same price for a rep as they would for a genuine watch, and would not even know the difference. They view them as status symbols, but that's just that mentality all over. All flash, no class. Again, Bond would never wear a rep, but neither would Jack Bauer, yet, Keifer still had one on his arm... Just a case of one production having more money for props than another. Absolutely. Peace out.

The trick with the diver's extension is not deplying it (that is easy) but in properly closing it. To deploy the extension, all you need to to is press your thumb over the end of the clasp, and the extension should drop down. When you come to close it up, DO NOT try to fold it closed as you would a normal clasp. You must fold the section closest to the clasp completely flat back against the clasp, and then move the second section back around to lock over the end of the clasp. If you examine the extension, you will see that the second section has a tiny lip on the end (you might need to fold the two sections at 90 degrees to each other to see this) When the first section is properly in place, it is this lip, which goes under a piece in the clasp to hold the extension flat when it is locked in place. If you do not have that lip under the retainer, and simply fold it shut, when you fold the rest of the clasp shut, it will be harder to close, and have a tendency to spring open. Sorry for such a long-winded explanation, it really is a very simple thing. Have a very good look at the extension while it is still closed, deploy it very slowly, and you will see what I mean Once you figure how it is actually supposed to close, it is no trouble at all to operate. Way easier than the diver's extension on a Submariner (Ripped my thumb to shreds once trying to deploy that in the 'factory approved manner' Just another reason why I prefer Omega over Rolex)

If that is really the case, why the hostility? With all due respect, you come across as a troll out to get a bite. Yet again, you make assumptions about people's motivations. I've been interested in watches all my life, and when I was younger, tended to buy a new one at least every two years, one year, I actually bought three new watches in a year. I couldn't care less if a watch looks like a high end brand to make someone else think I'm wearing that brand, I like the look of certain watches (Submariner, Planet Ocean) but am not prepared to pay the artificially inflated costs, so instead, I buy the most similar thing. Most similar thing as in closest details to the original. I could buy an Alpha or C-OMEX clone, but, their label is an inaccurate detail to the label on the original, so they are not watches I would consider. My tollerance for replicas comes from my collection of sci-fi memorabelia. The very nature of the interest means that owning the screen-used item is nigh on impossible, so everyone else with that hobby, has to make do with replicas of those props/costumes, and at conventions, people don't go up to each other saying "That's not Ewan McGregor's screen-used lightsaber, so your costume sucks", they accept that everyone's stuff is replica and deal with it. As far as I'm concerned, these watches are 'things that tell the time'. If someone wants to assume I own a Rolex or an Omega, good for them. If they asked me if it was genuine, I would tell them that it wasn't. The only thing I want to 'fool' with these watches, is my own eye. I know they're not genuine, so there's no point in trying to convince myself otherwise, and I certainly wouldn't try to pass it off as an original to anyone else. Don't believe that and think I'm FOS, good for you, your opinion is not really that important to me. Some replicas are better than others. Some are more accurate, some less so. When I took my Submariner into a watchmakers to have a loose piece of luminous material re-cemented, when I collected it, he asked me about it and said that had he not had to open the back, he would have thought the watch was completely genuine. My Planet Ocean has details on the the dial that are totally inaccurate to the original, and those would be instantly spotted by anyone with a little product knowledge. The point I'm trying to make, is that the average joe has little to no product knowledge. Even a salesperson in an Omega AD I was in on thursday had to be shown which watch was the Limited Edition Plane Ocean 45. Not exactly reassuring. The only people who know these specific details, are watch enthusiasts. I bet if you were to ask Neil Armstrong the ins and outs of his Moonwatch he probably wouldn't know (or care) as it was just a tool he had to use. In most people's minds, Rolex = Fake. Any other brand, and people are not even going to consider that it might not be the genuine watch unless the details are totally sloppy, because they don't know any different. Most people do not even know what the correct rehaut or text should look like, and as for the SEL issue, unless someone takes the watch off their wrist and hands it over, how are they even going to notice it at a passing glance? To be honest, you sound like someone who would not be satisfied with anything less than 100% accuracy, so the great majority of reps simply do not fall under that catagory, so the chances of you being satisfied with them are slim. I've read on genuine watch forums how people have bought 'their first Rolex', and absolutely scrutinized and picked it apart (visually speaking) and then tried complaining about any perceived flaw, only to be told that their complaints are unreasonable, as their expectations (of even a genuine watch) are unreasonable. I never said or thought I was. I am someone who collects movie memorabelia. I do not like 'Limited Edition' releases of things as they are inaccurate to the screen-used props. Simple as that. No, he is the actor who portrayed him in the last movie. What is your point? Glad you understand why it has been ripped. As for it being real, and stating James Bond would never wear a replica (I quite agree) consider 24's Jack Bauer. Keiffer Sutherland is wearing a replica Rolex Submariner. Would Keiffer Sutherland need to wear a replica? Would Jack Bauer need to wear a replica? No, both could afford the real thing. It is considered a prop, and suspension of disbelief makes it real. By your rather narrow logic, my Submariner cannot be the same as James Bond's watch because his is real, but it can be the same as Jack Bauer's because his is fake. Rolex would not issue a watch to the production of Doctor No, so they had to use the producer's watch. From what I understand, both George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton both wore their own personal watches. Casino Royale was paid for by product placement. Rolex did not want to contribute, so they stuck with Omega, who would. If I'd been the producer, I'd've put a Rolex replica on Craig's wrist to spite the company, and point out that Bond was originally written wearing a Rolex, and as with 24, this would be a prop. The commemorative pieces are made and sold for the very reason you said about replicas: Omega have a whole range of watches that are considered 'Bond watches', but the fact remains that the only Omega watches that are true Bond watches, are the Omega Seamaster (2531.80 and 2541.80) The Planet Ocean 45mm, and the latest model Seamaster with the Co-Axial movement, as those are the only watches which appeared on James Bond's wrist. Anything else, is just a marketting ploy to make the company more money. It certainly sounded like you posted to argue. That answer probably differs for just about everyone posting on the forum. As I said above, from collecting sci-fi memorabelia, I am quite used to purchasing items that are 'only imitations', so it doesn't bother me at all. As long as it looks accurate to my eye, that's all that concerns me (because I like details to be accurate, not because I want others to think it is genuine) How other people choose to view my watches, and the assumptions they choose to make, are entirely their own affair and none of my concern. If they ask, they'll be told the truth. Reps are made, for the same reason gens are made: To bring in money. In some cases, they are made to fool the unsuspecting admirer, as a watch enthusiast really should know the accurate details of the watch they like. The reason they are purchased, however, varies from person to person. Some people buy them to 'look flash', some people buy them as daily beaters so their gens don't have to take the day to day abuse, some people buy them because they like how they look, and in that instance, wether it is genuine or replica is irrelevent, as the only thing that matters, is that the owner takes pleasure in owning it.

Why did you sign up to post on a forum dedicated to replica watches, if you're going to [censored] and make assumptions about people's motivations? Here's something a bit more obvious. There are plenty of people posting on these forums who could afford to buy the genuine watches with the spare change in their pockets, yet they still buy replicas. Surely that says something about the value (or the lack thereof) of the genuine watches. Just because it is a replica, does not mean that people have to accept a needlessly inaccurate replica, which this watch is. Why is the 007 PO negatively looked upon? For the simple reason that James Bond would never wear a watch with his code number splashed all over it. Also for the reason that it was not the same as the watch Daniel Craig wore in Casino Royale. The 007 PO, just like the other '007 Seamasters', are nothing more than marketing ploys to sell watches to people (Bond fans/Watch collectors or both) who will buy the watch simply because it has 007 splashed over the dial. Nothing wrong with the 45mm PO on resin at all, but the Limited Editions are just a joke. The reason why this particular watch is getting panned, is because it is needlessly inaccurate. If 'not even a good replica' will fool you, why are you posting here?

Thanks, and glad you liked the pics. I have to admit, when I first thought of putting the 2531.80 on a resin strap, I had my reservations. Having seen how it looks though, I really like it. It makes the watch much more 'rugged'. I was also impressed with how much nicer the watch looked with a decent strap rather than the junk bracelet it originally came with. The ultimate irony came this afternoon though. I was trying to straighten the pins (which were bent) so the top of the strap wouldn't gape away from the case. The result was the sprung section of one pin came off in my hand... I figured I might as well chuck both pins and just replace them with the pins from the donor watch when it arrives Hope I've given you a few ideas to be mulling over

You're absolutely right, I stand corrected

I think you've misunderstood the point I was making. While I acknowledge that Bond saying 'Omega' can appear to be product placement, the point I was making is that Bond is a connoisseur of things. He knows precicely which brands are the best, knows precicely what he wants, and gives specific instructions to people so he gets precicely what he wants. From the Wikipedia: A lot of the comments he makes in the movie are simply examples of this 'meticulous nature', but, in our media-conscious era, it can be viewed (or misinterpereted) as product placement

No problem. I have to admit, I really like the SMP's SS bracelet, but the rubber strap gives it a more 'rugged' look compared to the more 'refined' look of the SS... Forgive the watch on the strap, it's still a work in progress (It is now looking 100% better than it did on it's original bracelet)

I don't know, I put it down to Bond's habit of specifying precicely what he has/wants, like ordering the specific champagne in the Bahamas... Same with the order for The Vesper, when he specified 'Gordons' rather than 'gin'. Although I agree it could've come across as product placement, I think it was really more a case of that is just the way Bond talks about things... To be honest, I'd say Casino Royale is one of the few movies that I find doesn't drag. The only bit that was a bit slow, was Bond's convelescence and begining of the vacation. That was a bit slow, but, it set the emotional tones needed for the end to work... As movies go, I thoroughly enjoyed it

Often very true. When I was in an Omega AD on thursday and asked to look at the LE 45 PO, the assistant showed us to seats, offered us coffees, and then went over to the cabinet. After practically climbing inside the cabinet (and easily a minute or more's deliberation), she called over another assistant, and had to be shown which watch I was talking about... Now, it could have been her first day, in which case I would allow such a lapse, but under any other circumstances, would consider it unacceptable for someone to not be able to immediately identify any product in their store a customer asked about. I wouldn't hold it against the assistant at all, but I do put it down to poor product awareness training on the part of the management...

Watch blooper? What was that?

If you're definitely going for the SMP, I have a quick suggestion... If you were considering the Chrono for a 'sportier feel', how about ordering the SMP, and then swapping the SS bracelet for the resin strap? I was originally planning on putting a decent SMP bracelet on my 2531.80 project watch, but, put a rubber strap on it today, and I rather like it, as it gives the watch a more 'rugged' look. It might be my imagination, but I think it makes the watch sit slightly 'higher' on my wrist, but I still got it under a cuff without any trouble.

Today I received a Seamaster strap I purchased privately from another member, which they had ordered from King, but were going to return. There is a 1mm gape when the strap is done up, but, I suspect this is because the watches' original spring pins themselves were bent, and a new set of pins should resolve that issue. Other than that, I am really pleased with it. The difference the strap has made to the watch is absolutely incredible, and it is now looking like a really nice watch. I'd suspected before that the bracelet was 'pulling it down', and this has confirmed that suspicion, as it looks 100% better, and I certainly won't be ashamed to wear it in public Originally, I was planning on putting the watch on a decent SS bracelet, but, the opportunity for the rubber was too good to pass up, and I really like the result. Given the original Tudor that is inspiring this project was Millitary Issue, so would've been worn on a NATO strap, I think the rubber strap is a nice modern 'update' of the idea, and chances are I will keep it on the strap rather than getting a decent SS bracelet. Something I would like people's feedback on, is the alignment of the bezel insert. Given the shape of the bezel, I had to mis-allign the insert to get a symetrical appearance. However, I have rather got used to it and am thinking of keeping the allignment when I get the new bezel and insert. When I get the new bezel and insert, would people advise lining the insert up properly, or, would having it 'mis-alligned' be a nice 'personal touch'? Previous: Now:

That's looking pretty sharp there I'm building my own Omega 2531.80, but that will at least still look like a 2531.80... The thing I liked about the watch I showed, is that it isn't any known model of Rolex. For want of a better term, it is a Fake, rather than a Replica Thanks for the suggestions, folks, cqout didn't have a Rolex like I was after, but it did have a real selection of Panerai, ranging from