TeeJay

Very nice, looks like a good 'all rounder'

The "Reasons" everybody states for being/staying on FB is a lot like standing by and watching [insert horrible tragic event] and doing nothing. You don't need FB to share photos. You don't need FB to stay in touch with people you REALLY care about.

The "Corporate" use of directing you to their FB page is an insult, and an atrocious marketing practice. Here is why. FB has a TOS (Terms of Service you must agree with, and join) it is not an open public site. In effect, a corporation is telling me to ACCEPT the TOS of a 3rd party entity who does not protect my privacy, and in fact sells my information to other 3rd parties.

Take a stand people. Just because something is FREE or CONVENIENT does not mean you should turn a blind eye.

"If you are not paying, you are the product."

"You can't get something for nothing,

You can't have freedom for free" -Peart

I look at it this way: It's a free service, people aren't paying for it, so sadly, people don't get any say in how fb operates. I don't particularly like it, but that's the deal with freebies And as for the keeping in contact thing, convenience is not a bad thing, it sure saves on the phonebill I just view it as a tool which makes things easier

Fantastic to see the community pulling together What can I say, but stay strong

Love your style, bro

Zuckerberg's a slimy douche. I hate the lack of privacy on facebook, but I trust Google+ security even less... My reasons for staying on facebook are: my friends and family use it, so it makes for easier networking, and all the time companies (at least in the UK) say to go to their facebook page, rather than a standalone website, it is clearly going to be the 'industry standard' so the best (as in lesser of two evils) to maintain a presense on. That aside, I am very careful about what information I do share, and I keep all possible settings on 'friends only'...

Hmm, interesting...

The dial says Rolex, that's the the thing which would arouse suspicion, not details as trivial as the hand color... It's only folks around here who notice such things, the general public won't have a clue Just buy the one you prefer, and I'm sure you won't be disappointed

Fantastic read, thanks for sharing

That's going to be a real nice project, amigo

Wooow TJ thanks, that Modena looks great!

And you get a tang buckel with that price cool!

Thanks you Sir, you made my day

Happy to be of help Although the Modena strap doesn't have the curved ends which some of the original Tropics had, it does replicate every other aspect of the design of the basket weave pattern, the waffle-texture back, which provides excellent drainage and ventilation for swimming or hot weather, and the raised sides, which give a really chunky appearance Also, I was surprised how smart the basket weave pattern makes the strap, even though it's not leather, it would still look better with a suit than other silicon straps You should also be able to fit a Rolex buckle if you wanted to

Here's a modern silicon version of the Tropic straps. I wear my Tudor Sub on one during the summer, and it is the most comfortable strap I've worn

http://www.modenawatch.com/product.sc?categoryId=32&productId=36

As for the bund strap being 'too Spartacus', it was good enough for Paul Newman (I can't stand wearing a 1655 on the bracelet, but love it on the bund strap ) Another option which looks really classy, is one of those black straps with the tight grain lizard pattern

From what I've seen and read Rolex played fast and loose with many of their offerings. The perspex insert came in a number of variances during a relatively short run. Maybe it was just a 1950s experimental thing, or shortages after the war, but it seems they were not real consistent back then.

Yes, consistency was hardly their forte at that point. I'm surprised that they went away from the Perspex insets so quickly, given not only that the numbers glowed, compared to the non-glowing metal inserts, but also the 'floating 3-D effect' I imagine the numbers in such an insert to have (having note yet seen one with the naked eye) Then again, back then, Rolex were focussing solely on function, rather than high-end appearance...

Another version of Donerix's 6542

Maybe, I copied it from somewhere, when I checked the properties, it said 'Photoshop'

That second variant should be pretty easy to replicate Even more interesting, is the slimline non-crownguard case, fitted with a later model bezel without the coin edge My Silix vintage sub case already has that appearance, certainly would make for an easier build by not having to install a new coin edged bezel

And the black hands... If this isn't some kind of fantasy/franken/rep, it would certainly confirm the theory that in the past during a production run, Rolex would use whatever parts they have lying around to build a piece, rather than being 100% consistent throughout the run

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think your counterfeit money example applies to the entire watch.

I wasn't meaning the conterfeit money comparison to be applied to the entire watch, only to the refinished dial, as an example of how even with every single element and component 100% genuine, if it's done 'outside the system', it will only ever be counterfeit/replication The rest of the watch, I would never dispute the provinence of the parts, and obviously given my own scheme of projects, the nature of the dial doesn't bother me in the least, I was just trying to clarify the difference between replication and restoration for ease of the discussion Hope you have an awesome weekend

I think comparing cars and watches is a good way to look at it. Years ago while in high school a friend bought a `67 Mustang. Within hours he changed the Ford 4bbl carb to a Holley double pumper. Of course the warranty was void, but it was never going back to Ford anyway. The thing is, it was still a genuine Mustang. Still a genuine Ford. It was never a "fake ass" at all. Today you can buy all the parts, body, interior, everything, to build a 1960s Corvette on a Chevy S10 pickup truck frame. Is it s genuine Corvette? Even using some genuine Corvette parts is it a real Corvette? Nope. It is just as my 6542 is, a replica. But if you buy a genuine 1960 Corvette frame, buy a genuine 1960 Corvette motor, interior and the rest, it is a genuine 1960 Corvette. And it is worth top dollar as a restored car. If the motor numbers do not match the original, but is still a Chevy engine, it is worth less but it is still a genuine 1960 Corvette, not a "fake ass" and worth only slightly less than the numbers matching car. freddy's watch is not a "fake ass" either. It is a genuine Rolex 6542 with a replacement insert and repainted dial. Just as stated from the start.

Cars are certainly a good comparison, but what I was referring to, is not that cars are often restored with aftermarket or even custom fabricated parts, but that even when Fleming wrote the novel, there was the knowledge that owner modifications mean invalidation of any maker's warranty (with regards the hypothetical DJ) I quite agree, and would never call Freddy's watch "fake ass" anything. It is a 6542 made from non-numbered gen parts. However. It does not have a genuine albino 6542 dial. It has a genuine 6542 dial which has been re-painted to replicate an albino dial, making the dial a replication, rather than a restoration. I admit, the work on the dial is 100% top notch work, and is as close to genuine as is possible to get, but this truly is the embodiment of where some people in the past have criticized frankens, saying that no matter what parts get put in, it is still 'just a rep'. (Although I certainly feel that this watch is more than the sum of its parts, and the ultimate pinnacle of our hobby) All people have pointed out, is had the dial come out of the greaseproof envelope an albino dial, then yes, that would be a gen albino dial. This, is simply a gen 6542 dial which has been re-finished to replicate the albino variant. Freddy is not saying that the dial is not repainted, he is saying precisely what it is, but what people're talking about, is the difference between restoration and replication, two very different things. Rather than cars, reconsider my example of the counterfeit money: Everything about said money, from both materials and production crew would be genuine, but because it would be made 'outside the system', it would still be counterfeit money Anyway, there's no need to flog a dead horse, we'll be going round and round on this all weekend, much more productive to agree to disagree

Freddy, you have a fine timepiece, which I could never begin to come close to achieving with my own projects, wear it in the best of health

I checked it out and that is correct, a custom dialed watch would be refused service from Rolex. Nonetheless, the DateJust is still a genuine DateJust but with a custom dial. If they are not still genuine, then there are whole bunch of watches being sold as genuine when they are not. Of course it's all moot, as freddy would not want a service from Rolex. The point I made is that freddy's watch is a genuine Rolex, as is the DateJust, but with a replacement insert and repainted dial.

I quite agree that that is precisely what Freddy's watch is, and while I totally understand him describing it as a 'gen repainted dial', I quite understand others who have said that the dial is fake. While the constituents of the dial, base plate, inks, even the skills of the artist who re-finished it, all were Rolex authorized elements in their own right, the fact that the dial was refinished to customer request different to the dial's original appearance, makes the dial a reproduction, rather than a restoration. To look at it another way... Someone steals a load of paper from the US Mint. They also steal inks, presses, plates, and kidnap a few workers as well... What would be printed would be the ultimate in counterfeit money and 100% unidentifiable and indistinguishable from Uncle Sam-issued greenbacks. But it would still be counterfeit money as it was created 'outside the system'. Personally, I have no issue with what Freddy has done, I think it's an amazing piece, and I think getting the dial re-finished thus is a stroke of genius. As an artist, I appreciate the work which the refinisher had to do on the dial more than anything else, because parts are just parts, they go together, but actually creating something (like with your insert) that is a different matter and a different skillset altogether I can also see why some people have stood up and said that the dial should not be considered as gen, but as a fake. With all due respect, I cannot help but feel that this is karma paying Freddy back, as before he built his albino, he convinced another member not to undertake the same project, as it would be identified as a fake on sight due to its rarity. Some time after, he decided to undertake the same project and got some serious kudos for the build. I'm not trying to put Freddy down here, I have too much appreciation for his skills to do that, I've just tried to balance the both sides of the discussion, and calling the situation as I see it

[Edit to add]

With regards the hypothetical DJ, I'm not surprised that Rolex would decline the service. While they would decline the service of any other 6542, they would be declining the service for a different reason for declining the service of the hypothetical DJ. 6542 gets declined due to age, as Freddy mentioned above, due to Rolex's unwillingness to assume responsibility for the safekeeping of an old watch which they may not be able to replace any parts accidentally damaged during service. Personally, I think that's a poor show. In situations like that, given how Rolex insists that its watches only be serviced by them to maintain warranty (ie they clearly view the watch as their own property, rather than the clients') I feel they should accept the service, and if anything is damaged, simply manufacture replacement parts and have them artificially aged to match with the rest of the watch. Given their resources, I know they could do it if they wanted to (but I can also understand their reason for not wanting to do so ) Hypothetical DJ, on the other hand, is declined service due to voided warranty. I remember in one of the Bond novels (I forget which one, but I believe OHMSS) Fleming describes Bond's car as not only having been modified, but that the manufacturer had washed their hands of the car because of said modifications...

Normal - 1 finger

Just watched Octopussy the other day (one of the free to air channels has been playing all the old bond movies every Thursday night). You have to remember that those Quartz displays were seriously futuristic 30 years ago when these movies were being made, it is a very recent idea that digital watches became passé via a very effective marketing campaign by the Swiss

That Seiko in Octopussy was seriously bad-ass. Now we know from where the Monster inherited its 'badass' genes

I saw it a couple of weeks ago, and managed to see that the tracking function was really the stopwatch, but it was seriously cool. Can't believe how much they sell for now though

@TJ

Im realy looking for a nice leather strap i want a soft one, i hope i will find one soon

I'm sure you'll find one, or failing that, you could always have a custom one made

:tu:

Put it on a black fat-strap, and it'll be Newman perfect

might be worth giving Yuki's site a look for the dial, as for the fogging issue: Was the watch water resistant before? Might just be a matter of the watch needing new seals at the crown and caseback (crystal might be slightly less tight as well... ) Any decent watchsmith should be able to rectify these issues for you

I don't think any 6542 watches are in warranty.

Would the Rolex factory service the DateJust with the custom dial?

I may be wrong, but as above, I don't believe they would service it. Unless, as with Oliver Shepard's 1655, the Rolex Factory did the dial swap themselves and had the papers to verify it. Anything other than that, like with aftermarket parts on a car, they would say the warranty was violated and wash their hands of it (Not that I agree with that mindset by any stretch if the imagination, but I understand how the corporate mindset would apply itself)

OK, lets say the worst, it is a custom dial repainted by someone other than Rolex Authorized, (though freddy's was done by a Rolex authorized dial refinisher) and the DateJust voids the warranty. Does that make the watch a "fake ass Rolex"??

In my scheme of things*, certainly not, but, I would certainly understand the snoots on a gen forum thinking it was, as I can understand that Rolex would say it was no longer in warranty

*I think it's open knowledge that my scheme of things runs to 'less than conventional' ideas

Exactly my point.

A genuine damaged PN exotic 6263 dial gets refinished it still is a genuine PN exotic dial.

However refinishing a genuine silver dial 6263 to look like a PN, even by a Rolex authorized refinisher, doesn't make it a PN dial

and therefore 10x more valuable,

Collectors wouldn't call it a gen PN dial either

I guess this is the one instance where Gen dial base + Gen factory + Gen inks doesn't = Gen dial