anton

Fake. Reported. Rotor is the biggest tell.

"Inflated prices for gens"... I don't think a company would survive if we paid the prices we wanted to pay for their watch. Essentially we are paying for their future.

I don't think it's a trendy watch, nor it intends itself to be. It does have a unique shape, however and probably be remembered for its' design. I like it for its' readability and most of the purchasers I know like the fact that they can take a quick glance and see the time. It's simple and no-nonsense. It's either a love it-or-hate it design; much like the Panerais. The irony is that the people who complain that the BR's are silly-looking like the "oversizedness" of the Panerai series. Who's to say that those designs will stand the test of time?

I'm surprised you came here and asked the question...most people would go on TZ/TURF and post the question.

it just needs to be lubricated. and yes, if something turns, it definitely is removable.

The rep is: couple mm thicker made from SS when the gen is White Gold lume markers on 3, 6, and 9 are too thick "daytona" is not as thick or bright subdial printing is slightly off dial is silver; gen is slightly champagne pushers do not screw down on the gen as deep as they do on the rep. SEL on bracelet sits slightly higher on the rep than it does on the gen.

Actually, I could see it from the dealer's perspective. In this business, you can't expect to send anything back to the supplier and receive some type of credit for it. So if you, the buyer, send him back the watch and he ships you a replacement, he has to eat the cost of the watch. When you remove the plastic from the watch, you remove any indication that you haven't modified the watch in any way. If you removed the plastic and opened and closed the caseback very meticulously, how would I know that the flaw in question wasn't caused by you? If anything, good customer service would be that the dealer would have the dial replaced and installed for you, free of charge.

The new seconds @ 3 movement used on the recent Breitling reps are based on the use of extra gear plates to drive the mechanism, including the two datewheels. A montbrilliant rep would mean we have to deal with a recessed datewheel.

Well if the hand sizes are the same you should have no problem. The 7751 is after all, a variant of the 7750.

I was told it was $3500. I just saw one at the AD two days ago. Well maybe it's 4000AUD. EDIT: (USD) $3450 HEAD ONLY. $3525 on RUBBER. $3925 on PRO II BRACELET. Source: 2007 Chronolog.

@ Italiano: Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful!!!!!!!!! I saw one at the AD today and almost purchased it right on impulse. Bear in mind that i didn't trade my Super Avenger, so I thought twice about that. But on the other hand, the AD did have two Blacksteels on order and I'm on the waiting list.

dang. you beat me to the answer. missing on the edges, right? the movement looks good. is that a gen movement?

No, the gen strap is also embossed. And also, looks like they pulled parts from the BR01 parts bin to build this BR03 (hands).

Sometimes I like to relate the rep collecting from watches to art. Everyone knows you can't really buy an original Matisse, but if you were able to obtain a facsimilie, you'd probably hang it on your wall and people would admire it for its' beauty, not its' authenticity. Kinda like how no one asks you, "nice watch. Is that real?"

I like how the OEM calf fits on me. It's also buttery soft and doesn't show stress lines. Do you find yourself using the two much, or do you have literally A KATRILLION straps?!?!?

If they did make it, I can already think of a million things that could be wrong with it. On the gen, there's 10 minute and 3 hour totalizers. And a flyback. And those must be the biggest features missing on the rep.

Of course I won't mind. But in your case, do you mind answering the same question, but in strap form? And yes, you can include aftermarket high quality straps in the category of "gens" as well.

Thanks for all your replies! The reason I ask is that I frequent the Diamond District. And by "frequent", I mean "all the time." Call me a watch W H O R E if you will. When I see something that catches my eye, I head downtown and see if the rep is available. If not, I may buy it online; since after all I can't try them on at the dealers without those salespeople breathing down my neck as if they have more important things to do than take my money. I may have explained this in other posts, but I liken reps as "demo" models that i can try on and then finally take the plunge if I buy it. I still like and wear reps, but there are those inane and annoying things about the rep that lead me to purchase gen. One of those being crap for lume. Another is a tricompax with a sunken datewheel. Recently I purchased 2 BR01 reps. I'd like them ALOT if not for the stuttering seconds hand and off-centered and cheap screws. So that caused me to purchase a gen. And also, I purchased a PAM 196 Daylight. How they could get the dial so perfect except for the "Panerai Luminor" being in serif and a sunken datewheel drives me crazy. So I'm leaning towards purchasing a gen.

Here's a wristshot for anyone considering: For comparison's sake, here's how it sits compared to a Panerai 202 Slytech: And my wrists are 6.75" big.

I guess there's really no need for me to explain my topic, since my question is already in the title, but to further elaborate... For you, did anyone ever purchase a rep only to find themselves purchasing the gen of said watch shortly thereafter?

I went to three different ADs in the city who had either iteration of the BR01 series in stock. PVD models say "military spec." on the caseback. Silver models do not. So far, I saw the (in)famous brand9 claim it's 1:1. And lest I forget, the the text on the BR01 92/94/96/97 is the same UNLESS: 1) the caseback is PVD 2) its a LE model; then the text "limited edition" should appear where the model number/serial is and the text "aviation type [and/or] military spec." is replaced in favor of the model/serial.

Well, I may be a bit harsh in my statement, but when a dealer states that a certain watch is replicated 1:1, I would expect that when parts are made for the gen, they should fit for the rep. Today I pulled the trigger on a gen BR01-96 (Big Date) so now to compliment my three reps is one gen. I would like to complete the collection and get a BR01-94 someday. To diffrentiate, the one on the left is the rep and the one on the right is the gen. (This is the case side, with strap removed, on the gen) When viewing the two side by side, the flaws are apparent on the rep. To me, the most glaring flaw on the rep is that the case screws are of low quality and slightly off-centered. It doesn't look right when 95% of the watch looks new and the four screws that can barely be "dinged" up are the ones with the chips. You can also see that on the rep, the lume markers are mis-aligned. Although the hand sizes are correct, you can see on the gen that half the hand is sort of a "brushed metal" appearance whereas on the rep it's just a matte silver. When looking at the caseback, the most obious flaw is the laser etching of the four faux screws. Everyone knows of that flaw, but two more apparent flaws are the addition of "military spec." text on the rep (It doesn't exist on the silver versions of the gen; only on the PVD models) and the measurement of the hex screw should be shown as "1,3mm", not "1.3mm". Last but not least, two reasons why I don't call the piece 1:1 - 1) Case lugs are detachable on the gen whereas they are part of the case on the rep. Somehow I think the BR01 rep is based on the BR03, since the BR03 does NOT have screws on the back. 2) Hex screws on the lugs are not compatible with the kex key set I received with the watch. On the gen, it is an actual 1.3mm whereas on the rep I has to use a 1.5mm key in order to get it moving. Still, the rep's construction quality is great and still a beauty to the eyes. If you've ever considered this watch a monstrosity, think twice. I have 6.75" wrists and the watch fits right on my wrist, end to end.

I've reviewed the BR01-92 and BR01-97 reps over in the review section. I know I should have really posted here, but I a watch review goes under the review section, right? Sorry for the shameless bump.

ROTM 21J rep. Day/date subdials. Reported.

Today I'd like to share my review and insight on two recently acquired reps: The Bell & Ross BR01-92 and BR01-97. Initially I was going to post this yesterday, but I had hoped to have a gen in my hands to make a side-by-side comparison. Unfortunately, the AD didn't have the one I wanted. The ones in question are the first two, from the left. This really should be two reviews, but being that they are are of similar construction, I'd like to refer to both as one watch and anything pertaining to each watch will be noted therein. I've had a long history with the B&R BR01 series since 2006. I first saw it in an aviation magazine and for some reason it drew it me in. I had purchased one (BR01-92 in Opaline) back in January but then exchanged it the very next day for a Super Avenger, one that I use as my daily wearer. I've half-regretted it since then and had been meaning to purchase again, but reading reviews of other watches have always led me astray. That brings me to the reps. I wanted an initial "test drive" of the series just to see if it would satisfy my hunger. These definitely are a looker. Aesthetics: The case dimensions are 46mmx46mmx10.8mm, on par with the gen. It has a sapphire crystal, with antireflective coating apparent on both models. It's not strong, but it's there as there is a degree of "invisibility" when viewed at certain angles, and the blue hue is also a sure tell. The crown, when unscrewed requires three complete turns for it to "lock" snugly into the case. Both cases have a "brushed" satin finish to them and polished edges. They certainly have a "high quality" feeling to them. Both watches came standard with a rubber strap, identical to genuine size and a brushed/polished steel buckle that also feels pretty solid and well-built. Movement: Word has it that the BR01-92 rep comes with a clone of the 2892 and the BR01-97 rep comes with a clone of the 2897. Since I readily don't have access to taking apart either watch just to prove in fact what movement is in there, I could tell you that the movement in the BR01-92 makes a loud winding noise when you attempt to wind the crown and ticks very loudly. A simple "jiggle" of the wrist spins the rotor very rapidly. I would not be surprised if it were equipped a 21J movement. Sure sounds like it. The BR01-97, on the other hand is a quiet runner as when placed to the ear makes a faint ticking noise. The winding of the crown and the rotor spin both sound smooth, as if those parts were properly lubricated. I was very surprised to see that the power reserve indicator DOES INDEED function and through winging of the crown and/or rotor spins cause the indiciator for change its' charge level. I left it idle for 12 hours just to see if the watch was bluffing, but by the morning PR indicator dwindled from 100% to about 75%. This would make me assume that it is capable for a 40+ hour reserve. And just to correct dealer's claims of a 28,800vph movement, it's more like a 21,600vph movement (more pronounced stuttered sweep) Flaws: (my favorite part) BR01-92: If my knowledge serves me correctly, there is no watch issued to RAID in this combination. Bear in mind that there were only 50 pieces issued. So that's obviously not a dealbreaker. BR01-97: The movement isn't an accurate copy of the ETA 2897. The datewheel is sunken in whereas it is flush on the gen and the PR indicator is slightly higher on the dial, closer to the hand stems. The appliques, although beautiful, when viewed within close range shows the poor QC that is apparent with all reps. The lume is crookedly applied. Additionally, the PR hand should be a "pointed" shape rather a straight line. Both models: When reviewing my pictures, notice the low-quality screws used in putting together the case, when any simple movement using a screwdriver will chip away at the screw. You'll also noticed that it also may not be centered perfectly; but that is only visible when viewed close-up. The rep is crafted from a single block of steel whereas the gen is comprised of multiple parts. You'll see that on the backside of the gen, there are four hex-key screws. Those hold the lugs. The rubber strap included with the rep watches are quality straps, but there they fall short as the edges of the rubber obviously show some cutting into the area. But I am glad to say that it is very comfortable and does not attract dust like the rep Panerai rubbers. AR is great in most lighting conditions, but it doesn't make the crystal completely "disappear" like on the gen. And AFAIK, Rubber straps only come stock with the BR01-94 Ti / SE's and BR01-92 limited editions. The majority of their models come with the calf leather and nylon velcro strap. Overall impressions: The Bell & Ross reps are finally the correct size. They finally are decent-looking. They finally corrected some of the flaws that were apparent when they first came around two years ago. It no longer says "MILIARY". It no longer has the short and thin seconds anchor. The dial font is correct. Although the lume sucks, it still passes muster. And the quality of watch that is apparent here is that it is definitely a looker besides it being humongous (this coming from a Super Avenger owner), but it also being unique in appearance. Because of the simplicity of the design of the BR01 series, these models will easily pass most people's scrutiny (except mine and yours). But I do know one thing, though. These B&R reps are beautiful and have only caused me to purchase a gen as soon as my AD has it available. Either that or the Phantom. More pictures: