Maxfly Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 I was wondering why are the crown guards always wrong on reps. If they can make copies of Rolex almost to detail, why can
Nanuq Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 This is partly due to the factories' lack of detailed knowledge of watch models. For example, the MBW 1665 case has the famous "droopy" crown guards and the 9:00 side of the case slopes inward toward the top. The gen case has neither of these details. But my gen 1680 is exactly like this, so if they used that case as the basis for the 1680 and 1665, the Sea Dweller is going to be wrong. Just an example. Why are the crown guards so fat and chunky? Well, look at this and tell me if the MBW crown guards (front) are close to gen (back). These CGs are straight from Maria's smoke stained hands:
rosnik Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 The problem is that the crown position in high , in GENs is different than in REPs. In GEN it's higher. This due the different movements used.
Maxfly Posted October 1, 2009 Author Report Posted October 1, 2009 Hi Nanuq, In your case I can imagine that the factory makes a mistake ( beautifull watches BTW) but with an "ordinary" Submariner or late model seadweller it should't be a problem in my opinion. That's why I don't understand the names Ultimate, supreme etc if the cg's are not even close to the gen!
By-Tor Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 The problem is that the crown position in high , in GENs is different than in REPs. In GEN it's higher. Not in the Explorer II rep though. Read.
rosnik Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Not in the Explorer II rep though. Read. You are in right ByTor! I was telling about late SUB models.
TeeJay Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 I was wondering why are the crown guards always wrong on reps. If they can make copies of Rolex almost to detail, why can
Maxfly Posted October 1, 2009 Author Report Posted October 1, 2009 I agree with you Tee-Jay. it's the only reason i can think off.
By-Tor Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 WM9 v2 Submariner crown guards are virtually perfect. I couldn't tell them from a gen anyway. Noobfactory ExpII and GMTII have decent ones as well.
Maxfly Posted October 1, 2009 Author Report Posted October 1, 2009 I ordered a WM9 at PT, i think it's a V1. By-Tor, do you know how the cg's are on the V1?
By-Tor Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 I ordered a WM9 at PT, i think it's a V1. By-Tor, do you know how the cg's are on the V1? Yes I do. I reviewed that watch. Read the article here. They are not as good as v2 but they're easily modifiable. I modded them myself and they became fairly accurate.
flex Posted October 2, 2009 Report Posted October 2, 2009 Agree with Nanuq on the lack of detailed knowledge of watch models. I received a 5513 case from DW. There is no lug holes! Waited 3 weeks for this to arrive!
Gatchaman Posted October 2, 2009 Report Posted October 2, 2009 If the factories made perfect replicas, you would only buy one and keep it for years and years instead of upgrading to the latest reincarnation of it. Hence, V1, V2, V3...ad nauseam...waiting for them to get it right.
jmb Posted October 2, 2009 Report Posted October 2, 2009 Gatchaman might be onto something otherwise why would they release a new version that "fixed" one thing but "broke" something else that was correct on the previous model?
Gatchaman Posted October 3, 2009 Report Posted October 3, 2009 Case in point: Rolex Milgauss replica. Why is the rehaut so wrong on the 40mm when the 42mm (totally wrong size!) is correct? Its reasons such as this that I gave up on getting a rep of it (and all other reps) and decided to build a Franken of the Datejust instead. IMHO, the best rep is a Franken (pseudo-rep?) made with all gen parts but using a generic Swiss ETA movement. You could even add the gen movement later (with proper hands)...and have a super Franken...which, is essentially a "restored" gen. Grinding down a rep case, AR'ing the crystal, reluming, changing crown tubes, etc... will never get you close to a gen. (My FrankenJust even has an authentic Rolex serial number that allows me to trace its history. Try that with a rep!)
Gatchaman Posted October 3, 2009 Report Posted October 3, 2009 (edited) So that the factories can try and argue in court, that they have not produced a 100% identical item... Its not a question of 100% accuracy or not. Its the fact that companies are using registered trademarks to sell merchandise. For example, in the replica clothing market, one can easily find Gucci, Dior, D&G clothing that is nothing like what the particular company actually sells. Those aforementioned labels (just like watch companies) hate the counterfeit market whether or not the item is 100% to the original or not. Also, you think Swatch AG is going to take Fung Dung Wu Heavy Industrial Corp., which is a subsidiary of Yamaha Corp., to court? Not bloody likely. But, Swatch AG would take legal action if reps of their product were being sold as legit watches in legit stores beside other legit merchandise. Edited October 3, 2009 by Gatchaman
Logan Posted October 3, 2009 Report Posted October 3, 2009 Due to the dimension of the Rolex 31xx movements vs any of the clones or Eta's you can have the correct rehaut depth or the correct crown position and guards or the correct case thickness. You can't have all of them, The non-rolex movements just don't allow this. The winding stem on the Rolex movements is substantially closer to the dial then any of the alternatives. If we ever get the long rumored / wished for 31xx clone movement or another movement with the correct stem position then we'll see these issues solved, until then don't hold your breath, you just can't do it.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now