freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 The Great GMTIIC AR Mystery: SOLVED Here is a gen Rolex GMTIIC crystal in its original, factory-sealed packaging (I cannot disclose many details about the acquisition, except to say that it required calling in a favor) Once I have figured out how to (safely) remove the bezel/insert on my CHS, I will install the gen crystal. In the meantime, this pic clearly shows the AR coating applied to the underside of the crystal, below the cyclops (if the upper-side of the cyclops is AR'd, I do not see it) Case closed. p.s. It is also worth noting that neither of the Rolex-certified watchmakers I spoke with were even aware of the AR coating until I pointed it out to them. In 1 case, the watchmaker was so unaware (& surprised) that he had to contact someone at Rolex Switzerland to verify the existence of AR on a Rolex lens. My point is that the AR on these watches is only relevant to WIS types & it is highly unlikely that anyone else you may encounter in your daily life will ID your rep (assuming you look like you belong with a $7k watch) as anything but the real thing based on the appearance of its cyclops. As best as I can tell, all the AR cyclops does is make the watch suitable for very interesting pics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkay Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 WILD APPLAUSE! Nice detective work, there!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 If anyone has removed the crystal on their GMTIIC - rep or gen - please let me know the steps involved (if you posted pics or a thread, a link would be helpful). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmegaPOFL Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 dammmn nice favor freddy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Well done Freddy, and not the outcome I would have expected. In fact, I consider this a very silly way to do it rather than simply coating the entire underside. For our rep purposes, you'd never know the difference. Someone ought to do a project watch... single AR on crystal and double AR on cyclops. That'd give indistinguishable results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Well done Freddy, and not the outcome I would have expected. In fact, I consider this a very silly way to do it rather than simply coating the entire underside. Agreed. It's the most insane solution possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 My understanding is that Rolex chose to AR only the cyclops area to see how well it would stand over time before they jump on the AR bandwagon. They do not want to find out (in 10 or 20 years' time) that the coatings fade, discolor or oxidize. Even though it may sometimes seem otherwise, Rolex is a very conservative company & they do not like to adapt new technologies (that they do not own) until they are well-proven over time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Fade, discolor or oxidize on the inside of a water/air tight enclosure? In any event, even if this were to happen, people (i.e. customers) aren't going to be happy looking at it under the magnification of a 2.5X cyclops! A simple crystal replacement down the road to a non-AR or better-AR version would happen either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highoeyazmuhudee Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 "They do not want to find out (in 10 or 20 years' time) that the coatings fade, discolor or oxidize." you mean like their tritium dials? how long has AR tech been around anyways? and should we expect to this on subs 20years from now then? it seems good enough for everyone else to use, and im sure they could do some artificial aging of it on their crystals for RnD purposes...no? either way, kudos on the rare purchase enjoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Fade, discolor or oxidize on the inside of a water/air tight enclosure? Stranger things have happened. Like some black paint on dials turns brown (tropical) or white tritium turns who-knows-what-color inside some sealed cases. I think they are trying to avoid repeats of those kinds of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 except to say that it required calling in a favor An interesting outcome for sure, but thanks for sharing the secret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justasgood Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 If anyone has removed the crystal on their GMTIIC - rep or gen - please let me know the steps involved (if you posted pics or a thread, a link would be helpful). Freddy, I removed the crystal on 2 Rep GMTIIC's. Do not monkey with the Bezel assembly. Just uncase the movemenmt, press the crystal out from the backside, and re-install with a press. Not sure if the Gen will fit the rep. I didn't measure mine when it was out....sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 I removed the crystal on 2 Rep GMTIIC's. Do not monkey with the Bezel assembly. Just uncase the movemenmt, press the crystal out from the backside, and re-install with a press. Thanks, that is what I thinking, but your experience just clinched it. Is the rep crystal the same shape (flat) like the gen? And a question for anyone who installs alot of sapphire Rolex lenses - What is the procedure for installing a sapphire crystal & gaskets (there are 2 gaskets with the GMT crystal)? Do you install 1 gasket, then the crystal, then the other gasket? Or what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblueprince Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Great work, strange outcome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Well done Freddy, and not the outcome I would have expected. In fact, I consider this a very silly way to do it rather than simply coating the entire underside. For our rep purposes, you'd never know the difference. Someone ought to do a project watch... single AR on crystal and double AR on cyclops. That'd give indistinguishable results. I was going to do this for this run CT but missed it.. I'll remove the crystal for your next run.. it is already without the cyclops.. and I will have to then remove the AR one the rest of the crystal surrounding the mag after it is coated.. I was really thinking it was on both sides of the crystal under the cyclops .. thank you freddy .. I'll get back with pics on the removal.. you can use my GMTII as a test.. We'll see how that plays out.. AC Lani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefcook Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Thanks, that is what I thinking, but your experience just clinched it. Is the rep crystal the same shape (flat) like the gen? And a question for anyone who installs alot of sapphire Rolex lenses - What is the procedure for installing a sapphire crystal & gaskets (there are 2 gaskets with the GMT crystal)? Do you install 1 gasket, then the crystal, then the other gasket? Or what? On the gen 116710 the crystal / bezel assembly is the same as on the 16610 Submariner with one gasket IMO. The GMT IIc crystal is a straight fit on the sub, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 On the gen 116710 the crystal / bezel assembly is the same as on the 16610 Submariner with one gasket IMO. The GMT IIc crystal is a straight fit on the sub, too. I'll disassemble it tomorrow, with pics.. I really thought I would have to do a 2 sided and remove both sides of the AR that were not directly in contact with the mag.. mm I still may do that for redundancy.. AC Lani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 I'll disassemble it tomorrow, with pics.. Thanks, Lani. I am pretty sure the existing rep crystal can just be popped out from the backside, but I am not sure about the installation of the new crystal. I only work on vintage (Plexiglas) crystals, which install differently. So pics of the install process, specifically, showing when/where each of the 2 gaskets & crystal go in, would be real helpful. With only 1 gen crystal available, I do not want to break/damage it. A man has to know his limits --Harold Francis Callahan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Thanks, Lani. I am pretty sure the existing rep crystal can just be popped out from the backside, but I am not sure about the installation of the new crystal. I only work on vintage (Plexiglas) crystals, which install differently. So pics of the install process, specifically, showing when/where each of the 2 gaskets & crystal go in, would be real helpful. With only 1 gen crystal available, I do not want to break/damage it. A man has to know his limits --Harold Francis Callahan Understood freddy.. I would feel the same.. so after the gym tomorrow.. I'll disassemble the beast and take whatever pics you need.. I'll post then if there is any other visuals you need .. I'll just stand by .. congrats on your acquisition with the elusive AR cyclops btw!!!!!!!! AC L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 so after the gym tomorrow.. I'll disassemble the beast and take whatever pics you need.. I'll post then if there is any other visuals you need .. I'll just stand by .. congrats on your acquisition with the elusive AR cyclops btw!!!!!!!! Thanks again, Lani. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Freddy, since we don't know what type of AR they used, be very careful when handling the lens. It's possible that they did not use a high temp coating so that they could coat the lens with the magnifier already attached, in which case, if you touch the coating or even wipe it with a cloth you'll ruin it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Thanks, Chief. My inspection of the gen crystal only adds support to the proposition that Rolex's AR is similar to that used on eyeglass lenses, which is easily smeared/damaged/removed (especially with ammonia-based glass cleaners). Believe me, I have ruined the AR on enough pairs of eyeglasses (& received appropriate reaming from my optician for doing so) that I have been ultra sensitized to treating this lens with kid gloves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 When I did a single sided AR run a few years ago for a bunch of PAM lenses, we went with a low temp coating which could not be touched with anything. Totally non-durable, not designed to withstand anything. We used lint-free gloves to to handle the lenses and only touched the egde, not the AR surface at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 When I did a single sided AR run a few years ago for a bunch of PAM lenses, we went with a low temp coating which could not be touched with anything. Totally non-durable, not designed to withstand anything. We used lint-free gloves to to handle the lenses and only touched the egde, not the AR surface at all. I doubt the AR on the Rolex lens is that delicate, otherwise the packaging would contain bold warning labels with explicit handling instructions. Since none of the watchmakers I discussed these with were even aware of the AR, I have to assume that it should stand up to 'normal' (for a Rolex-trained watchmaker) handling. Still, I always wear finger cots when working with lenses anyway, but I hear you. Just wondering why we did not do a low temp coating for the GMTIICs right from the beginning? That way, we could have masked off the underside of the crystal just as Rolex has likely done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Be back with pics of the crystal removal etc. in a bit.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.