unregistered Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Hi all, first off, I'd beg your kindness on this review as can be seen, I'm more of a PAM guy and only recently started moving to smaller sized watches. My desire to purchase a sub only started after I got my vintage Omega Moonie and who else would do but BK? Anyhow, after payment, the watch was shipped and arrived within the one month stipulated period (even with BK away for a number of weeks on holiday). This is not so much a review as a comparison as quite honestly, the tells are a lot less blatant as compared to say a PAM rep. But I'm certain people here will be able to spot them more readily than I can since you guys seem to stare at Rolex pics just like how I stare at PAM pics So on to the pics, comparative pics were sourced of a z-series black Submariner as well so this should be a apples to apples review; Front/Dial 1) Not so much a tell but a difference in inserts. The gen has thicker indices and numbers 2) The Pearl is noticeably different. Less of a metal ring/nonexistant. Some have said the cyclops magnification for the clark crystals is a little low as compared to gen, but I just can't see it. There's a DW pic further down to show the DW, and if you can tell me how far off it is, I'd be much obliged. The dial itself, I cannot really spot anything strongly off. This is the realm of loupes I'd have to say to really spot differences. The rehaut looks good, though on mine I can't say I can see the white crystal gasket which is quite prominent on the gen. Pearl The difference in the pearl is a lot more obvious here. Top Profile These look identical in terms of bezel height and profile. The end links though arn't as tightly machined as the gen. Mild mild gap. Clasp The crown circles are a bit more pronounced on the rep but the shape and sizing is a big step up from the noobmariner clasp. Crown guard profile from the rear looks good. Bottom Profile Again nothing to comment, the bezel teeth look good and are of the same shape, as is the case lug shape. Crown Guard To me the rep does still seem a little thick as compared to the gen. But the v3 fixes the issues the v2 had with regards to un-centered crown. Shine I've polished the case & bracelet using the Macscouver method This to me is a bit of a letdown. Many claim this is not a big deal, but for some reason it does bug the hell out of me. On the wrist it looks great, but somehow, versus 904L, the whiteness is just a stark difference. Lume Compared against a Little Hero PAM111I. 1sec exposure, 2min interval. No PS editing besides cropping. Nice lume. Datewheel Endlinks Unsure if this is the correct engraving, but a nice touch to see there. Pics Now I have a question to ask, is it worthwhile swapping out the bracelet on this to one of the new 316F noobmariner bracelets and keeping the clasp of this. Main reason is for the different sheen. Thoughts? Anyone else done this? As for the watch itself, I finally understand the great following the Submariner has. There is a certain understated elegance about the Submariner that allows it to be both casual and elegant, the combination of brushed bracelet and polished case. As for the BK/WM9. I can't comment for others, but for myself, I'm quite happy with it. I'm far from blown away to be honest. The sheen is an issue for me, to others perhaps not, but it bugs me. But in terms of overall tells, I just can't see much. The differences are minute and can be put down to variances in machining batches. Though the one thing I would do is source a gen insert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 thanks for the time to put together such a comprehensive review of the BK WM9 UN.. great pics and a thorough analysis.. great job!! I especially like the added touch on the lume pics.. very nice !!! the only parts I added to my WM9 from BK is a gen insert and a gen oyster bracelet.. I like the feel of the gen oyster.. since the WM9 is worth the addition of a gen bracelet.. I didn't swap the Clarks crystal with a gen 295c.. I felt the crystal was very good.. and it would not need the added expense of a gen. thanks again.. Value Added for sure in the Rolex Forum with your interest in Rolex AC/Lani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Very nice comparison, great pics of the gen and nice comparison shots of the WM9. I do agree that a gen insert would be the biggest improvement, but the WM9 certainly is very close and for the price, I still think it's a great deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deniz21 Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 thanks man, great to see the review of them both, and a great job from you, and of course thats a real nice watch denz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unregistered Posted January 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Glad to share guys. Thanks lani for the headsup too. Going to get myself a new insert and perhaps gen bracelet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmarin.72 Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Thanks for your time and effort mate!!! J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkay Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Sweet baby jeebus! Look at the orange peel on that insert! I hope they aren't all like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSRep Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 As for the watch itself, I finally understand the great following the Submariner has. There is a certain understated elegance about the Submariner that allows it to be both casual and elegant, the combination of brushed bracelet and polished case. Though the one thing I would do is source a gen insert. Hey UR! Brilliant comparison of your new V3. Congratulations I have had the same awakening you have re the submariner. It never had an appeal to me....but after having tried one on recently I thought "darn Ive been missing out" - it is THE classic divers sports watch......and extremely professional and elegant! Thanks to your review I cant wait to get mine too hehe. Its a shame about the sheen on the steel.....some say its not a big issue, same say it is! But until the PERFECT rep comes along the WM9 / BK is great it seems. Yup, change that insert and youll have a fantastic watch. ATB. /OS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Great comparsion thank you. It's a great watch for shure I own the V3 also. For me the Bezel is a bit off the teeth are too small in my opinion also the bottom shape is different. On mine a Gen Insert won't snap in,but I think there are variations. The Tube is too much recessed on the Case while there is a bit too much material shaped in this Area. The SEL's are bad machined in my opinion they are not curved enough in the middle and a bit too long.fitting on the Case can be better. Case Tube is also not the best,on the SSD the Rep tube is much better. The Crown is nice All in all a nice watch for shure but WM9 need to take care of the flaws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolexmaniac88 Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 the only parts I added to my WM9 from BK is a gen insert and a gen oyster bracelet.. I like the feel of the gen oyster.. since the WM9 is worth the addition of a gen bracelet.. AC/Lani How much would a gen bracelet cost? Also, do you have any idea about what a bezel assembly would cost? Thanks in advance Lani. Anyway, great review (can't wait to get mine), in my opinion, it is a hell of a watch and your review was very informative towards its ups and downs. Thanks for that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmb Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 About the only thing I really, really don't like about it is the insert and pearl but you noticed that yourself. Very nice looking Sub overall... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmarin.72 Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 I got a generic insert coming from Watchmaterial.I will try it on and post some pics to see how it fits. On my SSD was looking spot on. I also placed an order for a Watchmaterial lume pearl.I will try first to replace the pearl. Insert on my v3 is looking grear BTW,except of course for the pearl. I will post some pics as soon as i get the insert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panerai153 Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Thanks very much for the comprehensive review. From what i could see the WM9 is pretty darn good right out the box, and will probably be fine for 98-99% of the folks who buy the watch. for the other 1 to 2%, adding a genuine insert and possibly a genuine bracelet would be put this one into the Super franken catagory. I don't have one of these, I'm one of the many patiently awaiting the WM9 SD, but if I were looking for a modern sub, this would be the one. Another thing that I believe is going to make this one a rare bird down the line, is the plain rehault. my impression is all the Subs to come will have the rehault engraving, including the ones sold directly by WM9. Adding the engraving is another source of problems, as the rep factories have never gotten it right thus far. Another "Tell" and one that fixing is probably extremly difficult to impossible. Great watch, great review. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RolexSigEp Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Great review Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dluddy Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Another very nice review UR Thanks for taking the time and for sharing with the community Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Amazing watch ... apart from that insert/pearl. Still, it looks like a simple fix: replace the insert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unregistered Posted January 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Hey pug, been a while since I last saw you post Thanks guys, yup, chasing down gen insert sources now. Got one for $100 incl shipping. Decent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 Hey pug, been a while since I last saw you post Thanks guys, yup, chasing down gen insert sources now. Got one for $100 incl shipping. Decent? I think $100 is decent, but I'm out of the loop. I'd pay it if I had your watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member X Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 So, gen bezel and bracelet are the recommended improvements. Further to this, Tribal posted above, and in another thread I read today (http://www.rwgforum.com/topic/111709-my-wm9-sub-hybrid-v2-case-with-v3-eta-2824/), that he felt that the crown was too recessed and needed to be replaced with a gen crown to be accurate. Would others agree this is the case? Thanks all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Would others agree this is the case? Sadly yes. Also the 16613 seems to have the same problem. Worst of all there is no possibility to fix this. Yes you could place the tube further outwards, put an extra O-ring, but then there wil be a gap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unregistered Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 I don't know, but I would disagree. In hand I'm looking at it and the bezel and how they line up. On the gen, it looks like the base of the crown before the beveling is in line with the edge of the bezel which is exactly what I'm seeing in my v3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 I don't know, but I would disagree. In hand I'm looking at it and the bezel and how they line up. On the gen, it looks like the base of the crown before the beveling is in line with the edge of the bezel which is exactly what I'm seeing in my v3 Maybe we are talking about different things. What Tribal means is this: (pics courtesy of Tribal) Red line is same length. How does this look on your gen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member X Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 So in that top picture, the crown on the right hand watch is more accurate as it sticks out further past the bezel teeth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 So in that top picture, the crown on the right hand watch is more accurate as it sticks out further past the bezel teeth? Correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member X Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Cool, thank you very much for clarifying that, this is all good info for those of us who aren't that knowledgeable on Rolex! 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.