jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 As posted on a gen forum....what is your opinion?rep or gen?
valerian Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 OK, I'm really no expert here and still noobish, so bear with me. I'd say rep. GMT hand too green (can be the colour settings though). Missing AR under cyclops. Numbering on bezel too fat and too white. Wouldn't bet my granny on it though. Val.
chefcook Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 ... Missing AR under cyclops. ... The Pro Hunters have completely ARed crystals, therefore one won't see differences from the crystal to the cyclops. Hand stack looks correct and the rehaut engraving lines up where it is visible. I'd say gen.
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 Yes but...the word PRO-HUNTER has different fonts than the original,also the SEL's look bad and i really can't see any kind of AR on the crystal.Bezel numbers seem to thick next to the one posted on the PRO HUNTER site,etched crown is quite visible and the GMT hand is shorter than the original (ROLEX GMT IIC as well as PRO HUNTER) Also the ROLEX CORONET on the dial is thicker....
craigb Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 i would of thought the end links would fit a bit more snug, but i think we should leave this one to the real experts here on rwg
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 A photo of a GEN PRO HUNTER
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 A photo of a GEN PRO HUNTER Photo of the watch in doubt
chefcook Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 You are right with the GMT hand length. For everything else the watch is IMO too dirty and the pic quality is too bad.
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 PRO HUNTER fonts are definitely way off
spooky driver Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 the PRO HUNTER font is all wrong...
alligoat Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 With those serifs on the gen 'Pro Hunter' you'd have to say the other watch is a fake- it wouldn't make sense for Pro Hunter to change their logo, would it?
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 Also it wouldn't make any sense to make the GMT hand shorter
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 What is strange is that this watch was presented in a GEN forum GTG and no one ever bothered to dispute the authenticity. Seems that they assumed since it is a PRO HUNTER all the inconsistencies to the gen ROLEX are sensible...
alligoat Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 Isn't the GMT hand on the bottom of the stack in the pic of the suspect watch? tried to enlarge it, but not that good w/ photobucket yet! Still looks to be on the bottom to me!
jmarin.72 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 Looks like it but the angle of the photo i misleading...
ubiquitous Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 What about the 'MADE IN CHINA' stamp on the case back? I'd think that would have given it away?
jmb Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 +1 to the 'goat. It sure looks like an ICHS - but at that angle and magnification...
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