Nebakanezzar Posted September 7, 2006 Report Share Posted September 7, 2006 Has anyone bought the new 45mm PO with the correct 22mm Lugs? I have been waiting for someone to show some pics before pulling the trigger myself... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleo5555 Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 Has anyone bought the new 45mm PO with the correct 22mm Lugs? I have been waiting for someone to show some pics before pulling the trigger myself... Yes, I got the 45mm , black bezel version with SS band 22mm from Ruby, her pics are better than anything I could produce. I can say its an awesome watch, the slightly shorter hands issue is not really apparent to me on the wrist , you can tell in a blowup photo however. but what the hell ,at my age I need a big watch just to tell the time! Overall its the best watch Ive ever bought for $199. I think most of the dealers have it now, and I am seriously thinking about getting the orange one next. http://s70.photobucket.com/albums/i94/ruby-replicas/ Password: Ruby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 (edited) This watch is wrong for lots of reasons, the most critical one being a fat caseback that verges on the obese!! This is because of the bizarre choice of ETA 2836 movement which is the thickest of the 28xx range. The real watch uses Omega Calibre 2500 which is the same thickness as the thinnest of the 28xx range, the 2892. If I thought I could obtain a decent rep 22mm rubber strap (haven't encountered one yet) then I'd have a mind to build a Frankenrep using one of these and a Seagull ST-18 movement (2892 copy) and fit one of the spare casebacks I have from my pair of 45mm Asian PO's.... Edited to add: The fat caseback is the same one used on the 7750 PO chrono rep, which is why it looks ridiculous as it was built to accomodate the chrono movement using the 'bastard 7753' transfer gearing. Same flaw as the Daytona reps... Edited September 8, 2006 by r11co Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleo5555 Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 This watch is wrong for lots of reasons, the most critical one being a fat caseback that verges on the obese!! This is because of the bizarre choice of ETA 2836 movement which is the thickest of the 28xx range. The real watch uses Omega Calibre 2500 which is the same thickness as the thinnest of the 28xx range, the 2892. If I thought I could obtain a decent rep 22mm rubber strap (haven't encountered one yet) then I'd have a mind to build a Frankenrep using one of these and a Seagull ST-18 movement (2892 copy) and fit one of the spare casebacks I have from my pair of 45mm Asian PO's.... Edited to add: The fat caseback is the same one used on the 7750 PO chrono rep, which is why it looks ridiculous as it was built to accomodate the chrono movement using the 'bastard 7753' transfer gearing. Same flaw as the Daytona reps... I still like my wrong, fat , obese, bizarre , ridiculous, 45.5 black PO with 22mm band. Gen width 15.2 mm , this rep 16.3mm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 This watch is wrong for lots of reasons, the most critical one being a fat caseback that verges on the obese!! This is because of the bizarre choice of ETA 2836 movement which is the thickest of the 28xx range. The real watch uses Omega Calibre 2500 which is the same thickness as the thinnest of the 28xx range, the 2892. If I thought I could obtain a decent rep 22mm rubber strap (haven't encountered one yet) then I'd have a mind to build a Frankenrep using one of these and a Seagull ST-18 movement (2892 copy) and fit one of the spare casebacks I have from my pair of 45mm Asian PO's.... Edited to add: The fat caseback is the same one used on the 7750 PO chrono rep, which is why it looks ridiculous as it was built to accomodate the chrono movement using the 'bastard 7753' transfer gearing. Same flaw as the Daytona reps... So is the size/thickness issue unique to the 45mm model? What about the smaller model? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted September 9, 2006 Report Share Posted September 9, 2006 So is the size/thickness issue unique to the 45mm model? What about the smaller model? TBH I don't know. The pictures of the caseback of the latest generation 42mm PO look ok, but I can only assume that they may be about 0.4-0.5mm deeper to accomodate the 2824 movement compared to the Cal. 2500. The upside of the fat casebacked 45mm issue is that it should theoretically be an extremely easy retro-fit fix if and when a properly proportioned one appears (assuming they don't mess about with the case thread at the same time). I still think it looks ridiculous though..... 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.