Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 Hi! I bought a 127 crystal from the Bay a couple of days ago. This was the auction image: Seller got many Rolex crystals, 1172 feedback, 100% positiv Payed 61 Euro. This is what I got: Doesn´t the "o" on Rolex look totally wrong?? Not a Flat Hat at all.... Keep it or send it back? BTW: This is a Daytona Dial he sells for 18.000 Euro: http://cgi.ebay.de/ROLEX-Cosmograph-DAYTONA-6239-6263-6265-NEWMAN-dial-top_W0QQitemZ110500193699QQcmdZViewItemQQptZWristwatches?hash=item19ba5325a3#ht_1693wt_1167
mjmj Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 I would send it back. I had my eye on that one too and that is not what I would have expected. I would not be happy at all with the item.
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 Yes I allready told him that I want my money back. He gave me a little advice about flat and round hats (come on I know the difference, YOU need a leason on that) I wonder if it is gen anyways...
mjmj Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 what is the magnification of cyclops like? If its 3x then it could be gen. I ve got an aftermarket crystal on my 1680 and the cyclops is only 2x so that is why I want to upgrade mine to a gen crystal. I am hoping that this will fix the problem.
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 Looks the same as the pic to me. No way! The ebay pic got a sharp edge like a flat hat and the one I got has a belved edge. on this edges it wouldn´t be such a fine line... Besides the bag is another one at least...
ubiquitous Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 The crystal that you received is actually better if you're going for period correct accuracy (e.g. a Red 1680); the slightly angled top is true old stock as it was used in earlier production; the straight, top hat style is the version that was used in later production, and as service replacements.
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 what is the magnification of cyclops like? If its 3x then it could be gen. I ve got an aftermarket crystal on my 1680 and the cyclops is only 2x so that is why I want to upgrade mine to a gen crystal. I am hoping that this will fix the problem. How can I tell the magnification of the cyclops? Upper one is the eBay one Down one is a 25 127 Clark one...
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 The crystal that you received is actually better if you're going for period correct accuracy (e.g. a Red 1680); the slightly angled top is true old stock as it was used in earlier production; the straight, top hat style is the version that was used in later production, and as service replacements. Thanks for the advice! Actually after cooling down a bit, it doesn
alligoat Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 The crystal that you received is actually better if you're going for period correct accuracy (e.g. a Red 1680); the slightly angled top is true old stock as it was used in earlier production; the straight, top hat style is the version that was used in later production, and as service replacements. Interesting RS, I actually thought it was the other way around.
ubiquitous Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 I was also of that understanding for a long time, M. Then I got to talking with a couple of vintage guys and learned that the angled tops were first and original on a lot of the old Reds. That explains why a number of those 1680s still fitted with their original 127s had come to look almost like domed crystals with a cyclops; 3 - 4 decades worth of polishing and general wear and tear had worn them down to be domed in shape. That kind of profile would be easier achieved with the angled top. Plus, I had seen some 1680s in near-never polished, near mint all original state with the same 127 fitted which further supported this line of thought for me.
JoJo35 Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 I was also of that understanding for a long time, M. Then I got to talking with a couple of vintage guys and learned that the angled tops were first and original on a lot of the old Reds. That explains why a number of those 1680s still fitted with their original 127s had come to look almost like domed crystals with a cyclops; 3 - 4 decades worth of polishing and general wear and tear had worn them down to be domed in shape. That kind of profile would be easier achieved with the angled top. Plus, I had seen some 1680s in near-never polished, near mint all original state with the same 127 fitted which further supported this line of thought for me. I agree; in fact, I just looked at probably a half a million dollars worth of vintage rolex yesterday, and one of the pieces was a red 1680 with the original angled crystal that had worn down to almost a dome shape around the edges.
mjmj Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 How can I tell the magnification of the cyclops? Upper one is the eBay one Down one is a 25 127 Clark one... It looks like the clark one has more of a magnification.
alligoat Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 Thanks R and B, too. It's always fun learning something new around here! BTW, Gorilladame, in your last pic, the date mag on the Clark's crystal is slightly larger than the gen.
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 Thanks R and B, too. It's always fun learning something new around here! BTW, Gorilladame, in your last pic, the date mag on the Clark's crystal is slightly larger than the gen. Yes I think so too. So I guess it is a 2x magnification...
alligoat Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 Or maybe it is 2.5x and the clark's is 3x. When you install the crystal, you'll get a .5x boost or so because the crystal sits on the top of the case and the dial will be a mm or 2 below the top.
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 Or maybe it is 2.5x and the clark's is 3x. When you install the crystal, you'll get a .5x boost or so because the crystal sits on the top of the case and the dial will be a mm or 2 below the top. But the gen is a bit higher then the clark and they will both have the same space do the dial. The clark is a 25 127 and as I can remember the 25 means 2.5 magnifikation, right?
Justasgood Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 I would send it back. A flat sided top- hat is harder to find. I can get all the beveled 127's you want.....they only cost $36.00. Don't ask though, my watchmaker is on hiatus for a few weeks :-) Get your money back....I would.
Gorilladame Posted March 2, 2010 Author Report Posted March 2, 2010 He payed me 1/3 of the price back and I keeped it... It is a good start and he will look for a flat hat for me...
HauteHippie Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 You definitely didn't get the crystal in the picture, but it is genuine (that O in Rolex is correct on the wax paper). If you want a flat one, they're available out there too, and you should get a full refund and shop elsewhere.
ubiquitous Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 Personally, I do like the flat top better for aesthetic reasons...
Justasgood Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 Personally, I do like the flat top better for aesthetic reasons... I agree!
HauteHippie Posted March 2, 2010 Report Posted March 2, 2010 Personally, I do like the flat top better for aesthetic reasons... Definitely.
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