Tropic 21 on eBay

[Martyd3]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLEX-GENUINE-VINTAGE-DAYTONA-CRYSTAL-Tropic-21-6263_W0QQitemZ130369961129QQcmdZViewItemQQptZWristwatches?hash=item1e5aa7bca9

[lhooq]

Do not buy from these guys. Whatever it was that came in that Rolex branded envelope (marked '21', of course) was NOT a genuine Tropic 21. Look in one of my older 6263 threads to see what you're going to get: It's a straight cylinder without the ~60 degree bevel that sets a genuine T21 apart.

[lhooq]

A second, sobering update: This morning I had the good fortune of examining and handling a couple of genuine 6263s and a 6265. I can now confirm that the second crystal I bought from eBay seller "watchcrusher" is also not genuine. You can see pictures of this bogus 21 in my most recent 6263 posts, and in my photo comparison of vintage Daytona crystals. While the second crystal I bought has the beveled edge, it's only about half as deep as the edge on a genuine crystal. That makes a much bigger difference than it might sound, I assure you.

I'm currently looking for alternative sources for genuine Tropic 21s, as these two experiences have soured me on eBay for a while.

[freddy333]

While I am not sure about the package (I have never a Rolex package with the printing so far off-center), the T21 looks gen to me. At least the beveling looks correct. But the only way to really tell is a side-by-side comparison with a known gen xtal. So, as always, buyer beware.

[lhooq]

freddy: A while back you posted a wonderful comparison shot of a genuine black Paul Newman next to the DW version. I think you were pointing out how well the refractions of the DW matched the original's, thanks to the T21. As hard as I tried, I could not replicate that shot, and I first suspected that the crystal was (somehow) mounted too high. But the angled area is much smaller on my "gen" crystal. Consequently, I can only see a sliver of the refracted subdials. I'll try to post some photos of the case viewed in profile. When compared to photos of gens taken at similar angles (e.g. Robert Maron), the difference should be clear.

This is turning into an unexpected money sink, but I believe I've been able to find the real deal this time. (Famous last words.) I hope to update this comparo within the next couple of weeks with a genuine genuine Tropic 21!

[freddy333]

I hope you did not get taken, but here is the pic I think you are referring to. Hopefully, this will help settle things

[Martyd3]

I bought one from him a couple of months ago. It was definitely genuine.

[lhooq]

freddy: That's the one. On your DW, the entire '4' of the left subdial is refracted on the edge. (Ditto the '5' on the genuine.) I see less than half a digit on mine, and the vertical portion is more prominent than the angle in profile. Photos of coolfire's Spinmaster-prepared Paul Newman also show a crystal that matches the gens I looked at.

Marty: In that case, it may well have been an honest mistake on their part, but the crystal I got from thewatchgarage has practically no angled edge to speak of, and was further away from the gen than the one I got from watchcrusher:

Not the greatest photo, I know. I will update my comparison and this thread as soon as I get a genuine crystal that matches the gen examples I've seen at trusted vintage shops and online. In the meantime, either take my warnings with a grain of salt or pay extra attention to sellers with white Rolex envelopes!

[gplracer]

hmmmm.......

[freddy333]

I hate to say it........

[lhooq]

Before anything else: I would like to retract my claims about both thewatchgarage*com and watchcrusher. I am now very certain that the crystals I purchased from them were, in fact, genuine Tropic 21s.

I recently received a T21 that I'd ordered from a trusted source on the Rolex Forums. It wasn't cheap, but I wanted to be sure about what I was getting. Before bringing it to my watchsmith for installation, I took pictures of the T21 using the same angles I'd used in my aforementioned photo comparison. I was very surprised to find that it was identical to what I had believed to be another fake crystal. It was only then that I understood what was happening.

The left crystal, which I suspected as being fake, is from the comparison I made last month. The T21 on the right, sourced from a trusted supplier, arrived days ago:

The first two times I'd purchased these crystals, I'd handed them over to my watchsmith to attach on my 6263. As others have noted, the DW bezel is too tight a fit on a genuine Tropic 21. So when faced with the choice of trimming a metal bezel or trimming a clear hunk of plastic, my watch guy did the logical thing and trimmed the crystal. I'm certain that the ugly crystal pictured in my March 6 post began life as a genuine Tropic 21. I don't have any pictures of it prior to installation, but I went over its surface a loupe. The edges have been buffed to clarity, but there are telltale signs of reshaping.

It's my fault for not working things out beforehand so that I could give my watch guy clear instructions. And it's my fault for not paying attention on two separate occasions. I feel terrible for ruining two good Rolex crystals, but I feel even worse for badmouthing two eBay sellers who did nothing wrong.

On the plus side, I finally got the edge and the refraction I'd been after:

Had I been more aware, I could have had these two months and $200 ago.

[tomhorn]

That's good news .... at least for me anyway ...

I had bought a T21 from thewatchgarage prior to your thread coming out, and was quite disappointed after reading the thread that perhaps I had been taken for a ride too. Was never able to get it to photograph well, but thought I was seeing a beveled edge. Glad to know it's really OK, and now have good instructions on what not to do when fitting it. Thanks for the update!