Tribal Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 Hello Gang, here are some nice shots to compare a gen 1680 with a MBW 1680 Every shot is from the same angle... First Gen second MBW... Enjoy.. RG Tribal
Starbug Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 Very nice.. Is it just the light or does the rep look a little darker (bronze-ish)? Pretty good though
Tribal Posted September 18, 2006 Author Report Posted September 18, 2006 Very nice.. Is it just the light or does the rep look a little darker (bronze-ish)? Pretty good though Only the light ...
By-Tor Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 Yep, excellent! The only difference is the outer surface of the cg's but it would be difficult to tell without comparison picture. Great work!
Tribal Posted September 18, 2006 Author Report Posted September 18, 2006 Yep, excellent! The only difference is the outer surface of the cg's but it would be difficult to tell without comparison picture. Great work! Yepp, you are right with the Cg`s.. But on other pics of Gen Subs there are a lot of varietys of CG`s.. On This one they must reshaped from outside a little bit,the Cg's are thinner on this gen... RG tribal
lionsandtigers Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 great post, love the photos, and now i have a REALLY good reference for doing my cgs!! :)
NRG Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) The tail of the sweep second hand is also different. Edited September 18, 2006 by NRG
Tribal Posted September 18, 2006 Author Report Posted September 18, 2006 Yepp, i know there are a lot of flaws,exspecially on the dial.... but who cares, i think the MBw Dial is one of the best and a gen diall are hard to find and to expensive... I only want to show how near a Mbw is to a Gen one.. RG tribal
Alextor Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 Yep, excellent! The only difference is the outer surface of the cg's but it would be difficult to tell without comparison picture. Great work! Exactly! The cg's on the gen 1680 were pointy...but it is impossible to tell with a comparative picture...and then, cg's changed at least three times...(square on the earlier models, pointy in the 70's and then the current configuration more rounded)... the pearl and the dial...impossible to tell without a 10X loupe I guess...I'm drooling all over the keyboard. Congratulations Alex
HauteHippie Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 Yepp, i know there are a lot of flaws,exspecially on the dial.... but who cares, i think the MBw Dial is one of the best and a gen diall are hard to find and to expensive... I only want to show how near a Mbw is to a Gen one.. RG tribal Yea there are many flaws. The dial is somewhat disappointing. But it's still a very nice watch and one that readily accepts gen parts.
Watchwatcher Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 tribal, first, thx, great comparison. second, would have been interesting if you had NOT told us which was which. that would have demonstrated the fact that an expert or anyone on this forum would not be able to distinguish which of these watches is the MBW. the more gens you look at the more you realize that CG shapes are all over the place, particularly on the older pieces...
Tribal Posted September 18, 2006 Author Report Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) No offence Tribal - we all know these are the best, and once again we can see what mods can do... I know,I know Olli.... Comments are welcome... By the way folks, the gen one has an aftermarket tropic installed RG tribal Edited September 18, 2006 by Tribal
ubiquitous Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 Great comparison! I agree... It is very difficult to spot the rep... MBW's are very good once modified (WM's too)!
Tribal Posted September 18, 2006 Author Report Posted September 18, 2006 Can we agree on saying that MBW's and WM's are the same but MBW is the more common name for the watches? The same watches... RG Tribal
2005SUBMARINER Posted September 18, 2006 Report Posted September 18, 2006 i think the rep looks awsome ! great pix too !
EuroTimez Posted July 29, 2008 Report Posted July 29, 2008 Nice tribal, very nice... learned alot from the comments thanks guys for sharing
Tribal Posted July 29, 2008 Author Report Posted July 29, 2008 This is an old thread Chris, the 1680 is updated a long time. Must share the Pics the next time also the great white is updated.
rolexgermany Posted July 29, 2008 Report Posted July 29, 2008 This is an old thread Chris, the 1680 is updated a long time. Must share the Pics the next time also the great white is updated. GREAT WATCH GUY
watcher Posted July 29, 2008 Report Posted July 29, 2008 Great comparison! The big tell for me is the lug width being much wider on the rep case and less tapered from the center to the edge. The MBW's are very good but this is one area where the Vietnam cases stand out on accuracy and help to justify the greater cost.(to me anyway ) Great pics!
lanikai Posted July 29, 2008 Report Posted July 29, 2008 Thank you T.. almost missed this ... the variances are subtle .. but I'm starting to recognize them.. the coronet is the most glaring on the dial, (for me anyway)... the slightly thinner CG's... the slightly flatter S .. oddly the pearl dosen't bother me as much as the coronet.. But all said, a great starting point for the mods that are going to be done on mine .. and even out of the box excellent rep... compared to all others Thanks again .. it is an excellent side by side pictorial !!! informative to see them exactly the way you shot the angles. Aloha~Cheers R
_brian_ Posted July 29, 2008 Report Posted July 29, 2008 Well, if you are looking at the pictures and there is a way to make a comparison, it is not that hard to find some flaws. However if someone has this rep on his wrist I doubt that people could tell that the watch is not a gen (apart from some Rolex experts). I have to admit that I read everything about rehaut and crown guards and so on but if I see a Rolex Sub on someone
lanikai Posted July 29, 2008 Report Posted July 29, 2008 '_brian_' date='Jul 29 2008, 01:33 PM' post='498456'] Well, if you are looking at the pictures and there is a way to make a comparison, it is not that hard to find some flaws. However if someone has this rep on his wrist I doubt that people could tell that the watch is not a gen (apart from some Rolex experts). I have to admit that I read everything about rehaut and crown guards and so on but if I see a Rolex Sub on someone 1
vlydog Posted July 30, 2008 Report Posted July 30, 2008 The above mentioned "cutting edge members" have been valuable resources always. They are generous with their knowledge and quick to offer opinions that impact our decisions. For me, there is nothing better or more compelling than a side by side comparison with lots of photographs. Thank you for a wonderful post.
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