Guest Sql_pl Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Now that some members start receiving their new Daylights, how do you guys feel about DWs? In these pics, it looks like it is still a bit sunken: And here is gen for comparison: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sql_pl Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Now that I look at these pics it looks like it is even too small, more like a 7750 DW.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sql_pl Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Great photo comparison courtesy of PaulVanDyk from RG: It is not good. Is it a real copy of a 7753 or just another version of 7750 tuned up a little to mimic 7753's case side pusher date change? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babola Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Is it a real copy of a 7753 or just another version of 7750 tuned up a little to mimic 7753's case side pusher date change? As disturbing as it seems I guess we won't know that before someone takes the dial off one of these Asian "7753" mov'ts. I agree, so far it doesn't look good but it could still end up being a 7753 clone on which they kept the 7750 type DW assembly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sul Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Mhh..that is really interesting. DW is not correct indeed, if movement is 7753 then DW location has to be different... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormTooper4 Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 May be the dial is just thicker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sander Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 So this will mean that the dial is not compatible with my gen 7753........ I almost pulled the tricker! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxman Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Maybe It's just me but I think the dw looks realy good,not perfect but close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) Great photo comparison courtesy of PaulVanDyk from RG: It is not good. Is it a real copy of a 7753 or just another version of 7750 tuned up a little to mimic 7753's case side pusher date change? I don't get it, the DW cut out has a different location. [edit] Ok the dime dropped still sipping my coffee . Left the new so called 7753, gen on the right, yes. That is not good. [/edit] Edited September 17, 2010 by slickdick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 So the date is the same size and in the same position as the stock A7750 version, which will clearly be a problem if you have a 7753 based dial, on the flip side, this movement should (in theory) drop into any previous A7750 PAM watch, just the date pusher would be a concern if it's not functional on the case..... Still, I'm not overly bothered, the date is still flush to the dial (aside from the dial thickness itself) and as I have the 236/250, the black colour and non numeral dial makes the date position accuracy less noticeable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 So the date is the same size and in the same position as the stock A7750 version, which will clearly be a problem if you have a 7753 based dial, on the flip side, this movement should (in theory) drop into any previous A7750 PAM watch, just the date pusher would be a concern if it's not functional on the case..... Still, I'm not overly bothered, the date is still flush to the dial (aside from the dial thickness itself) and as I have the 236/250, the black colour and non numeral dial makes the date position accuracy less noticeable Well it bothers me... Sure, we need to see the watch in person, Pics may not represent the actual watch sent. But these are the claims: New Breed Asia 7753 movement .. Exact copy of the Swiss 7753 Movement .. No Recess date & date adjustment via the 10.00 recess pusher Completely interchangeable with Genuine including movement!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Well I did mention it would be a problem for those who wish to tweak and mod, its just that I'm not one of them. Certainly worth taking it up with the dealer/s involved though, if this will cause you a problem Could be the dealers are just saying what the factory tells them, at least that will most likely be the excuse again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmarin.72 Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Well it bothers me... Sure, we need to see the watch in person, Pics may not represent the actual watch sent. But these are the claims: All of which kinda remind me the Movement: Asia 7750 Valjoux Working Chronograph movement Updated Decorated Insignia Rotor, 28800 bph, New Improved 29J Version Functional Regulator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender110 Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) Quote New Breed Asia 7753 movement .. Exact copy of the Swiss 7753 Movement .. No Recess date & date adjustment via the 10.00 recess pusher Quote Completely interchangeable with Genuine including movement!!! +1 Edited September 17, 2010 by Defender110 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drulee Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Spam, spam, spam, spam ... spam pam pam pam PAM PAM PAM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 The more I look at the pics the more confused I get - and I am wearing a gen dial 188. The date window does not look to me nearly as obvious as a typical A7750 date window and nor does the gap. The overall size looks pretty similar to a 7753. The placement does look off but that can be a function of the layout of the dial. The date window does not fall in exactly the same place on a 162 as it does on a 188. I was curious so I looked this morning. I can't wait for someone to have definitive pictures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 Yep, this watch needs to get into the hands of one of our resident experts pronto! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babola Posted September 17, 2010 Report Share Posted September 17, 2010 The more I look at the pics the more confused I get - and I am wearing a gen dial 188. The date window does not look to me nearly as obvious as a typical A7750 date window and nor does the gap. The overall size looks pretty similar to a 7753. The placement does look off but that can be a function of the layout of the dial. The date window does not fall in exactly the same place on a 162 as it does on a 188. I was curious so I looked this morning. I can't wait for someone to have definitive pictures. I'm confused as well... Last night I compared dial photos of older 250 rep with A7750 and the new 250 with A7753. The DW placements on both look identical. Definitely not even close to ETA7753 DW placement on my EL PAM196 with gen 7753. It appears as someone mentioned before they used A7750 for a base and added the thicker DW and quick-set DW function on the case at 10 o'clock. Something's fishy here, indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulVanDyk Posted September 18, 2010 Report Share Posted September 18, 2010 yeah...i was gonna post pics from RG but sql_pl beat me to it it saddened me A LOT when i did those comparison shots and realized that the DW isnt close to 7753 and is in fact smaller and slightly recessed. i dont understand, why dont they just copy the f@cking ETA7753 so we can finally have some good quality and accurate reps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hackR Posted September 19, 2010 Report Share Posted September 19, 2010 hmmmmm...ok, so does all this mean that this new movement might fit the old skool case/dial a7750 196's?...it appears the dw is in the right place and right size...what do you guys think?... if so, this would be great news... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chronoluvvv Posted September 19, 2010 Report Share Posted September 19, 2010 if so, this would be great news... x 22 if it can work on the Corum Admiral's Cup SS chronograph that'd be spectacular i wonder what i can use the 'serviced' 7750 from my old 196 case for ... Blackbird or 6.75 perhaps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babola Posted September 19, 2010 Report Share Posted September 19, 2010 hmmmmm...ok, so does all this mean that this new movement might fit the old skool case/dial a7750 196's?...it appears the dw is in the right place and right size...what do you guys think?... if so, this would be great news... Don't believe so mate, as the old-school A7750 196 had a non functional pusher at 10 o'clock, as well as its position was slightly off. Not without some serious case re-work, sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted September 19, 2010 Report Share Posted September 19, 2010 I think that they only went half way, instead of tooling up and making a new correct larger diameter 7753 DW, they re-used the existing 7750 DW, and probably the top plate as well. This would account for the incorrect placement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babola Posted September 19, 2010 Report Share Posted September 19, 2010 I think that they only went half way, instead of tooling up and making a new correct larger diameter 7753 DW, they re-used the existing 7750 DW, and probably the top plate as well. This would account for the incorrect placement. R, do you believe they used A7750 mov't as a base, or started with all new ebauche for this latest A7753? How complicated would it be to transfer the date change from the set lever operated by the crown to the quick-set at 10 o'clock on a A7750 instead of starting anew? I mean, they already transferred the gears for tricompax on A7750 to create a pseudo-A7753 in the past, all they needed was to rejig the date change mechanism. Or is this all one big brain fart on my side? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted September 19, 2010 Report Share Posted September 19, 2010 R, do you believe they used A7750 mov't as a base, or started with all new ebauche for this latest A7753? How complicated would it be to transfer the date change from the set lever operated by the crown to the quick-set at 10 o'clock on a A7750 instead of starting anew? I mean, they already transferred the gears for tricompax on A7750 to create a pseudo-A7753 in the past, all they needed was to rejig the date change mechanism. Or is this all one big brainfart on my side? I thought I was the only one with brainfarts... How complicated to transfer the quickset date? not that complicated, remember it's only the quickset that is transferred, the normal date change is basically the same design. On the ETA 7753 the mainplate is modified to accept the quickset lever, and the top plate with the calendar mechanism is changed as well, so other than a bit of machining on the mainplate, and a new top plate, its' farily simple. I suspect that instead of doing it 100% per the ETA design, they cut corners and re-used what parts of the A7750 they could. Maybe one of the modders from one of the other forums would be able to do a detailed teardown and review for everyone, wouldn't that be a nice gesture on their part. 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.