7753, DW still sunken?

[babola]

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.

Thanks mate, yeah...Vacuum promised us few days ago he's onto taking one apart and doing a comparo with a gen ETA7753, so I guess we're all ears

cheers!

[Watchmeister]

And the speculation continues. If they did cheap out and use the 7750 sized date wheel and track to hold that date wheel the old case 7753's are still priceless. I feel vindicated. But these watches are still a wonderfully accurate rep for a fraction of the cost of all those frankens we all built so they are a great addition to the rep arsenal.

[rek001]

Vac and Francisco will be doing teardowns soon.

I'm excited about these new releases but will wait for the movement reviews.

[hackR]

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

not withstanding the date advance pusher on the case, though, i figured this new movement would raise the datewheel on the existing old skool 196's which have the best dial...

if you had an old skool a7750 196 - which as you said, had a non-functioning date advance pusher - if you wanted to go 7753, you needed a new dial...with this new movement, we could use our current setup, and essentially have a flush'ish datewheel...that's what i was thinking...

yes/no?!...if yes, this retains the value of the old skool case as a candidate for a new movement transplant...

[babola]

not withstanding the date advance pusher on the case, though, i figured this new movement would raise the datewheel on the existing old skool 196's which have the best dial...

if you had an old skool a7750 196 - which as you said, had a non-functioning date advance pusher - if you wanted to go 7753, you needed a new dial...with this new movement, we could use our current setup, and essentially have a flush'ish datewheel...that's what i was thinking...

yes/no?!...if yes, this retains the value of the old skool case as a candidate for a new movement transplant...

R, it basically comes down to a difference in old-school cases between the one built for ETA7753 and another for A7750.

It will work if you have the former, and won't on the latter. IMO, the old-school A7750 cases have not much value if you're looking for a transplant.

The ones built to house ETA7753 mov't are gold.

As far as the 196 dials go, IMO these latest ones based on A7753 are the best and closest to gen, bar the incorrect DW cutout placing. Old school 196 dials had many smaller issues now rectified on this latest batch, like incorrect and thin txt font, chrono subdial markings (10, 20, 30) in wrong places, too long lume marker at 6 o'clock etc.

We need a good review of the new 196 dial to confirm this but what I've seen so far these new 196 dials are the bees knees, IMO

cheers,

b

[Snrubb]

And the speculation continues. If they did cheap out and use the 7750 sized date wheel and track to hold that date wheel the old case 7753's are still priceless. I feel vindicated.

If I were to do a build now, I'd buy the new 236 and use the case with the current cartel Swiss 7753 dial / movement.

[hackR]

We need a good review of the new 196 dial to confirm this but what I've seen so far these new 196 dials are the bees knees, IMO

cheers,

b

thanks, D...appreciate the info...i have 2 old 196 cases...the one that will take a 7753 and the old EL case with the wrong pusher location...that old EL case, tho, has a really nice set of lugs, high bezel, etc...it's a shame on the pusher...

R-

[w0lf]

R,

If you have time to do a proper teardown of the A7753 I can volunteer my PAM236. I'm sending you several watches anyway so I can just throw it together in the box.

[ExtraExtra]

I think the approach of cutting corners to make it appear 7753 may work well with the factories and existing parts. This may mean that for those reps that should have 7753 but currently sporting 7750 today are a good candidate the use these 7753. The factories will likely need less parts to change to drop these in the Breitling Legende for example.

[mastrmindalliance]

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'm not sure that those date window comparisons are a fair example... here's a pic over-layed and transformed so that the dial marking like up a bit better.

The watch on the right is layed over the watch on the left in the below:

[babola]

They're definitely off, mate.

Not by much but enough to make a difference between the 7750 and 7753 DWs.

Gen 7753 DW comes in just over a millimeter wider diameter than gen 7750.

Also, the teeth onto which a date change cog catches are placed differently on 7750 and 7753 DWs, on 7750 they're aligned with the middle of the number, on 7753 they're placed between the two numbers. Due to this difference the date cutout on the 7750 dial isn't only placed more towards the middle of the dial but also a little lower than on the 7753.

[z3k0]

I'm not sure that those date window comparisons are a fair example... here's a pic over-layed and transformed so that the dial marking like up a bit better.

The watch on the right is layed over the watch on the left in the below:

It doesn't matter, second picture (250 dial, with vertical line drawn from chrono minutes hand post) leaves no place for doubt. Since placement of hand post is defined by movement, not dial geometry, it is obvious that date windows is placed differently relatively to hand post - meaning DWs are not the same.

regards

[cskent69]

So, the next question is - will a 7753 drop right in there (if you brought your own dial). One thing I am worried about is the stem alignment, etc. If these cases will fit the ETA 7753 - at least that would be something...you could then get dials from DSN...though - his are not as nice as these.

Thats all if you have to be perfectly correct. Basically - with these new Daylights - you are taking them as is...which ain't bad. only bad for fiddlers...

[Drulee]

On the bright side, if they do use the standard 7750 DW, this may mean that we can use current Lello, Leo, 2Geeks 7750 DW offerings which were produced in greater numbers than the 7753 versions, no ?

Of course all speculation, until one of the experts strips one down..

[w0lf]

Got my PAM236 yesterday, love the case finish and fit of all parts. My CG lever is reasonably flush but could likely be improved. I'm sending it off to The Zigmeister for a teardown at lunchtime so we'll have all the facts soon enough. Stay tuned.

[hackR]

Got my PAM236 yesterday, love the case finish and fit of all parts. My CG lever is reasonably flush but could likely be improved. I'm sending it off to The Zigmeister for a teardown at lunchtime so we'll have all the facts soon enough. Stay tuned.

excellent news and thanks for doing this...

wondering...do you have an old skool 196 with a7750?...if so, any chance you could send that to Z, too, so he can see if the new a7753 movement would fit in it?...(had to ask... )

R

[w0lf]

Sorry, this is my first and only chronograph, hackR.

[hackR]

Sorry, this is my first and only chronograph, hackR.

ya know...i think Z has one...we should check on that...but i'm sure his analysis will tell us enough to sort this out as far as the tube/stem/crown alignment...but its the date window i'm hoping will align...it should based on the pix members have shared...

[z3k0]

OK, guys, check out review by bollobandit - date windows position is EXACTLY THE SAME like on gen ... I don't know how did those previous pictures fool us, or create some optical illusion, but these are pics of rep next to gen, and there is no doubt. Also, size and depth of date window (i.e. recess of DW) are identical. Great news anyhow !!

regards

[babola]

OK, guys, check out review by bollobandit - date windows position is EXACTLY THE SAME like on gen ... I don't know how did those previous pictures fool us, or create some optical illusion, but these are pics of rep next to gen, and there is no doubt. Also, size and depth of date window (i.e. recess of DW) are identical. Great news anyhow !!

regards

Hmm, the difference between the two does look smaller on those pics, indeed..but it's still there, unfortunately

I've asked BB to post couple of macro dial shots if possible...

[babola]

The diff appears to be a miniscule one, although still noticeable.

I've borrowed 2 photos from a wonderful 236 'rep vs gen' review from Bollobandit (hope you won't mind mate)

See for yourselves guys...I'm not too phased, even with thinner DW font the rep comes scarily close and doesn't really warrant a DW upgrade, IMO.

Gen:

Rep:

cheers!

[dluddy]

Great comparison post D

Close enough for me

[robertk]

All this talk about the minutae of the DW (I know it's important to some), makes one realize that if this is the major flaw, reps have hit Nirvana! considering for several hundred dollars one is getting an almost "Perfect" replica of a multi thousand dollar watch. Let put it in perspective. Not even the Panerai dealers will spot that flaw.