Whatever123 Posted September 26, 2010 Report Share Posted September 26, 2010 Hi guys, is there a rep vs. gen comparison of the new ceramic sub somewhere? Haven't found it... Thanks, Whatever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im2 Posted September 26, 2010 Report Share Posted September 26, 2010 This would be interesting indeed ! I still wonder "who has the best (CERAMIC) sub?" .... Hehe.. The old time classic ceramic noob question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whatever123 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Hmmm.... no one got the gen and the rep and could do a side by side review? I just received my ceramic sub rep and I have to say it s much better than I expected! Flaws that I can see (I'm no expert here...): - The bezel numbers are not white enough - The rehaut engraving is not correctly aligned - The crown guards are not quite correct (but who sees this anyway?) - Date cyclops size and mag seem to be a bit off and of course the cyclops lacks AR - The pearl, as usual... but it's not that bad actually Apart from those little thing the watch looks and feels great. Endlink fitting is very good by the way! Cheers, Whatever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryaku Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Agreed, it's not very accurate but overall quality is excellent. I'm considering to buy a A21j for an homage project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pman Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Whatever, how's the case design itself? Does it match the gen in your opinion? Also, are the center links hollow of solid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whatever123 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 The case seems good enough, apart from the crown guard shape which isn't quite right. You will probably see it if you compare it to a pic of the gen. No big deal imo. Not sure about those links - seem solid though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcher Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 I had the gen for two days before trading on to a buyer and the biggest differences are the Cyclops having no AR, the CG's being a long way off, the gen has shorter lugs so the crown sticks out quite a long way even compared to the older gen sub. The worst thing for me though is the very thick bezel. It is the same problem on the GMT rep too I think. The gen ceramic Sub bezel is no different to a standard 16610 Sub bezel. Not sure why they have got this so wrong apart from the issue of using a 2836 movement maybe. I no longer have the rep either as these things bothered me too much. I will probably have another gen in a few weeks so I will take some pics then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im2 Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 I had the gen for two days before trading on to a buyer and the biggest differences are the Cyclops having no AR, the CG's being a long way off, the gen has shorter lugs so the crown sticks out quite a long way even compared to the older gen sub. The worst thing for me though is the very thick bezel. It is the same problem on the GMT rep too I think. The gen ceramic Sub bezel is no different to a standard 16610 Sub bezel. Not sure why they have got this so wrong apart from the issue of using a 2836 movement maybe. I no longer have the rep either as these things bothered me too much. I will probably have another gen in a few weeks so I will take some pics then. We will be very thankful if you manage to get some detailed pics of the gen so we can compare. It s a pity there are so obvious flaws and that they dont seem to care fixing them.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magagne Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 It s a pity there are so obvious flaws and that they dont seem to care fixing them.... Puretime just came out with, "finally", a full brush link bracelet. I was near to pull the trigger on one. That's a good start, but there's place to more improvement, be patient, we will see a lot of version of this one like we see for the DeepSeaDweller rep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianGP Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 (edited) I had the gen for two days before trading on to a buyer and the biggest differences are the Cyclops having no AR, the CG's being a long way off, the gen has shorter lugs so the crown sticks out quite a long way even compared to the older gen sub. The worst thing for me though is the very thick bezel. It is the same problem on the GMT rep too I think. The gen ceramic Sub bezel is no different to a standard 16610 Sub bezel. Not sure why they have got this so wrong apart from the issue of using a 2836 movement maybe. I no longer have the rep either as these things bothered me too much. I will probably have another gen in a few weeks so I will take some pics then. Paul, is the 2836 that bad? Not 4813-bad right? or any 21j for that matter? I just pulled the trigger on a black sub-c from Lay, just awaiting QC pics/vid. With the pics/vid, I'm able to tell visually what's wrong with it and have Lay pick me out another one...however my main concern is the noise of the movement. My 21j reps are very noisy when the rotor winds. Am I to expect the same from this 2836? quick fix? Edited October 1, 2010 by ianGP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcher Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 The movement is fine. What I meant was that the crown position is always wrong with a 2836, 2824 is closer to 3135 Rollie movement as with the WM9 watches. Not had any experience with asia movements though. I always go swiss where possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whatever123 Posted October 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Side by side comparison... here we go...: http://www.repgeek.com/showthread.php?p=1349101#post1349101 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.