Jump to content
When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.
  • Current Donation Goals

Gen 127 Cyclops Magnification less than Clark 127?


bkwbkw

Recommended Posts

Picked up something strange yesterday from an eBay seller who claims is a member of NAWCC selling gen 127's. The magnification just doesnt look right when compared to my older gen 127's and Clark 127's.

Are Clark 127's 3x? If so, then I would guess that this is 2.5x

If Clark 127's arent 3x, then are there 2x gen 127's?

When comparing my watch against stock photos of 1680's, the cyclops mag looks weak.

Here are two pictures. First one is of the cyclops and the second is the height of the xtal so you can see that the cyclops is raised pretty high from the date window.

5556000184_6e3a9c11fe_z.jpg

5555998544_101cb33623_z.jpg

Update: I contacted the seller and asked him for his NAWCC credentials and his opinion on gen vs clark plexis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuine is 2.5X and Clarks are also 2.5X Crystal height will definitely affect the magnification ( size of the date wheel numbers) as seen from straight on. Compared to my 1680 with a genuine 127, the photo in your post looks identical to mine.Also the crystal on the 1680 does sit up pretty high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a picture of what I was told to be a gen xtal. This is very close to one of my Clark 127's I have used. You can plainly see that the mag is much stronger.

Also, the one on my white 1680 sits much higher than the others - I havent sanded it down yet, and if I do, it'll negatively impact the magnification.

5548566139_897f77469d_z.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have noticed that the new $98 1680 have a pretty strong magnification but never nooticed the difference in gen and clarks

DSCF1291-1.jpg

this is a clarks i know Cats has a gen crystal installed on his MBW so maybe he could add a photo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that certain days of the month will always appear smaller- 20,& 22-30 particularly.

Single digits are the biggest, and teens also appear fairly large.

My '83 16800 came with a Rolex replacement DW and the fonts were slightly smaller. I replaced it with a NOS DW and the mag improved- it wasn't the cyclops, it was the DW. I don't think Rolex worries about it as much as we do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont forget that the depth of the rehaut will affect the magnification. If the dial is further from the plexi, then the mag will be bigger. MBW is pretty close to gen, but not sure about all the new ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ive seen gen 1680s with weak mags, most common are the over magnified ones however.

one MUST also factor in the depth of the rehaut and the effect of magnification at different distances. does your case have the right depth to magnify the date more? compare with gen

Edited by highoeyazmuhudee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have met Cameron Weiss in person a few weeks ago and he seems a nice enough guy, but I can't say anything regarding authenticity of his products.

I bought some blank submariner pearls from him at a great price (haven't used them yet), but that mag looks very week to me (usually the date window fills the whole are of the mag xtal).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up