bkwbkw Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 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. Update: I contacted the seller and asked him for his NAWCC credentials and his opinion on gen vs clark plexis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkwbkw Posted March 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 Gen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woof* Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 Cameron Weiss? weisstime? or something like that? I picked one up too. Been waiting to see what others thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panerai153 Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkwbkw Posted March 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 I have noticed that the new $98 1680 have a pretty strong magnification but never nooticed the difference in gen and clarks this is a clarks i know Cats has a gen crystal installed on his MBW so maybe he could add a photo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 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! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 26, 2011 Report Share Posted March 26, 2011 Here is a gen top hat 127 crystal on an MBW white for comparison Pic and watch curtesy of cats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cats Posted March 26, 2011 Report Share Posted March 26, 2011 Man that's a great looking watch :wub: Just kidding Carpe Diem Cats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgn_vn Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 I have narikaa 1680, does gen crystal fit. Thx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted March 30, 2011 Report Share Posted March 30, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pr0digy30 Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 BKW... did the seller come up with his NAWCC credentials? He's selling quite a few xtals... so makes me wonder where this booty came from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mapman57 Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Cameron Weiss? weisstime? or something like that? I picked one up too. Been waiting to see what others thought. Hi WOOF - if you mounted yours, can you also post any pictures? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 how about the mag on this one look at the bevel of the date window And i would say that is a gen i found it here http://rolexblog.blogspot.com/2010_03_01_archive.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highoeyazmuhudee Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) 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 April 5, 2011 by highoeyazmuhudee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woof* Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 Hi WOOF - if you mounted yours, can you also post any pictures? Thanks No sir not yet, I'm amassing parts like crazy, and when I see a deal somewhere I buy it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donerix Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 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). 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.