Rolex Ceramic Sub - QC picture review/help?

[whiteshields1830]

Just received QC pictures for a Rolex Sub from a trusted dealer here.

Its not the highest grade one (ie. BKs one), so its not the best replica out there. Can you guys see any imperfections on it?

From what i can tell its just the pearl on the top isnt on exact centre and on the bezel the '1', the 3'o clock bar, 7'o clock bar seems to have excess paint on.

What things can you see that needs to be fixed?

To be honest i dont see it being any different to the actual rolex ceramic sub (maybe you guys can educate me?)

[DragonWrangler]

Please note the pearl may not be as off as it appears due to the lighting & angle of the photo

99.99% of people want even notice you have a watch on

Wear it in good health

[sneed12]

Its not the highest grade one (ie. BKs one)

No, but it's the same base watch. It just doesn't have the BK mods and quality control.

To be honest i dont see it being any different to the actual rolex ceramic sub (maybe you guys can educate me?)

Us rep freaks can spot this watch as a rep from a mile away--unfortunately, by modern standards the Sub-C isn't a very good rep.

Fat minute hand

Fat marker surrouds

Lack of sparkle in the bezel numerals

Pearl is wrong

Rehaut engraving is off

no AR on the cyclops

datefont is too large/not centered on the numerals

Having said all that--the average person couldn't tell the difference between this watch and a gen if you held them right next to each other. Wear it and enjoy it.

[whiteshields1830]

Us rep freaks can spot this watch as a rep from a mile away--unfortunately, by modern standards the Sub-C isn't a very good rep.

Fat minute hand

Fat marker surrouds

Lack of sparkle in the bezel numerals

Pearl is wrong

Rehaut engraving is off

no AR on the cyclops

datefont is too large/not centered on the numerals

Having said all that--the average person couldn't tell the difference between this watch and a gen if you held them right next to each other. Wear it and enjoy it.

So the normal Sub (metal bezel) is a better rep?

Damn, should have got that one instead. What tell signs does the TW Sub have? To what ive read so far, the TW is the best version out so far?

[ThePimp]

Sneed 12 -

It amazes me from one picture you can tell all the faults you have listed. Is this a generic list of problems you have for this watch or on general and accurate observation?

It amazes me how a watch can be disected and slated from one picture.

[amespinosa]

given the flawed nature of current sub-c reps, as sneed said "-the average person couldn't tell the difference between this watch and a gen if you held them right next to each other."

i have the same watch (Asian ETA movement) and it has more wrist time than my 1680 Rep, the upgraded bracelet is well worth it. as they ahve said it, wear it in good health.

if i'm not mistaken, the case reference/serial of that watch is "V261246"

[whiteshields1830]

given the flawed nature of current sub-c reps, as sneed said "-the average person couldn't tell the difference between this watch and a gen if you held them right next to each other."

i have the same watch (Asian ETA movement) and it has more wrist time than my 1680 Rep, the upgraded bracelet is well worth it. as they ahve said it, wear it in good health.

if i'm not mistaken, the case reference/serial of that watch is "V261246"

Would all reps be as easy to tell that its a rep?

For example, BKs version of the TW sub has mods all over the watch to make it as authentic as possible. Its damn pricey at $680 (compared to $180 which i paid for mine, $500 dearer), but does that fool even the trained eye? Is there no difference in that watch compared to a real rolex unless you open it up?

[amespinosa]

depends on who is looking at your piece. some can spot a rep a mile away or once you handed them down your watch for close scrutiny. it may be difficult for an average joe to ascertain as whether a piece is a rep or not unless its a really bad one. and given the progress the rep game has been through, even entry level $130 reps are good enough, well of course you get what you paid for.

at $680 another good one is the TC sub, gen construction if i'm not mistaken has the ability to take gen parts, etc. so yes i think a price that high is justified for such watch, that's the closest thing to a gen. franken watches aside, cause they are a different league

[sneed12]

It amazes me from one picture you can tell all the faults you have listed. Is this a generic list of problems you have for this watch or on general and accurate observation?

It amazes me how a watch can be disected and slated from one picture.

Here's a gen (pic from the sticky)

Comparing these two pics, I think it's clear that everything I said about the Sub-C was something I could see in the pic that the OP posted. If you know what you're looking for, it's obvious.

Here's the rep again:

Compare the hour hand on the gen to that of the rep. Far too fat. Same for the steel surrounds of the hour markers. If you look by the 20 minute mark, you can see that the "L" in the ROLEX rehaut engraving is right next to the 19 mark, but it should be the "E" if the rehaut engraving was aligned successfully. The cyclops is reflecting too much light. Even from just that small part of the date that is showing, you can tell that the date is too big.

Look at the sparkle of the engraved numerals in the bezel of the gen. It's vapor-deposited platinum (the actual metal), not paint. The rep is painted using grey paint. The difference is obvious when you're looking for it.

But the point is, of course, that most people aren't looking for it, and therefore don't see it.

[sneed12]

Would all reps be as easy to tell that its a rep?

No. By modern super-rep standards, the Sub-C simply isn't very good.

Even by Rolex standards, it's not all that good--and there are some other brands that are much better. Omega, Panerai, Sinn, IWC--there are quite a few reps out there that are much "better" in that sense than most Rolex reps.

HAVING SAID THAT--if you're wearing a rep to try and fool people, you're going to fail. That's not really what reps are about. YOU'RE going to know it's a rep, after all.

99.9% of people literally won't even notice that you're wearing a watch. Even watch people won't look closely. I'd have trouble telling the difference between a rep Sub-c and a gen at wrist distance, so unless you take it off and hand it to me I'm not going to be able to tell.

For example, BKs version of the TW sub has mods all over the watch to make it as authentic as possible. Its damn pricey at $680 (compared to $180 which i paid for mine, $500 dearer), but does that fool even the trained eye?

No. The tells on the TW are different, and it's hard to tell from that angle, but I could tell if I had one in my hands.

Again--buy a rep because you like the way it looks. Build a rep because you like building watches. But don't buy a rep to try and fool people. You're not going to. People believe the wearer, not the rep.

[sneed12]

I should say also that I've owned two BK Sub-C's, and liked them. They're nice watches. I didn't stress out about the flaws, and when I decided I wanted to try and fix some of them I did. Until then I wore the watch just as it was.

[whiteshields1830]

I should say also that I've owned two BK Sub-C's, and liked them. They're nice watches. I didn't stress out about the flaws, and when I decided I wanted to try and fix some of them I did. Until then I wore the watch just as it was.

Thanks for your help sneed. Reason i was choosing between the SubC or the Sub TW, was both looks the exact same to my eyes, except for the material the bezel was made of. Only reason why i chose the SubC was the shiny metal bezel looked very similar to my UPO black bezel.

Seems that i was wrong, and realised on here that the Sub TW was a superior replica than the SubC (kicking myself over it). But regardless, i guess i bought the Asian ETA, so few yrs down the track if it does break i do have the excuse to try the Sub TW if its still around (or a better one has taken its place).

[TeeJay]

No. By modern super-rep standards, the Sub-C simply isn't very good.

Even by Rolex standards, it's not all that good--and there are some other brands that are much better. Omega, Panerai, Sinn, IWC--there are quite a few reps out there that are much "better" in that sense than most Rolex reps.

HAVING SAID THAT--if you're wearing a rep to try and fool people, you're going to fail. That's not really what reps are about. YOU'RE going to know it's a rep, after all.

99.9% of people literally won't even notice that you're wearing a watch. Even watch people won't look closely. I'd have trouble telling the difference between a rep Sub-c and a gen at wrist distance, so unless you take it off and hand it to me I'm not going to be able to tell.

No. The tells on the TW are different, and it's hard to tell from that angle, but I could tell if I had one in my hands.

Again--buy a rep because you like the way it looks. Build a rep because you like building watches. But don't buy a rep to try and fool people. You're not going to. People believe the wearer, not the rep.

+1 100%

Just buy the watch and enjoy it for what it is