glennmichael Posted December 20, 2012 Report Posted December 20, 2012 V3.5 Gen One tell is that the Gen has slightly smaller 'cubes' on the dial.. Other than that.. What else can you see to tell them apart ?
chefcook Posted December 20, 2012 Report Posted December 20, 2012 I'd even say the cubes (called Méga Tapisserie) are correct and that it is only lighting and angle that make them appear smaller in the pic of the gen. If you compare the hour markes in relation to the Tapisserie then it seems to match up.
gtanak Posted December 20, 2012 Report Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) So far the tells are the thinner lume numbers (the '0's are most obvious) and some eagle eyed member spotted the thickness/spacing of the hour hand is off on the rep Gen pic looks really familar but i'm just saying... Edited December 20, 2012 by gtanak
frankpower88 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Posted December 20, 2012 the interior of the ''0'' on the gen are squares, and on rep they are round
watch.aholic Posted December 20, 2012 Report Posted December 20, 2012 Good observation guys about the zero.....the rep zeros are sort of elongated too.
rogerthat Posted December 21, 2012 Report Posted December 21, 2012 Definitely a great rep but Internet picture comparisons are helpful but not definitive Thought based on thread total it was a gen next to rep comparison
glennmichael Posted December 21, 2012 Author Report Posted December 21, 2012 So far the tells are the thinner lume numbers (the '0's are most obvious) and some eagle eyed member spotted the thickness/spacing of the hour hand is off on the rep Gen pic looks really familar but i'm just saying... I borrowed that Gen pic from a screenshot of another thread, can't remember which tho,. Anyway thank him for the contribution
glennmichael Posted December 21, 2012 Author Report Posted December 21, 2012 I'd even say the cubes (called Méga Tapisserie) are correct and that it is only lighting and angle that make them appear smaller in the pic of the gen. If you compare the hour markes in relation to the Tapisserie then it seems to match up. Learnt something new ! Thanks Chef
Watchmeister Posted December 21, 2012 Report Posted December 21, 2012 It ain't the angle. The Tapisserie squares (or at least the flat portion on the top of each square is definitely smaller. Still wouldn't think twice though about that rep. It is incredible.
gtanak Posted December 21, 2012 Report Posted December 21, 2012 Since that's my wrist... You're welcome Glenn. Photo is off my iphone camera and diver is 100% gen
glennmichael Posted December 21, 2012 Author Report Posted December 21, 2012 Since that's my wrist... You're welcome Glenn. Photo is off my iphone camera and diver is 100% gen Thumbs Up !
edgematic1 Posted December 22, 2012 Report Posted December 22, 2012 Here's a pic from my review. No differences on the Tapisserie. The inner bezel, endlinks and caseback still have some minuscule flaws, strap grain as well.
megafatius Posted December 22, 2012 Report Posted December 22, 2012 One of the biggest tells to me has always been the edge of the rubber crowns on the rep. Both the 3 and 3.5 have an unfinished "lip" vs the smooth finished rubber seen on the gen. Either the AP diver is one of my favorite reps. I have mine on a donerix shark strap and I wear it at least twice a week.
nlnlnlnene Posted December 31, 2012 Report Posted December 31, 2012 The lume on the inner bezel is fairly obvious.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now