Erict719 Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 My wm9 suppose to have gen crystal when bought from an other member. But it does really seems to have 2.5x cyclop. doesn't 2.5 x should have the date window four corner touching the cyclop corners? but when on brighter light the date seems bigger. My question is does light effect it. and if I got faked and it is stock wm9 crystal , will it have 2.5x? I don't have LEC or AR cyclopI meant it does not have 2.5x * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSTEEL Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) Post up a photo, and lets take a look. I will get a photo of mine now for comparison for you. Edited February 19, 2013 by SSTEEL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 around the same as your. put u know when u put it up straight its a little bigger. by the way, your date wheel number seems different then mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSTEEL Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 Mine are closed 6's and 9's, its a 2005 Sub. Flat 4's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 Your is gen? mine is close 6 9 too, but look thicker. So gen have thinner fonts? interesting info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSTEEL Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 No, it's not gen, its a swiss eta movement though. Post up a photo of yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 will post pic soon. I need to download the app version first. Never post pic before here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneed12 Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 doesn't 2.5 x should have the date window four corner touching the cyclop corners? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 As I keep on reading million pages, I can almost 100% sure I got faked by the seller. The watch should only got a Clark crystal , not gen. The bevel edge is very thin , as gen should be a but thicker. could anyone do a close up shoot of the bevel edge of a Clark vs gen for me please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneed12 Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 As I keep on reading million pages, I can almost 100% sure I got faked by the seller. The watch should only got a Clark crystal , not gen. The bevel edge is very thin , as gen should be a but thicker. could anyone do a close up shoot of the bevel edge of a Clark vs gen for me please No offense, but you clearly don't even have an idea of what correct magnification looks like. Why do you think you "can almost 100% sure" you "got faked"? If you have a gen crystal from the pre-etched-coronet era, it's pretty damn hard to tell it apart from a good aftermarket sapphire. And there are dozens of different aftermarket sapphires available, not just from Clark's, all with slightly different shapes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSTEEL Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 WHS^^^ Mine is pre-coronet era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Mine is pre coronet. well the reason why I think it's not gen is the edge of the crystal. As I review many pictures , the gen seems to have a thick bevel around the edge, or maybe even two level of bevel . but mine is so thin, almost non. Kinda like the stock wm9 crystal which have the coronet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSTEEL Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 You still not figured out how to add a photo or two yet Eric? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2013 I found my watch, the link is the pervious owner post, this is my watch and you guys help me check the crystal . Thanks! http://www.rwgforum.net/topic/121459-wm9bk-16610-sub-v3-just-arrived/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymanmatt Posted February 26, 2013 Report Share Posted February 26, 2013 Looks good to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2013 So do you guys think its gen crystal? Looks like Clark to me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panerai153 Posted February 27, 2013 Report Share Posted February 27, 2013 did you buy the watch from me ? Or did you buy it from someone else? I did own the watch, and sold it. If you go back and read the sales post, it clearly states that the watch has a Clark crystal. Here is the link to my sales post. http://www.rwgforum.net/topic/127021-sold-wm9bk-16610-v3-modded-and-genuine-parts/?hl=%2Bwm9+%2B16610#entry923139 . If you bought it from me, you should have known it had a Clark crystal. If you bought it from someone else after I sold it, The crystal could be a genuine, or maybe not? I believe that you should do your research and look up the old posts before you start accusing anyone of cheating you. I went back and looked through my old messages, it was sold to another member a couple of years ago, so I cannot say what crystal is on the watch now. However, when you use one of my old posts and use the context that you used, "previous owner", I believe that you should have clarified that while I was a previous owner, It was not sold by me to you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erict719 Posted February 27, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2013 (edited) Sorry man, i should be more clear to my post. I didn't buy from you my friend. I just keep on research and find that you are one of the owner to this watch. since when pass to me. The seller told me its gen... But honestly . If you stated that its Clark... I think it's Clark too. since its exectlyn the same as yours. don't mistake me at all. I am not saying you cheating me. I just said I found a post of my watch. Since I can't upload pics , so I use your link . Edited February 27, 2013 by Erict719 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.