does gen sub dial suppose to have thicker binder at 6?

[Erict719]

I mean by, the 6 marker suppose to be even thicker binder then the 9??

Since on both tc and wm9 I have, the 6 is wider and thicker . please advice guys

[SSTEEL]

Yes, looks like it to me after looking for carefully at them for a while.  I was always under the impression the 9 and 6 markers were identical, but obviously not, unless this is a placebo effect.

[SSTEEL]

Just noticed our member BeR10 posted a photo of a BP sub in another thread, and it looks like the 9 marker is at the 6 position.  You can clearly see the 9 marker is bigger than the marker at 6 when it should be the other way round..

 

 

The one below is a sub someone is selling, they look pretty much the same.  I will get my onscreen ruler out, and post up my findings. 

 

Edited March 29, 2013 by SSTEEL

[SSTEEL]

Ok, my findings are of the second one I posted above, the measurements are as follows..

 

9 marker = 138mm x 50mm

6 marker = 152mm x 53

 

Of course, these are only computer screen reference.  I would be interested in anyone with a digital calliper to get readings.

 

 

[SSTEEL]

I will try and find a genuine Sub square on photo, and carry out the above, and post back what I find for you.

[SSTEEL]

Ok, found a gen Hulk, now remember, these measurements are only going by my onscreen photos, and do not depict actual sizes, but does give a insight of differential sizes.

 

9 marker = 154mm x 62mm

6 marker = 157mm x 54mm

 

 

 

Sp after all that, I'm even more confused lol, looks like the BP sub has the correct 9 marker (thicker than 6).

Edited March 29, 2013 by SSTEEL

[freddy333]

I believe the dimensional differences you are seeing on gen Subs are due to visual/camera angle aberrations. Except in cases of manufacturing variations (those that Rolex QC have missed), the rectangular markers should be the same size. I used to have a video in my archives showing how the markers are applied to modern Sub dials (the rectangular markers all come from the same receptical on the line regardless of where on the dial they go), but I cannot seem to locate it just now. You can probably find it on youtube though. It puts alot of these types of Rolex myths to bed.

[whoopy12]

You also have to take crystal distortion into account.

[Erict719]

I have the dial off the watch to check. well the marker at 6 is OBvisously thicker broader.

the lume is same, just the surrounding thicker.

as seen in gen, I don't think I seen it different yet.

If you put it under light , the reflection of the surrounding will make it very easy to tell.

if I know how to reassemble those marker. I will exchange the 9 on wm9 to mine new tc. Haha

by the way, one more thin I notice , the 6 is always whiter uncharged lume then the rest of the dial.... happen in both dial too

Edited March 30, 2013 by Erict719

[fidhle007]

I just measured one of my gen dials, 3.55 x 1.3mm on both markers. Any difference between the two on a rep dial is a flaw.

[SSTEEL]

Cheers guys, thought I was going mad lol.

[Erict719]

Did u guys see that the marker 6 is whiter compare to the rest of the markers!!?

[Erict719]

I just measured one of my gen dials, 3.55 x 1.3mm on both markers. Any difference between the two on a rep dial is a flaw.

Great info!

the SSD dial is way better made