Opinion Poll: Do The Rep Makers Purposely Change Them

[MJP]

This question haunts me the more I look at reps...the more I see little things that could have easily been copied to perfection, especially on the dial, font choice or placement, etc.

Is this really the way they avoid litigation or something, or do they have really bad attention to detail?

Please enlighten us RWG vets. MODS: If this thread subject is inappropriate or sensitive, or just plain too naive, for any reason, just delete it with my apologies.

THIS QUESTION APPLYS ONLY TO THOSE WATCHES WHERE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN EASY TO GET IT RIGHT, as opposed to where they were cutting a considerable amount of costs by using cheaper materials and /or processes. Obviously a lot of them fall in to this catagory, so lets exclude those.

If you think it's both, choose which you think is the primary reason.

[jfreeman420]

I think there is more to it than the two choices you made.

The first reason is because up until recently the makers relied solely on pictures to replicate watches. It is impossible to get a 1:1 rep this way. Sometimes they take a picture of the front of one model and combine it with the back of another similiar model.

I also believe they have just realized recently that there is a growing market for the 1:1 replica. The street or tourist $20 to $50 knock off market is dying out because of crackdowns on conterfeiting worldwide. With the internet sellers can remain somewhat anonymous and cater to a more discerning clientele. Previously, they had no incentive to make reps better because people would buy what was available. I would like to think these boards have somewhat of an influence on the makers increasing quality. Now they can buy a genuine, disect it and sell fewer numbers with a higher markup and make more money with less hassle. The asians are learning the American way.

Litigation has nothing to do with it. Gaf is not conscerned with the shape of the crown guards on your sub, but whatever the Rolex logo and trademark is printed on. If you get caught selling an omega seamaster with the Rolex logo printed on the dial it doesn't make you any less prone to litigation, however it is impossible for them to enforce intellectual property laws in asia.

Lastly, there are a couple of reasons for minor differences in the same model. Many watch manufactures make minute changes that only us nitpicking anal retentive WIS notice. These sometimes get confused as flaws because the watch is missing this or that, or because the rep maker adds it to all models when it should only be a few. This was proven a few years ago when all Rolex reps came with open 6 and 9 date fonts. Rolex stopped doing this in the early 90's. The next improvements come from customer feedback. The factories want to release a new model as soon as they can to start making money. We get it in our hands and notice the case is .5 mm too small or the logo isn't high enough so they fix that and have another release. Then there is something else wrong so back to the drawing board with more machining and printing. It almost makes sense for them to buy the gen and get it right the first time. This would alleviate a lot of the costs of reengineering IMO.

[MJP]

I don't know how to edit the poll questions, otherwise I would go back and make choice "2" : Poor attention to detail/ think no one will care.

[kye_lin]

Another possibility is: To sell more watches..

They release new versions every 6 months with better quality and accuracy.... those hardup on details and specifics will want to upgrade to a better version...

Just like computer software and various other commercial technology... they release the 1.0 version... then upgrades.... 1.2... 1.3 and then an all new version....2.0..... etc...

Just a thought... I might be wrong... Dun hang me for it....

Kai

[themuck]

Excellent topic MJP and on a subject that I too have been wondering about.

As a newbie I wasn't even going to start to respond with any reasoning and simply keep watching the topic for posts and congratulate you for putting this subject up for debate MJP especially after reading jfreeman420's well written post.

However kye_lin may have an excellent point, especially when you consider there are examples like the Planet Ocean which is now in its 6th / 7th generation - how many people have bought other generations and are now buying ultimate PO's?

In addition, looking at views expressed elsewhere in this forum regarding perfect reps, I am staggered that there seem to be very minor flaws with some models that can be modded fairly easily, especially by a local watchsmith and, perhaps even more astonishing, is the fact that no Rolex models appear in any top ten or other perfect lists.

Surely after so many years in the industry, manufacturers know that Rolex is the brand that is possibly the most famous, probably the most desireable (I started looking for a rep because I've always wanted a perfect Daytona - looks like it will never happen) and a true perfect Sub will rake them bucketloads of money.

Maybe a possible answer would be for dealers to work with manufacturers and post multiple pictures of prototypes in this and other forums and incorporate all the feedback they receive into the production version. This would perhaps mean that everyone is working together to produce the best possible reps but that also begs the question - do dealers and manufacturers actually listen to the comments posted here and in other forums? - because if they did, we'd already have those elusive perfect Sub's, Bentley's, Daytona's, Seamaster's, Offshore's etc - wouldn't we!

[By-Tor]

perhaps even more astonishing, is the fact that no Rolex models appear in any top ten or other perfect lists.

Surely after so many years in the industry, manufacturers know that Rolex is the brand that is possibly the most famous, probably the most desireable (I started looking for a rep because I've always wanted a perfect Daytona - looks like it will never happen) and a true perfect Sub will rake them bucketloads of money.

Keep in mind: the current Rolex replica models are rather old. Some even 2 years or so...

But it's true...besides Explorer I (and perhaps some DD/DJ models) there's not even single very accurate out-of-the-box Rolex replica (save the modified DW's and MBW's). Some of them are downright awful...when compared to some Omega, Breitling and even TAG reps.

But newbies still buy the inaccurate Subs and SeaDwellers like hotcakes... so why would they make any real improvements? You know... blessed are people who are easy to please.

[AMK000]

Well , .... don't know what others say and where they base their opinions ...... but the almost 5 years of my buying reps experience taught me that all flaws are made in purpose.

This is "best" way to avoid having big brands go after them without a rest.

The CHN rep makers have the total and absolute technical capacity to replicate any watch with a 100% accuracy. If they don't do it is strictly related to two reasons:

- Cost

- Law provocation

It is true that 5 years ago they were copying watches from pics but this has change drastically.

Now they buy the original thing so they can clone any detail of it.

This industry moves a huge amount of money (...... Paul - Abay .... used to say that the watch rep industry is very much compared to the drug business).

See what jay said about our rep watch polls ??? 15.000 USD is the limit.

To me every single fault is done in purpose.

..... old foxes can confirmed that.

[MJP]

I kind of regret making this a "poll" thread, because I meant it more rhetorically. I didn't mean to get numbers, just bring up the subject.

[By-Tor]

To me every single fault is done in purpose.

..... old foxes can confirmed that.

I think it might be true for Rolex. Submariner is a simple watch compared to many watches they have replicated almost flawlessly (TAG Link Chrono, PO 45mm, Chronomat Evolution and the upcoming Big Bang, etc.) Yet none of the Submariner or SeaDweller reps aren't even close. The best forged case was the TW best which is 4 years old... it's been all downhill since then... at least when it's about constructing a rep case. Even if they can get the dial in order... it seems to be completely impossible to do the rehaut/crystal/case construction right.

The $95 Noobmariner (and its $140 ETA incarnation) is the only Submariner rep that makes any sense. If you don't have lots of extra cash for genuine parts and some modding talents I wouldn't waste a dime to those half-assed attempts. I mean...launch of the next "perfect Sub" is already waiting around the corner anyway...

[tvt]

This is a very old question and one that I believe has a CLEAR black and white answer, and that is that mistakes have NOTHING to do with litigation.

Teh simple fact is that as soon as a trademark is broken (ie: using the Rolex name or logo) then the law has been broken as badly as it can be broken. The fact that a second hand may be too short or some engraving may be wrong offer no safety net for the maker whatsoever. The law simply does not work like that.

Now if someone calls the watch a Polex and puts a logo that SORT OF loosk like a crown on the watch, that is a totally different story. Those pople are skirting the law but that is NOT was the watches we talk about here do... they blatently break the trademarks and thus the law. The fine details of the watch thus become meaningless.

If you put Rolex logo and name on a $2 digital watch it is breaking the law just as much as if you put them on an exact copy of a solid gold Day Date.

As for why they continue to make mistakes, well most likely because killing themselves to make an EXACT copy just does not pay for them. The mass majority of these watches are not sold to "collectors" who would ever notice or care about these things. Now we are staring to see some newer efforts (such as the Big Bang) that do seem to cater to the collector and want to get it as right as possible. Bot they sell tens of thousands of Submariners and Day Dates, far more than all the collectors in the world combined, and they sell them to people who just don't know or care. So why bother going through a lot of extra work?

The "why" is speculation on my part but as for the law it is very clear cut. Inaccurate fakes, especially the small details we are talking about, offer ZERO protection from the law.

Edited December 20, 2006 by tvt

[ubiquitous]

Personally, I think the flaws are on purpose to an extent. It's funny... We the public get a watch that we've been waiting for (maybe it's the 30th revision on a Sub), and a bunch of flaws that we've all been grinding our teeth over have been fixed; but yet, 3 or 4 other details that were perfect on the last version are now jacked. It's absolutely possible that these new Subs came from a different factory, with different cases, maybe different specifications, etc. but it just seems strange to me that the specific problems that people wanted fixed are now fixed, but yet we have new problems introduced.

I like to call this the one step forward, three steps back theory

The factories got you to buy the old model with some flaws, and then offer a new model with those flaws fixed xx months later. You buy the new model (but now with new flaws), and the next round, they'll fix those problems and reintroduce new (or maybe old) flaws, and people will buy that one too. If they introduced a perfect model... Well, what will they sell after that? Certainly not another Sub... Cause now everyone's already bought the 'perfect' Sub and the factories just caused their own demise to that model.

[By-Tor]

I agree Randy. For that exact reason I refuse to buy even one single Rolex rep anymore... until they come up with something that doesn't look half-assed.

The ExpII looks tempting... it's almost spot on. But then there are those ridiculous grey hour marker rings on the white version. I mean... how can you screw up something like that and don't do it on purpose? There are probably 2 thousand reference pics of the ExpII on the Google alone. And those thin bezel numerals...

Or putting those humongous "Jumbo" crowns to most Submariners? Or those laughable pearls? Have you ever seen a rep pearl on those Subs that doesn't look utterly ridiculous and fakey fake? They're shite even on the MBW's. Are they blind, stupid... or both? No... it doesn't wash. Cost-effective? Yes, partly... but it has to be done on purpose... to an extent.

I agree with tvt that they mostly sell these watches to masses...and not to collectors/enthusiasts like us who care about the minutiae. But come on... why wouldn't they make one rep model that would sell thousands and thousands in this community... and keep sellling forever? Sure... those "special order" Big Bang and Chronomat Evolutions will be huge sellers. But nothing compared to Submariner.

They can't do it? Sorry I don't buy that... they just don't want.

[themuck]

Wow - a lot of excellent points very well made about a subject that is clearly frustrating to many experienced members.

This newbie was about to buy the (three!) Daytonas I always wanted until I found this forum and discovered that would not be a very good idea for a multitude of genuine reasons. Would have bought an SD and Sub as well but the industry I work in is awash with them and I would have been 'outed' in a heartbeat - so what's the point of enduring the inevitable ridicule.

At the end of the day, if newbies and those who just don't know any better don't spend the time and make the effort to research this and other forums (or they absolutely must have a Rolex or move in circles that wouldn't know a rep even if it said Boleks on the dial) and keep buying the current stock, there is no real incentive to upgrade and improve models. And maybe that goes for everyone else as well - if it aint truly accurate then enthusiasts and collectors just maybe shouldn't buy it then the manufacturers will have to produce real 1:1's if they want our business.

My research and activity on these forums would suggest that, out of the thousands of reps available from our trusted dealers, there are just four worth buying if you want real accuracy - IWC Ingenieur, Planet Ocean, Speedmaster Chrono and Tag Link Chrono. I'll probably buy all of these to start my collection but, after reading the advice and guidance available here, I still know that I'm going to have to send all of them to a local watchsmith to be modded (even slightly) checked, lubed and pressure tested etc - meaning there is no true out of the box perfect rep!

We all accept less than perfect products from manufacturers that have the capability to provide perfection - and if we continue to do so then there maybe is not and possibly never will be any incentive for the manufacturers to change their strategy of offering numerous generations but never a true Ultimate / Perfect rep (despite what some dealers may claim). So we give up our hobby - no. Stop buying nearly there but not quite reps - no. Start persuading dealers to push manufacturers to deliver what the customer really wants - ?

[rbj69]

my vote is they will never make it exact because then there sells will slow down, that is why they fix one thing and have fault in another area, soon however we will be able to buy 2 or 3 watches with good areas and bad areas and combine them to have a perfect watch , we already have in many cases

but mainly it is about the money period

merry christmas

joe

[KB]

Yeah as already stated it's so they will always have the 3rd, 4th, 5th etc models to drum up more business.

Make a 1:1 and the sales stop when everyone has one.

Ken

[By-Tor]

@themuck: I'm not saying ANY of our reps are bad. They would fool probably 99,9% of the population.

Noobmariner with ETA movement is outstanding watch and rep (imho). When it comes to accuracy it runs circles around the best modified $400 Submariner reps 18 months ago.

Rolex reps indeed have improved, but they haven't reached the same level of accuracy as many other brands and rep models. I'm just wondering why, because we have seen such amazing burst in quality and accuracy just lately.

Or perhaps something is happening soon? It could be just that the factories haven't really concentrated on Rolex lately... and the great Sub and SD are on the works? Personally, I don't really care either way... but at least that would be the day to remember.

[themuck]

I fully agree with your legitimate point about fooling 99.9% of people By-Tor...but I have plenty of friends and work colleagues who have beautiful gen Daytonas and Subs so with the lack of accurate reps it's a total rep Roley no no for me - until that perfect day arrives

Can I just open this subject up a little bit and suggest that the business logic behind the manufacturer's strategy could be costing them even more profits!!! I can honestly say that I've been tempted by around 25+ reps that I would have probably bought (over time) in addition to the five Roleys I would have definitely pulled the trigger on immediately - that's 30+ watches (seems to be an average amount for a collector).

But, because of the lack of accuracy and quality issues I've learned through this forum, I'm going to buy just 4 watches - where's the business sense in that?

And if manufacturers produce more 1:1's that are commended by trusted and knowledgeable members of this forum - I'll almost definitely buy them as well, regardless of make or model.

Kenberg again makes a vary valid point. But again their business model may not make real commercial sense. Imagine it's January 2007 and the true Sub 1:1 finally becomes available - everyone buys it. It's now February and the Navitimer 1:1 is out - everyone buys it even if they don't necessarily like Breitlings. March comes and it's the Constellation 1:1 - again everyone buys it even if it's never going to be on their wish list. April arrives with a JLC...May something else...June etc etc. Before the year is out absolutely everyone owns a dozen 'perfects' and by the end of the next year that doubles!! - and at the same time they are still selling Sub's by the cartfull without any further R&D, tooling etc.

Maybe they just haven't thought about this yet...maybe they are more interested in the quantity of the easily satisfied masses as opposed to the quality required by discerning collectors...and maybe they haven't worked out that enthusiasts might even be prepared to pay more for the very best and will probably buy even more makes and even more models that collectors aren't even currently considering.

[AMK000]

The ExpII looks tempting... it's almost spot on. But then there are those ridiculous grey hour marker rings on the white version. I mean... how can you screw up something like that and don't do it on purpose? There are probably 2 thousand reference pics of the ExpII on the Google alone. And those thin bezel numerals...

Ask Angus to send you pics regarding RX EXP II white. I just got one from him.

The rings around the dots are 95% - 99% black and the date font is correct (not bold).

Andy's is 70% black rings (dark grey) and correct date font

EL's is (looks) like 100% black rings but can only supply with wrong date font.

[Rolexman]

The rep makers can easily make a 100% perfect rep!

Why they put all their efforts into making a 99% perfect rep and not make it a 100% right I don't know?....... It could be the 'milking strategy' as mentioned above?!

The question discussed here is like asking why not every new car made runs on water hydrogen?.....

It is possible (cost-technical) so......

There are just too much stakes involved (oil=power=money)!!

Remember? A 100% perfect rep means that it is identical to the gen (even movement and features)... so how can we keep them appart?.... we can't ! (if we can it is not a 100% perfect rep)......so the whole high-end watch industry would crash in a couple of months/ years. ADs and other sellers and buyers won't be able to tell the difference anymore.

My 0.02

Edited December 20, 2006 by Rolexman

[Pugwash]

I get the impression we're simply not the target market for replica Rolexes. People who want something that's not a Rolex are slightly more discerning.

[themuck]

You couldn't be more right if you tried Pugwash - by the way, the frost's about an inch thick so you'll need your woolies from the 20th

[tonton2000]

The rep makers can easily make a 100% perfect rep! .........

..........Remember? A 100% perfect rep means that it is identical to the gen (even movement and features)... so how can we keep them appart?.... we can't ! (if we can it is not a 100% perfect rep)......so the whole high-end watch industry would crash in a couple of months/ years. ADs and other sellers and buyers won't be able to tell the difference anymore.

My 0.02

Exactly my thoughts

100% reps have existed before, and they do still.

Who remembers Rivers PAM 127 with an original panerai movt for $3000?

That could EASILY have been bought by someone and sold as a gen.

A DW 6263/6265 with a VJ727 inside (cost of case + cost of movt and other gen parts <$3-4K for a watch that could potentially be sold for upwards of $15K)

Tommyhighways 18k white gold Rolex with a rolex 3135 movt inside?

Hell, even buy a TAG link chrono, and spend $315 for a Valjoux 7750 with a TAG rotor from ofrei and you have another 100% rep for $600.

There is no amount of checking, short of tracing back the serial numbers, that would have give these pieces away as reps.

Its completely possible to make a 100% sub, but how many fake subs are sold as real already? and thats with all the flaws!

What would it be like if there were no visible flaws!?

There may already be some 100% sub reps out there, with rolex movts inside, but if these were readily available, things would go [censored] up quite quickly for rolex! and alot of people who think they are buying a genuine sub!

Hell, these manufacturers can make a TOURBILLON FOR LESS THAN $1K! Don't you think they can make a submariner case where the rehault is deep, the cyclops is corrct and the endlinks dont look like they were made from Playdough!?

I'd love for every rep to be a 1:1, but we should be careful what we wish for.........

[crystalcranium]

I agree with TVT that subtle nuanced differences that might allow you to say "Well, technically its not a copy" go right out the window when you print "Rolex" on the dial.

The reason replicas have a variety of variations from the ideal in the 95%+ accuracy range is the lack of QC, no financial incentive, no centralized start to finish parts production and assembly, ..etc. The half dozen or so "perfect" reps we see are better controled in these departments but also suffer from the same variations in quality genuines have. I don't recall who posted it, but there was a facinating comparison of vintage dials here that had obvious variability in quality, variations that would have us howling if they were in a replica.

[ubiquitous]

Well, the modern sapphire Daytonas are an especially difficult Rolex to rep due to their movements. 16520's have the El Primero based 4030 (which has not been duplicated to date) and the new 116520's have the proprietary in house 4130, which is kind-of-sort-of duplicated with the mod 7750, but far too thick (hence requiring an even thicker case; one give away to the rep), and is notorious for problems and mechanical failure.

As is the situation, the factors above were my motivation to build my own 16520's, using genuine El Primero 400's, genuine parts (i.e. dial, case, hands, crystal, crown, etc). All said and done, I have the basic equivalent to a genuine 16520 at a fraction of the price...

My opinion on the matter- When they don't offer it... build it yourself.

[tvt]

Crystalcranium got it right.

If you saw the video of the watch "factories" I posted a few weeks back or if you have been lucky enough to visit the Chinese watch markets when they were still running 100% you know how there is flat no quality control.

Before I go on let me clarify that I am NOT talking about some special project like what we see Angus working on, I am talking about your general fake Rolex, the submariner or DD that make up the bulk of sales for these guys.

Westerners think of some sort of factory producing watches. Every watch coming off the line is the same and if there is a small flaw they can identify it and correct it. But nothing could be further from how these are actually made. Parts come from all over the place, they are assembled in back rooms and often by people who are ot highly skilled. At the watch markets I would see the same model watch sitting side by side with each ohter at the same sellers booth. These came from the same source and were made at the same time and yet they would have huge variations within themselves. Perhaps this one had a long second hand and the next a short one. Maybe this one has a fat crown and the next a thin one... it all depends on what the maker happened to grab. By the time the watch is being assembled the people doing it are not studying photographs and the like, they are just more or less slapping them together.

Remember, these things are by and large not made for collectors. They made hundreds and hundreds of thousands of watches that are sold all over the world. From markets in Hong Kong to China Town in New York they are being sold on eBay as gens and out of a trunk some place as a fake. They are being sold in many ways to many people and almost none of them have any idea at all what is correct or not correct.

In order for a watch maker to somehow centralize and operation and instal real quality control would be a HUGE operation, cost all sorts of money and be at constant risk of being shut down. It simply does not pay for that person to make those changes, he has zero incentive.