Is this person right or wrong?

[Guest paneraifreak]

OK

I had a photo of the movement in my Ultimate PO Lite and contrary to some members here, this guy posted the following comment:

<<<Not intending to threadcrap, but are you absolutely sure that your watch contains a 2893 derivative Asian movement?! I find this highly unlikely as 2893 is a very expensive GMT movement.

uPO lite is normally supplied with a DG8413 movement which has the same ligne and datewheel position as an ETA2824 but shares no compononents with any ETA movement. The movement you have pictured as a spare is a DG2813 which is a Miyota copy and, although similar to the 8413, will have the date in a slightly different position. >>

About this photo of my watch's movement:

And the photo below is of the movement that is inside my PO LITE..compare:

Do you think is way off or is he right?

I dont know enough to make a call here.

Help please.

[marrickvilleboy]

well, it depends on what you're selling description is; what did you describe the movement being?

It certainely isn't an ETA movement, in fact, the member who pointed this out (which i'm also aware of who it is) is correct in the description of the movement. That is also the reason why they call it the "UPO Lite version" as opposed to the swiss version.

Hope this clears it up for you

[Guest paneraifreak]

NO NO NO

I never thought this would all cause such confusions.

I was selling a PO LITE, which is the Asian, not the ETA.

Here is the movement that is inside my PO Lite:

Now Pugwash himslef assured me it is the replacement is the right one.

Compare...and let me know.

[marrickvilleboy]

the gold colored movement does not mean that it is different from the silver colored movement.

They are the same! and yes, it is still the DG8413 movement. The movement in your pictures is not swiss, if thats what you trying to say.

[Guest paneraifreak]

Looks like some people here on RWG need to get educatyed before they crap on someone's thread.

Here is the thread Andreww satrted on the very issue of what I sold here with the PO Lite over in Sales:

http://replica-watch.info/forum/viewtopic....asc&start=0

The replacement movement I sold with the PO Lite is the right one to fit the watch.

[marrickvilleboy]

ohh i finally got what you are saying.

you are arguing whether the movement is DG8413 or DG2813.....

You better ask some of the other guys who knows more about these asian copy movements.

[crystalcranium]

Hey, I'm squatting and getting ready to thread crap....

We're nuts to be paying $150 for these things. That movement is a $2.00 wholesale piece of crap.

Ahhhhh, I feel better!

[Pugwash]

Looks like some people here on RWG need to get educatyed before they crap on someone's thread.

Or, and this could be important, you need to either learn to write and express your opinion clearly or stop being upset when you're inevitably misunderstood.

Don't get assume it's everyone else's fault that you keep having to try to make yourself understood.

[r11co]

This should answer your question.

The DG8413 and 2813 are almost identical designs, the main differences being the beat rate and the shape of the rotor. The 8413 attempts to mimic the ETA2824 in these two areas, whereas the 2813 is more faithful to the Miyota design that both are derivative of. They should be interchangeable in a watch as hand-post sizes/dial feet locations/stem design are identical.

Neither is an ETA design in any which way, shape or form and it is not appropriate to describe them as such. Little white lies......

With regards to the uPO, I have had both 'lite' Asian and ETA versions side-by-side under my magnifier. The watches are identical WRT case, bracelet, crystal, bezel, etc. All fully interchangeable. Where they differ is the movement and all things associated ie. hands, datewheel and stem. The movement holders are identical but are clamped differently depending on which movement is fitted.

No uPO has ever been advertised with a 2893 ETA, which is a horribly expensive and rare GMT movement. Any rep carrying this movement usually sells for $500 plus.

[archibald]

This thread is a perfect example of the cost of the little sematic games some dealers continue to play (my apologies to the "lost in translation" folks who apparently believe that the chinese characters for D and G can somehow be mistranslated to the Western letters E, T and A).

Hopefully any confusion is now laid to rest.

Paractically speaking, though, a little tidbit above is news to me. Can someone verify that the date position is "slightly" off in one of these versions? Is the date indicator of one of the DGXXX movement's position "correct" relative to the 2892 or are they both off?

I certainly wouldn't mind sporting a watch with an asian movement as long as it is advertised and priced accordingly, but not if it sacrifices accuracy as well as reliability.

[Guest paneraifreak]

I am still quite confused with most of the replies here. NOTONCE DID I EVER MAKE MENTION OF THE DG2813 AS AN ETA OR SWISS OR WHATEVER OF THE SORTS...

Where does this come from, for Pete's sake??

Nowhere did I ever mention the acronym ETA in anything to do with the PO Lite. The Lite version of the UPO has a cheap ass Asian movement, most of us know that now. This movement I bought as a replacement is from the suggestions of Andreww over at RWI, and I verified that this movement shown here in the photo would fit into the PO Lite....

What does ETA have to do with any of this???

Not from me, for sure..... I kept everything Asian....that's it.

[archibald]

I am still quite confused with most of the replies here. NOTONCE DID I EVER MAKE MENTION OF THE DG2813 AS AN ETA OR SWISS OR WHATEVER OF THE SORTS...

Where does this come from, for Pete's sake??

Nowhere did I ever mention the acronym ETA in anything to do with the PO Lite. The Lite version of the UPO has a cheap ass Asian movement, most of us know that now. This movement I bought as a replacement is from the suggestions of Andreww over at RWI, and I verified that this movement shown here in the photo would fit into the PO Lite....

What does ETA have to do with any of this???

Not from me, for sure..... I kept everything Asian....that's it.

People are referring to the fact that some well known collectors still refer to this movement as "Asian 2892." It's part of larger issue than your particular watch/sale.

[Guest paneraifreak]

People are referring to the fact that some well known collectors still refer to this movement as "Asian 2892." It's part of larger issue than your particular watch/sale.

Thank you Archibald.

Finally, somone who has the wits to address my concern instead of crapping on the thread or making snarly comments on my typo errors...

[r11co]

The confusion arose from the fact that you advertised your uPO lite for sale as having a "2893" movement. As I said, and have repeated since, this indicates an ETA GMT movement. Hence the confusion. The number is VERY important!!! At no point in this discourse have you acknowledged your error or attempted to correct it.

I would have linked to your advert for the uPO, but it is the nature of this forum to delete ads when the item has sold. Thankfully you did not overprice and it appears the buyer was more aware of what he was purchasing than you were of what you were selling.

'Nuff said.

[marrickvilleboy]

The confusion arose from the fact that you advertised your uPO lite for sale as having a "2893" movement. As I said, and have repeated since, this indicates an ETA GMT movement. Hence the confusion. The number is VERY important!!! At no point in this discourse have you acknowledged your error or attempted to correct it.

I would have linked to your advert for the uPO, but it is the nature of this forum to delete ads when the item has sold. Thankfully you did not overprice and it appears the buyer was more aware of what he was purchasing than you were of what you were selling.

'Nuff said.

Yeah i saw the Ad as well, thats what my first reply was all about here.

[Guest paneraifreak]

The confusion arose from the fact that you advertised your uPO lite for sale as having a "2893" movement. As I said, and have repeated since, this indicates an ETA GMT movement. Hence the confusion. The number is VERY important!!! At no point in this discourse have you acknowledged your error or attempted to correct it.

I would have linked to your advert for the uPO, but it is the nature of this forum to delete ads when the item has sold. Thankfully you did not overprice and it appears the buyer was more aware of what he was purchasing than you were of what you were selling.

'Nuff said.

Before assuming the worst in someone, give him the benefit of the doubt and in the case of my sale, I simply did not understand your statement fully and kept trying to figure it out until one member made a little clearer for me and then your last post finally cleared itup for me. So, I now know I simply made a mistake in the movement numbers, an innocent mistake from a movement noob...can you guys ever forgive me for this and will you let me live another day?

Now, I think the right numbers are 2813, asian of course...no ETA here....

And since some people may have an ounce of doubt in my integrity or honesty, i will refund the buyer his money and i will keep my watch to wear and enjoy.....

Bottom line is the spare movement fits the Asian PO but because some people felt compelled to correct me and, in the process, not reiterate the good aspects of my sale, I will retract the sale and forget the whole thing.

By the way, there is no such thing as "'nuff said" when it follows a damaging comment... consequences ensue and one or more person has to pay the price..... and I did. Thanks for nothing.

[hambone]

[r11co]

And since some people may have an ounce of doubt in my integrity or honesty, i will refund the buyer his money and i will keep my watch to wear and enjoy.....

Don't you think it would be better to leave the decision to cancel the purchase up to the buyer who, if they had been following the thread in your advert would have been in possession of the facts anyway?

As I said, the asking price was not excessive and it was fairly clear to anyone with an ounce of knowledge of the uPO what it was you were selling.

No one has ever questioned your integrity, just your accuracy and we all make mistakes. The above statement however shows a considerable lack of judgement.

[PAMman]

As I understand it, the original post at the top of this thread acknowledged that both movements are Asian but simply asked if anyone could confirm if they are interchangeable with each other, and more specifically if the date wheels are the same and would line up in the same window in this UPO Lite. In other words is the spare movement a viable swap for this watch? I haven't a clue about Asian movements but I understand the question.

[Watchmeister]

So what is the answer?

[NRG]

The gold one is a DG8413 28,800 bph movement and the other a 21,600bph DG2813.

They are NOT direct replacemet for each other. The movement height is different, the balance c0ck is different, the fourth wheel pinion height, centre wheel and hour wheel...all different.

[NRG]

...

Paractically speaking, though, a little tidbit above is news to me. Can someone verify that the date position is "slightly" off in one of these versions? Is the date indicator of one of the DGXXX movement's position "correct" relative to the 2892 or are they both off?

Archibald, I can confirm the date position is more or less correct as a 2824-2 in a lateral plane ...height ...I'm not sure.

[r11co]

2813

8413

Hand post sizes are identical. Diameter of movement is identical. Movement thickness differs, but this is mainly due to the different rotor design. Balance c0ck on 8413 is smaller in order to achieve the faster beat.

Date position on the 8413 is identical to the ETA2824. The datefont of the standard wheel even mimics the ETA one (intentionally).

[NRG]

The pinion heights are different, you won't get the hands on. Plus because of the movement height difference the stem / case hole alignment will be out...

[archibald]

Guys, lets be fair to the OP. He posted a thread which referred to his own sale, complete with huge pics, trying to clarify false advertising on the part of whomever he bought the watch from originally, false advertising that apparently fooled a lot more people than him. Sure, you can argue that he should have immediately changed his ad on the basis of the responses here, but if I don't think anyone willfully selling a watch as something it's not would start a thread in DG calling his own sale into question. Besides, at least once a week, I notice far more egregious examples of misrepresentation of watches' original prices, rarity, cost of mods, and even movements on occasion from members who have been around a lot longer than the OP.

BTW, can one of the folks who know the DG movement well tell us how far off the date window on the DG2813 would be relative to the 2892?