t Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 i am sure Angus will come with the best version... let Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Cool to hear the experts opinion now. I think I wasn't that wrong with Josh's SD (sorry Josh, no bad intention here). A mordern SD would look great in my collection, but I'm not in a hurry getting one. As long as we do not have a very accurate one that only needs "traditional" mods (CG-Insert/Pearl-Crystal) and accept these gen parts, the MBK vintage are sexy enough for me. Cheers and thanks for your opinions that serve our Rolie community. Stephane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellomen Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 i am sure Angus will come with the best version... let Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcher Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 King is now showing what looks to be the same watch as Josh but her picture angles give a far better impression and the crystal looks superb as does the bezel. It is not quite 100% on the bezel shape but I doubt it will be repped better than this to be honest. One thing I have noticed and I will tell you if and when my WM9 Sub appears is that they have copied the gen crown tube size better. WM9's Sub has the crown and tube and so does the SD in King's pictures. I would have no hesitation in ordering this SD when available. I have sent an email to King and I'm sure many of you will too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I will definitely get the Dweller too... but I'd wait until the fat lady signs. I agree with Watcher, the rep looks much better in King's pics. However this doesn't change the fact that it's an inferior base watch. The other version (with wrong maxi dial) is clearly superior base, because it has the very THICK rehaut (and double-"rehaut bevel"), which is imho very important and characteristic look for the Sea Dweller. This is clearly missing from the Joshua's version. Are me and bklm the only ones who see this? I wouldn't jump on this just yet. Not until we see all the offerings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I wouldn't jump on this just yet. Not until we see all the offerings. Very wise BT and very good advice. So, now that "King's good" disappeared from her site, maybe Josh will post the "King's good" with a normal dial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 They only need to change the maxi dial/hands, crystal and datefont, and it would be hands down the "best out of the box" Rolex rep ever. I would be satisfied with the dial & hands change alone. It looks fantastic. Can't say the same about this other version. Sorry. We offered help for Angus and the factory that was doing this... they never came here and collected the information (that would have been freely available). If they never release the good version, I'll say f**k it... I've had enough of medicore Rolex reps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcher Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I hear what you are saying and the TW's have been the only reps really to have this correct in my opinion but it will not stop me buying and the price well under $300. The rehaut is actually slightly deeper too than the gen but it is close enough and the crown position although not perfect is close enough to not look obvious to the naked eye. I doubt they will fix the rehaut thickness but it would be nice if they did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake48 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) One of the things I find most interesting about the new SD being offered by King, Joshua and I am sure the others to follow is the fact that an ETA 2836 was used. I spoke to Angus and he said his watch will come with a 2836 as well. There has been much discussion on how the crown could not possibly be placed in the correct position on a sub unless a ETA 2892 was used. Looking at the pictures on Kings site an Joshua's site you can clearly see the crown has been raised to the correct position and that a 2836 was used. Looks to me that all the speculation about the fact that a 2892 had to be used has proven to be incorrect. How'd dey do dat? Edited October 15, 2007 by jake48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 One of the things I find most interesting about the new SD being offered by King, Joshua and I am sure the others to follow is the fact that an ETA 2836 was used. I spoke to Angus and he said his watch will come with a 2836 as well. There has been much discussion on how the crown could not possibly be placed in the correct position on a sub unless a ETA 2892 was used. Looking at the pictures on Kings site an Joshua's site you can clearly see the crown has been raised to the correct position and that a 2836 was used. Looks to me that all the speculation about the fact that a 2892 had to be used has proven to be incorrect. How'd dey do dat? Well well well 1. King's watch used eta 2892 2. angus watch uses 2836 - he says it is OK with the rehaut vs. crown position. reason: SD is thicker than sub,some millimetres.so it is possible IMHO. We will see. Personally if the 2892 version is the better one ( it is very good already) I hope they will release a version with asian movement. I won't pay 500$ for the 2892 version - which is the price king quoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 BTW: 2836 is much cheaper than 2892 - so let's for the best & cheapest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcher Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 The crown on Kings new 2836 version and Josh's 2836 version the crown is stillnot high enough but it does look very good. On the gen the crown sits flush with the bottom of the guards as hopefully seen this pic of my gen I had ealrier this year(much regretted sale too!!) Kings 2836 is half the price of the 2892 version and perfeclty acceptalbe really. Perfection is impossible to attain in a rep but it is fun trying I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Indeed interesting. Anyone got some dates/prices for us from King ? Is any SD version from her available now? PS: can someone please tell king's site adress? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 PS: can someone please tell king's site adress? KING'S SITE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake48 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) The crown on Kings new 2836 version and Josh's 2836 version the crown is stillnot high enough but it does look very good. I am not sure about the crown not being high enough. Look at the pictures side by side. To me it looks like the top of the crown is in the exact same spot (the bottom edge of the bezel teeth) on the Rep as on the Gen. Also, the bottom of the crown in relation to the case seems to be in the same spot as the Gen as well Either way, we are now talking about nano meteres and I really don't see how anyone other than a Rep WIS who has WAY to much time on thier hands would ever know. Also, I tend to agree that they overcame the crown height issue because the SD case is thicker, crystal top to case back, than the other rolie subs and there is no issue with the date mag being moved up or down. If anything, I think the crystal height looks a little low. Then again, this is all speculation becuase untill someone has a watch in hand, we can not know for sure! Edited October 15, 2007 by jake48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 KING'S SITE Thank you so much! I have it now... 2836 VS 2892 Same height!!! Will add rehaut comparison later Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 IMHO King's new 2836 is the 2892 with different movement and corrected Dial + better pearl etc. Crystal bevel now down to the case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straight_six Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 IMHO King's new 2836 is the 2892 with different movement and corrected Dial + better pearl etc. Crystal bevel now down to the case? Yeah, only, something happened to the bezel height in translation... Dean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) Roflmao what I am talking about the new version has no lugholes. Edited October 15, 2007 by piratedzeus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straight_six Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 ahh...one more thing...is it me or the new version has Sub caseback thickness? Dean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 lugholes is the way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopypants Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Not sure if this was mentioned above... but, I see that KING version has HOLLOW MIDLINKS... thats a good sign... Also, looks like the endlinks on KINGS is better and sharper... (better = more correct) Also, the clasp shows 93160, which is correct for the SD... However, the crown stamp still looks horrible... Kinda wished they would start using OEM-STYLE tubes and crowns... Even aftermarket triplock is like 5-10 bucks... Why not start!?!? I am calling it now! I bet ALL of the dealers are going to milk this one for all its worth! 400-500 bucks for a what should be a $150-$250 starting price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mentalist Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Does anyone have any pricing from King yet? That 3035 movement looks incredible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bklm1234 Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 I'm pretty sure the latest King SD has a thinner bezel (at the bottom) than the one with the maxi-dial Using the same 2 pics, left is the latest, right is the one with maxi-dial: The left pic is taken from a low to high angle. The right one is taken leveled with the case. So the left pic should show thicker bottom portion of the bezel but it doesn't. It actually looks thinner even at this angle. In real life, it most likely has a thinner bottom. I tried staring at my 1665 at level and from low to high. I swear the bezel bottom portion looks thicker when viewed from low to high. It's why the photographer took the left pic like that, he wanted to exaggerate the bezel thickness and also make the crown seem higher. King's latest version is disappointing. Few of you know though in the previous version, there were 2 cases, one for the gen 3135 movt option, one for the 2892 movt option. The latter version was never displayed. Most likely it isn't as good as the gen movt version. King said to me the gen movt version was all out and the factory was updating the case for the ETA version. Little did I know they were updating the case to fit a 2836 in it. I bet the original 2892 case is what we are seeing in the latest pics but with the crown moved DOWN since 2836 is thicker. Disappointing but it's still the best SD to date. The gen movt version case would have been perfect. I just don't understand why that isn't used. I'm actually even OK with putting a 2836 in it. Big deal if the crown is lower. But the rest will be 1:1. I never understand the rep factory. -bk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Agreed 100%. If this is the "updated and final case", and if there will be no version with the original (awesome) case, no Dweller for me. That's a major disappointment, and another insane screw-up from the factory. This thin rehaut version with bulky crown guards looks nothing like the genuine SeaDweller. 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.