Tribal Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 (edited) Hello Gang, have you all seen Angus Ultimate Seadweller? I think the Bezel is not thick enough,i've compared with Gen one.... By the way when you compare with King's new SD you see what i mean..... KING GEN Man i hate this waiting so long for this one and than this.... Overall the case looks good,also HE Valve,Dial,Glass,Crystal.... The Bezel is off also the Insert is not good... What do you think about it...... Let me know your opinions... Edited October 16, 2007 by Tribal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsons Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 I'll wait and see if anything happens with King's 2892 which looks good to me. Heck, I would be happy with an Asian 2892 if that what it takes. With regard to the 2836-2 variant, I'll take a pass. I'm a little tired of waiting for this one as well. Maybe I'll just build another MBW 1665 to let out some of the frustration as I have extra gen parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Tribal -- I agree with you about the bezel. It may just be the angle of the watch in your photos, but the case shape (especially the slope of the lugs) bothers me more than the bezel. Because so many Seadweller reps use Sub cases, that is one of the first things I look for to identify a gen from a rep. The gen Seadweller case has a more pronounced hump at the lug than most of the gen cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bklm1234 Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Angus' looks the same as Josh's and King's. I thought it's a different effort. Sigh! Angus' on the left, King's on the right. Angus' on the left, Josh's on the right All 3 watches look the same. Compare the bezel bottom thickness vs. King's 1st SD, true 1:1 with gen 3135 movt. Angus' on the left, King's 1st 1:1 SD on the right: Bezel bottom not thick enough. Crown as expected, low: So much for 1:1. Try again next time. Though not 1:1, it's the best looking modern SD to date. Am I getting it? No. Why don't the factory go with King's 1st 1:1? I don't mind they lower the crown to fit a more economical 2836 in it. At least the rest is 1:1, that is they fix the maxi-dial, datewheel and crystal (the super SD all these 3 dealers have has the correct beveled crystal so that's doable). -bk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Well now how did they get this wrong - with a gen for comparison... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 haha thats a good question! And i dont like the slope of the lugs either. Im glad its got lug holes anyways. A sea-dweller without lug holes for me is just 'wrong'. Its the best modern version so far but its not what we were all expecting thats for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cntrl Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 hmm...this was disappointing...gonna get me a gen 14060 instead, kinda frustrated with this rep "ultimate" hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 King's 1st SD, true 1:1 with gen 3135 movt. -bk I thought King's had the 3035 movement- the predecessor to the 3135 movement. BTW, Andrew has just come out with this watch also- same thin bezel, "working" HE valve, WR to 100m, $278.00 plus shipping. Available Oct 25th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 This is now probably 5th thread about this same watch. How many separate threads we need, it's quite difficult to follow them all. Once again, the biggest disappointment is the rehaut shape, which looks absolutely NOTHING like the genuine SeaDweller. This kind of crystal/rehaut shape is ESSENTIAL for the SeaDweller, but it's completely f*cked up on this new version. It was good on King's initial watch. The MOST IMPORTANT feature on the Dweller is the thick crystal, low rehaut and very special rehaut/crystal combo, which has very characteristic look, especially from an angled view. They have screwed up the most important visual feature on this watch. The first (best) version on the left. The new one has also very bad crown guards. It's not "ultimate" or 1:1, it's just standard, hyped up and average Rolex replica with some serious & fundamental flaws. Our only hope is that they'll reissue the initial version. What a disappointment! I've been waiting for this watch as well, and it would have been nice to finally see a decent Rolex replica. It's especially disappointing, because we OFFERED to help the factory, here in the forum. Apparently they weren't even interested in building a good one. Same old, same old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bklm1234 Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 I'll wait and see if anything happens with King's 2892 which looks good to me. Heck, I would be happy with an Asian 2892 if that what it takes. With regard to the 2836-2 variant, I'll take a pass. I'm a little tired of waiting for this one as well. Maybe I'll just build another MBW 1665 to let out some of the frustration as I have extra gen parts. King's 1st 1:1 SD was offered in 2 movts, gen 3135 and 2892. Guess what? the 2892 had a different case which was never displayed on King's website. I verified that with King herself. She told me the gen 3135 version was all out and they were updating the 2892 version. I think "updating" is making a 2836 fit in there. I suspect all along the 2892 version has always been what we are looking at now with Josh's, Angus', and King's 2836 SD. Again, it boggles me why they didn't continue develop using the gen 3135 version case. -bk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 King's 1st 1:1 SD was offered in 2 movts, gen 3135 and 2892. Guess what? the 2892 had a different case which was never displayed on King's website. I verified that with King herself. She told me the gen 3135 version was all out and they were updating the 2892 version. I think "updating" is making a 2836 fit in there. I suspect all along the 2892 version has always been what we are looking at now with Josh's, Angus', and King's 2836 SD. Again, it boggles me why they didn't continue develop using the gen 3135 version case. -bk Kingtold me it comes with"2892 and eta3035:)" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsons Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 BK, I believe King was asking $2.5K for the 3135 SD which is way too high. One can pick up a nice used example for $3.5K with all boxes and papers. Perhaps her watch didn't exist or it was custom made in very few numbers. Whatever it was, it had a good case. If that's the only way we can get an accurate SD, then we might have to live with only the 1665. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopypants Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 So, can we as a community label this one as the NoobDweller? or Nymphdweller? or So-Called Dweller? WhateverDweller? Might as well offer this one with a cheap CH movement too... i could use some cheap XMAS give aways... PP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dax Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Angus' looks the same as Josh's and King's. I thought it's a different effort. Sigh! Angus' on the left, King's on the right. Angus' on the left, Josh's on the right All 3 watches look the same. Compare the bezel bottom thickness vs. King's 1st SD, true 1:1 with gen 3135 movt. Angus' on the left, King's 1st 1:1 SD on the right: Bezel bottom not thick enough. Crown as expected, low: So much for 1:1. Try again next time. Though not 1:1, it's the best looking modern SD to date. Am I getting it? No. Why don't the factory go with King's 1st 1:1? I don't mind they lower the crown to fit a more economical 2836 in it. At least the rest is 1:1, that is they fix the maxi-dial, datewheel and crystal (the super SD all these 3 dealers have has the correct beveled crystal so that's doable). -bk Am I right in thinking these pics are the same as PureTime's SD Ultimate 16600, posted today in his area. http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=54688&hl= 278$US Is this watch from the same factory, so has same design faults? I keep on looking for a good SD, but everytime I find one, someone finds too many faults... Is all these "Ultimate" "Perfect" models just spin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star69 Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 i like the old tw-best more - it had at least nice lug-holes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 i like the old tw-best more - it had at least nice lug-holes Ditto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 A gen shot. Observe how thick the front rehaut on this watch is. It's gigantic due to extra thick crystal, and there are two separate "bevels" on the rehaut, which are extremely apparent. The (new) rep version fails miserably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perry563 Posted October 16, 2007 Report Share Posted October 16, 2007 Can someone tell me why the PERFECT SD sold for 358 bucks while the new ULTIMATE 1:1 is only $278? I also notice that the PERFECT SD is no longer available. The only thing I see better with the new version is the gas escapement valve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopypants Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 (edited) Can someone tell me why the PERFECT SD sold for 358 bucks while the new ULTIMATE 1:1 is only $278? The same reason we all keep using the keywords ULTIMATE, 1:1, and PERFECT!!! Marketing, Marketing, Marketing!!! The only REAL Ultimate, 1:1, Perfect Version iiiisssssssss....... GENUINE! All this hype about being modeled after a genuine piece, and yet we are still pointing out the obvious through internet photos... It's sad that people don't even have this thing in their hands yet and can spot these flaws in 2 seconds... Imagine what a WIS would think of you? The only QUESTION you need to ask these dealers is... will ANY/ALL genuine parts fit on this model? If they say no, then guess what... ITS NOT BASED ON THE GENUINE ARTICLE!!!!!! now, not to be too harsh, it is actually an improvement to Modern SD line... but you have to feel a little betrayed in thinking that this is actually a 1:1 copy... Edited October 17, 2007 by poopypants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perry563 Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 I never said I thought any of them were perfect or 1:1. I am aware of the typical gen vs rep differences. Let me reprase: Are we getting any less or more with this watch as compared with what was termed the PERFECT SD which sold for 358 bucks? From what I see it looks like the new version has a thicker case unlike the previous which was just a sub case. Also it appears the bracelet edges are polished to a high sheen. The so caller perfect SD bracelet was just a sub type with non polished edges. Do we know for a fact that the case is thick like the real SD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mentalist Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 BK, I believe King was asking $2.5K for the 3135 SD which is way too high. King has been on the pipe. There is no way anyone would pay that much for a rep when the gen is not that much more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTone Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 King has been on the pipe. There is no way anyone would pay that much for a rep when the gen is not that much more. Duuuude... Ummm, I mean Keeeeng... Pass the Bong... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 LOL puff puff pass.. your fukken up the rotation! haha The term 1:1 is thrown around these days like its nothing. There are obviously reasons as to why they dont actually make them properly. If the vietnamese can make an almost perfect case then why cant any of the other rep manufacturers? There is always at least one glaring flaw., The trick is to buy the rep with the flaws that you can FIX, and have it modded to perfection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopypants Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 you know... i'm looking at it again... did anyone notice that the CG's are like the prototype in that one is bigger than the other... thought i remember someone saying that it would get fixed on the final release... love it! i gotta find that little tidbit before i call anyone out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJGladeRaider Posted October 17, 2007 Report Share Posted October 17, 2007 I never said I thought any of them were perfect or 1:1. I am aware of the typical gen vs rep differences.Let me reprase:Are we getting any less or more with this watch as compared with what was termed the PERFECT SD which sold for 358 bucks? From what I see it looks like the new version has a thicker case unlike the previous which was just a sub case. Also it appears the bracelet edges are polished to a high sheen. The so caller perfect SD bracelet was just a sub type with non polished edges. Do we know for a fact that the case is thick like the real SD?Let me answer you thus - I bought several of the old "Perfect SD" which were the same as the TW Best. They were beautiful, thick, heavy pieces. I have nothing for sale, but if I did, I wouldn't consider $500 for one of them.Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now