sanro Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 After having been lucky with the 027A (managed to get one with the 2892 movement ) I am a bit sceptical about my luck being big enough to get me a 029 with the 2892 too... ...so I am thinking going the Davidsen way and settling for the 2836-2 modded by him...once my wallet heals a bit from its recent (permanent?) loss of blood. Just wondering: Davidsen says in his specs that his 029 does not have AR coating...is that how it is supposed to be, i.e., like the gen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 After having been lucky with the 027A (managed to get one with the 2892 movement ) I am a bit sceptical about my luck being big enough to get me a 029 with the 2892 too... ...so I am thinking going the Davidsen way and settling for the 2836-2 modded by him...once my wallet heals a bit from its recent (permanent?) loss of blood. Just wondering: Davidsen says in his specs that his 029 does not have AR coating...is that how it is supposed to be, i.e., like the gen? Yes. A 29 should not have AR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadog13 Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 After having been lucky with the 027A (managed to get one with the 2892 movement ) I am a bit sceptical about my luck being big enough to get me a 029 with the 2892 too... ...so I am thinking going the Davidsen way and settling for the 2836-2 modded by him...once my wallet heals a bit from its recent (permanent?) loss of blood. Just wondering: Davidsen says in his specs that his 029 does not have AR coating...is that how it is supposed to be, i.e., like the gen? just a small correction...the 029 came with the eta2893-2 movement...and like the previous poster said...no AR on the 029... good luck with your search.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 At a guess, I would think that the watch (rep or gen) would not have AR because the cyclops would mar the appearance of the AR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subzero1 Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 Unless you get the Cyclops removed, and an AR coated Chieftang 7mm cyclops installed instead. That's what I'm doing. I don't care that the gen does not have AR, my rep will. What's the point of having a tuxedo dial if you can't see it clearly? The non-AR coated standard crystal completely washes out the dial and it's texture. K2222 is dong the crystal removal, the cyclops replacement, and the double AR coating, great service! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 Unless you get the Cyclops removed, and an AR coated Chieftang 7mm cyclops installed instead. That's what I'm doing. I don't care that the gen does not have AR, my rep will. What's the point of having a tuxedo dial if you can't see it clearly? The non-AR coated standard crystal completely washes out the dial and it's texture. K2222 is dong the crystal removal, the cyclops replacement, and the double AR coating, great service! I know it's a matter of personal taste, but I'd have to say that's a bit of an exageration... Okay, so reflections can obscure the dial a little, but I never found them so obscuring that the texture was un-noticeable... Then again, I like the 'subtle' quality which that gives the tuxedo dial, less 'in the face'... Either way, AR coating will definitely show the dial better, so best of luck with the procedure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sssurfer Posted December 5, 2007 Report Share Posted December 5, 2007 Just adding my voice to chieftang's and dadog's voices, and agreeing with subzero. @TeeJay: cyclops can go together with AR at no problems -- just, if it's single-side AR, it must be applied after the cyclops. I tried both single-side and double-side AR on PAMs. As I already reported elsewhere, the effect of single-side AR on the dial is small, but on the date readability is awesome! So, even single-side AR is an excellent fit on "cyclopsed" PAMs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subzero1 Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 I know it's a matter of personal taste, but I'd have to say that's a bit of an exageration... Okay, so reflections can obscure the dial a little, but I never found them so obscuring that the texture was un-noticeable... Then again, I like the 'subtle' quality which that gives the tuxedo dial, less 'in the face'... Either way, AR coating will definitely show the dial better, so best of luck with the procedure I dunno man, there's something about the crystal on the 029 that is particularly bad about washing out the dial. I think it's because it's so incredibly thick and has that subtle dome to it that really makes reflections pretty awful. It's probably the worst rep I've had for the washout effect. Which is why I'm pretty excited about the new cyclops and the double AR. The nice thing about both K2222' and chieftang's AR coatings is that they are very high quality, so they generally just make the crystal less visible, unlike some of the crappy rep AR's that flash blue in a glaring fashion. I've seen the quality AR effect on my Inge with it's textured dial. It didn't make it "in your face", it just let you see that there was actually texture to the dial. Before the AR, you could only see the texture from a few, very limited angles. Or, put another way, good AR lets the dial become a prominent part of the watch design and look. Without AR, the crystal (rather than the dial) is what becomes the prominent part of the look of the watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMK000 Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 Unless you get the Cyclops removed, and an AR coated Chieftang 7mm cyclops installed instead. That's what I'm doing. I don't care that the gen does not have AR, my rep will. What's the point of having a tuxedo dial if you can't see it clearly? The non-AR coated standard crystal completely washes out the dial and it's texture. I have the 029 with 2893-2 .... and I fully agree with you. Without AR you cannot really get the beauty of the Tuxedo dial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 Just adding my voice to chieftang's and dadog's voices, and agreeing with subzero. @TeeJay: cyclops can go together with AR at no problems -- just, if it's single-side AR, it must be applied after the cyclops. I tried both single-side and double-side AR on PAMs. As I already reported elsewhere, the effect of single-side AR on the dial is small, but on the date readability is awesome! So, even single-side AR is an excellent fit on "cyclopsed" PAMs. Ahh, that would certainly make sense if the cyclops is also treated to the AR coating process I dunno man, there's something about the crystal on the 029 that is particularly bad about washing out the dial. I think it's because it's so incredibly thick and has that subtle dome to it that really makes reflections pretty awful. It's probably the worst rep I've had for the washout effect. Which is why I'm pretty excited about the new cyclops and the double AR. The nice thing about both K2222' and chieftang's AR coatings is that they are very high quality, so they generally just make the crystal less visible, unlike some of the crappy rep AR's that flash blue in a glaring fashion. I've seen the quality AR effect on my Inge with it's textured dial. It didn't make it "in your face", it just let you see that there was actually texture to the dial. Before the AR, you could only see the texture from a few, very limited angles. Or, put another way, good AR lets the dial become a prominent part of the watch design and look. Without AR, the crystal (rather than the dial) is what becomes the prominent part of the look of the watch. It's interesting that you should think that, as I would say that the 2531.80 is one of the worst offenders at 'washing out', but, interestingly, the 029a and 2531.80 share many common design features. I have to admit, I don't find the 'washout' on my 029a as annoying as I find the the distortion at the edge of my 127 from it's shaped crystal, so I guess it is a case of personal taste and opinion. The one thing I would say, is do you find the 'washout' on a 029a annoying because the watch has that detailed dial rather than being 'plain', and would you find the same degree of 'washout' annoying on a watch like a 111h? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 I have the 029 with 2893-2 .... and I fully agree with you. Without AR you cannot really get the beauty of the Tuxedo dial. That is going to be my next watch send to K2222. On the other hand ,..... dont know why some members say that the gen has no AR (... I personally would like to see a link here describing the tec details of the gen watch). I belive from the pics ... that the gen has single AR. See the pics. You can see that there is a reflexion on the date mag but not on the rest of the dial. AR is the way to go with watch. It's personal preference. The A and B series PAMs (like the 29) didn't have AR. That's well known. Some people choose to add the AR anyone to see the dial and date mag better, and the difference is indeed drastic. Personally, as a purist, I wouldn't coat a 27, 28, 29, 63, etc. I have a 28 and a 63 and would like a 2892 29. But as much as I love my AR, I won't coat those watches. And when I did my 196, I only did a single side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddhead Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 ) I am a bit sceptical about my luck being big enough to get me a 029 with the 2892 too... They are out there, but they go fast. You really have to be jonny on the spot. I have one, and it is my favorite rep even without mods (although I think I have to get those done too) 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