yellomen Posted December 24, 2007 Report Share Posted December 24, 2007 I was just looking at the website of one of the cartell members and saw pictures of his MBW 1665 vintage seadweller. They state it's a copy of the MBW... The first and probably only thing that comes to mind is... "SCAMMERS!!!!!" If that's a copy of an MBW it's been made by a blind lepra patient. The dial... please don't speak of this dial and mention MBW/MBK in the same sentence. The case... hilarious... except when you wanna sell it as MBW What a disgrace... so be sooooo aware of thescamms of the cartell and consider this when spending your hard earned money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loewenheart Posted December 25, 2007 Report Share Posted December 25, 2007 Don't knock it till you try it..... Let's have a side by side comparison! L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 There is a new copy of the MBW1665 sea-dweller that was just released. Angus has them and he clearly states they are copied from the MBW case. But Angus also charges a LOT less money than the MBW sells for. These might be them who knows. We'll need someone to do a comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Why don't they call it CBW for China best watch then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mezzanine Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 It'll be interesting to see if these accept genuine parts. Assuming they do, then even if it's of a lesser quality than the MBW's, practically, it will be the same. It all comes down to the ability to accept genuine parts. I think they'll have a successful product if they're functionally similar to the MBW's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellomen Posted December 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Don't knock it till you try it..... Let's have a side by side comparison! L No need for a side by side, mate... just look at the pictures and let's not just believe what a dealer says. Have you guys seen the rehaut on the so called MBW 1665? Indeed... a completely different watch and if that's a 1:1 copy my name is Santa Claus Also the He valve is completely off and the dial print is just fugly. Sorry if i sound agitated, but I am actually quite upset as i thought Angus wouldn't post cartel-like crap ... but now he does. I also assumed people browsing this forum would be more critical about what is being offered and would have jumped at the so-called MBW 1665 posts instantly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corgi Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Narikaa reported to me direct from the markets, and in comparing the MBK Nautilus to the chinese "MBK" Nautilus - he said it was "close but no cigar". Overall, the quality is much better even though the accuracy is closer appearance-wise on the china model. I think its the same case here. What can you expect of a "rep of a rep?" Why not just get the original rep? I will never understand someone who spends their hard-earned money otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellomen Posted December 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Here are some pictures direct from MBW. These are the original MBW Rolex 1665 case set which is shipped with a Singer dial. I think MBW asks around 200 euro for the case + dial. The He valve is functional according to MBW and the tube is at the correct height for a genuine Rolex movement! Also have a look at the inside of the caseback! PS. this post is in no way intended as an advertisement!! Just to show the difference between the cheap and bad copied Cartell-MBW and the genuine MBW. Merely intended to protect potential customers who think they can buy a genuine MBW for almost nothing... sorry guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Sorry if i sound agitated, but I am actually quite upset as i thought Angus wouldn't post cartel-like crap ... but now he does. I also assumed people browsing this forum would be more critical about what is being offered and would have jumped at the so-called MBW 1665 posts instantly... You are not agitated mate...you are right ! Same with WM9 Sub in my honest opinion. There are hundreds of MBK (formerly MBW) out there and thousands of posts about them. I'm not surprised that some want to surf on the wave of their success. We all dream of a 1:1 watch...but they simply still do not exist. My two cents, Cheers Stephane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cskent69 Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Hey guys. Unless I am mistaken - that MBW 1665 is not longer available. I got my 1665 from George and it does not have that working HE valve. Is it really possible to get that one again? Also - has anyone had a good look at the new great white from Paso? He has the new caseback. But i think that the HE valve on that one is also just etched - not working. Would love some help on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mezzanine Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Here are some pictures direct from MBW. These are the original MBW Rolex 1665 case set which is shipped with a Singer dial. I think MBW asks around 200 euro for the case + dial. The He valve is functional according to MBW and the tube is at the correct height for a genuine Rolex movement! Also have a look at the inside of the caseback! PS. this post is in no way intended as an advertisement!! Just to show the difference between the cheap and bad copied Cartell-MBW and the genuine MBW. Merely intended to protect potential customers who think they can buy a genuine MBW for almost nothing... sorry guys. It's still a useful and necessary post, though. The MBK's are no joke. I was a skeptic, felt they were overvalued, but in the end I ended up with a few of them in my permanent collection on the basis of this quality. I don't even like the modern rollies...but damn if I don't love the vintages...if a watch has everything gen other than the case/movement, it's functionally and aesthetically a genuine rolex- and if you add a datewheel, even the movement is not questionable unless you crack the caseback. http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=64717 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Yeah the copy 1665 looks like it has a conical rehaut but it could just be the picture. but thats enough to keep me away for sure. The dial is probably just a generic dial.. as far as i know they just copied the case and not the other parts. It doesnt look 1:1 with the MBW though.. i think they just copied the case thickness more than anything, but i could be wrong. Heres a few pics i stole from Angus so you guys can see it here This rehaut looks a LOT different than my gen MBW1665. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellomen Posted December 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 So - this case is probably (most probably) of NO use at all. Amen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loewenheart Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 Okay, so Angus hasn't quite got it right yet... But let's not forget that the mbw is just a copy, a good one but just a copy nonetheless. And it's NOT made in Switzerland either. I don't see any reason why Angus would not be able to provide us with a 1665 or 1680 at MBW specs in the future. Just invest in some new molds. Invention and continuous quality improvement will benefit suppliers and customers alike! L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 No need for a side by side, mate... just look at the pictures and let's not just believe what a dealer says. Have you guys seen the rehaut on the so called MBW 1665? Indeed... a completely different watch and if that's a 1:1 copy my name is Santa Claus Also the He valve is completely off and the dial print is just fugly. Sorry if i sound agitated, but I am actually quite upset as i thought Angus wouldn't post cartel-like crap ... but now he does. I also assumed people browsing this forum would be more critical about what is being offered and would have jumped at the so-called MBW 1665 posts instantly... Psssst Angus is part of the Cartel... Andrew, Angus, Joshua and King. That it (or certainly was) the membership, unless there have been breakaways from the group... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 It's still a useful and necessary post, though. The MBK's are no joke. I was a skeptic, felt they were overvalued, but in the end I ended up with a few of them in my permanent collection on the basis of this quality. I don't even like the modern rollies...but damn if I don't love the vintages...if a watch has everything gen other than the case/movement, it's functionally and aesthetically a genuine rolex- and if you add a datewheel, even the movement is not questionable unless you crack the caseback. http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=64717 Sorry, dude, but that's just funny Given a movement is what makes a watch function, without a genuine Rolex movement in it, (and every other part genuine Rolex stock) then such watches will never functionally be genuine Rolex. Don't get me wrong, I really admire the people who build their watches by sourcing parts, and there are some really nice examples on the boards, but, at the end of the day, unless every part in the watch is genuine stock, it will still be a replica. It's a bit like a comment I read on a HotRod forum, where someone wanted to restore a Model T which was in seriously bad condition, with a huge rust problem. Members pointed out, that, due to the sheer amount of metal which would have to be replaced, and using aftermarket parts, by the time the project was completed, it would be considered a 'replica', rather than a 'restoration'. And of course, there's always the Curse of the Rolex, where someone will always ask "Is that real??" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellomen Posted December 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 Well... maybe i'm not such a purist as the hotrod Ford T lover and Rolex people... when i have a case with another solid movement inside like an ETA 2824-2 i'm more than happy. To me that's as good as a genuine Rolex... no even better! And better because i think the prices of vintage SD's and Sub's are completely insane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 I don't see any reason why Angus would not be able to provide us with a 1665 or 1680 at MBW specs in the future. Just invest in some new molds. You say this as if Angus makes the watches. He doesn't, he just buys/sells them. The longer I'm in this hobby, the more I realise we're not the driving force behind what gets made and what doesn't, and the more I realise that improvements won't happen because we want them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TTK Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 (edited) why go through all the hassles involved and take such a stupid piece as a MBW. Why not take a genuine or a better case. MBW's The simple reason is that Angus wants to trade on a recognised and highly desirable 'brand' name....MBW / MBK.....this is just another example of his crass attempts at cashing in on the MBW / MBK name....he's done it waith The Nautilus....he's done it with Rollies.....he's trying to d it with the AP's.....and regardless of whether MBK's are 'just' fakes or not.....Angus has NOT been able to pull it off.......NONE....and I mean NONE of his 'fakes' of a 'fake' come up to scrathc....it's bad enough that MBk don't reach the mark....but when a dealer simply uses marketing hyperbole to advance sales....it's time something was done.......I'd like to see him desist from lying about these and describing these as MBW/MBk's.....they are NOT....NOT ONE OF THEM ORIGINATED AT MBK....NOT ONE OF HIS PATEK's....NOT ONE OF HIS ROLLIES....NOT ONE OF HIS AP'S.......and NONE OF THEM WAS EVER OFFERED BY Maria...it's just another example of a dealer lying about his product./.....IF THESE WERE SO GOOD....WHY DOES HE NOT OFFER THEM AS ALTERNATIVES TO MBK.....it's surely time someone came up with an alternative....and able to stand on it's own feet......these are just NOT the alternatives......NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES HE SCREAMS MBW/MBK'S' IN HIS SALES POST HEADERS.....HE'S LYING........! Edited December 28, 2007 by TTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 The longer I'm in this hobby, the more I realise we're not the driving force behind what gets made and what doesn't, and the more I realise that improvements won't happen because we want them. I do agree with you Pug. If we were the driving force we would have 1:1 Rolex since ages ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mezzanine Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 Sorry, dude, but that's just funny Given a movement is what makes a watch function, without a genuine Rolex movement in it, (and every other part genuine Rolex stock) then such watches will never functionally be genuine Rolex. Don't get me wrong, I really admire the people who build their watches by sourcing parts, and there are some really nice examples on the boards, but, at the end of the day, unless every part in the watch is genuine stock, it will still be a replica. It's a bit like a comment I read on a HotRod forum, where someone wanted to restore a Model T which was in seriously bad condition, with a huge rust problem. Members pointed out, that, due to the sheer amount of metal which would have to be replaced, and using aftermarket parts, by the time the project was completed, it would be considered a 'replica', rather than a 'restoration'. And of course, there's always the Curse of the Rolex, where someone will always ask "Is that real??" Who said they were genuine Rolex? It could be that our meanings of the terms 'function' are different. My point was quite simple: I have a 'vintage 1680' that I paid 10-15% of what I've seen them going for with papers to own. This watch appears every bit the part of the 'real' watch, and as well it should, as almost all of the aesthetically significant parts are genuine. I have no delusion about the actual 'authenticity' of the watch. However, if you look at the relative rep/gen price ratio, they're not a whole lot different than many other reps to own. A movement might be what makes a watch to you, not necessarily to me if I'm a rep enthusiast. For me, it might the appearance of the watch. Considering you couldn't spot my movement as 'fake' without cracking the caseback, what do I really care if you don't think it's real? This is a rep forum, right? Damn if it isn't a lot of fun to actually build and source parts for your own watch, and have the ability to use a case that accepts genuine parts to do so. Personally, I think it's one of the cooler things we have at our disposal. Your car example is off in left field somewhere.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mezzanine Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 The simple reason is that Angus wants to trade on a recognised and highly desirable 'brand' name....MBW / MBK.....this is just another example of his crass attempts at cashing in on the MBW / MBK name....he's done it waith The Nautilus....he's done it with Rollies.....he's trying to d it with the AP's.....and regardless of whether MBK's are 'just' fakes or not.....Angus has NOT been able to pull it off.......NONE....and I mean NONE of his 'fakes' of a 'fake' come up to scrathc....it's bad enough that MBk don't reach the mark....but when a dealer simply uses marketing hyperbole to advance sales....it's time something was done.......I'd like to see him desist from lying about these and describing these as MBW/MBk's.....they are NOT....NOT ONE OF THEM ORIGINATED AT MBK....NOT ONE OF HIS PATEK's....NOT ONE OF HIS ROLLIES....NOT ONE OF HIS AP'S.......and NONE OF THEM WAS EVER OFFERED BY Maria...it's just another example of a dealer lying about his product./.....IF THESE WERE SO GOOD....WHY DOES HE NOT OFFER THEM AS ALTERNATIVES TO MBK.....it's surely time someone came up with an alternative....and able to stand on it's own feet......these are just NOT the alternatives......NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES HE SCREAMS MBW/MBK'S' IN HIS SALES POST HEADERS.....HE'S LYING........! I hope that the guy who runs MBK is conscious of this potential conflict of interest and avoids selling any 'lots' of watches to the cartel dealers, as he did with Josh recently with the vintage rollies. When that happens, it creates a perception of ambiguity in the minds of the average buyer. "They've got them sometimes..." kinda thing. The issue about the false marketing and copying of MBK watches is one that should be addressed. We're supposed to be 'protecting' the rep buyer from this type of stuff, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 Who said they were genuine Rolex? It could be that our meanings of the terms 'function' are different. You did. Right here: if a watch has everything gen other than the case/movement, it's functionally and aesthetically a genuine rolex My point was quite simple: I have a 'vintage 1680' that I paid 10-15% of what I've seen them going for with papers to own. This watch appears every bit the part of the 'real' watch, and as well it should, as almost all of the aesthetically significant parts are genuine. I have no delusion about the actual 'authenticity' of the watch. However, if you look at the relative rep/gen price ratio, they're not a whole lot different than many other reps to own. A movement might be what makes a watch to you, not necessarily to me if I'm a rep enthusiast. For me, it might the appearance of the watch. Considering you couldn't spot my movement as 'fake' without cracking the caseback, what do I really care if you don't think it's real? This is a rep forum, right? Damn if it isn't a lot of fun to actually build and source parts for your own watch, and have the ability to use a case that accepts genuine parts to do so. Personally, I think it's one of the cooler things we have at our disposal. Your car example is off in left field somewhere.... Absolutley, you're quite right, this is a rep forum, and indeed, I couldn't care less if a watch has an Asian or Swiss movement in it. Actually, that's not quite true. By choice, I prefer Asian movements. I've found them to be more reliable, but that's just my own experience. Indeed, it doesn't matter what kind of movement it is, I just thought it was funny that you said that if the watch had everything but a gen movement, then it was aesthetically/functionally gen. I admit, it's a Ship of Theseus debate. Say someone has a gen watch, but the movement dies, so it gets taken to a local watch smith who throws in a POS movement. Does that mean the watch is no longer 'genuine'? Of course it doesn't, at least, not to the owner, or anyone knowing the watch's history. If someone were to build, from scratch, the exact same watch, people would be less inclined to consider it 'functionally genuine'. Indeed, it is cool to get parts and build something up, but, at the end of the day, the movement and the case are the most important parts. They're like the foundations of a house, or the canvas on which a masterpiece is painted. Without those key parts, the rest of the watch simply doesn't go together, and, as I said before, as the movement is what makes the watch function, then, if you want the watches functionality to be genuine, then you're going to need a genuine movement. I totally agree with what you've said, I was just amused by the expression you used Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted December 29, 2007 Report Share Posted December 29, 2007 You say this as if Angus makes the watches. He doesn't, he just buys/sells them. The longer I'm in this hobby, the more I realise we're not the driving force behind what gets made and what doesn't, and the more I realise that improvements won't happen because we want them. Yes there is only one thing that drives the rep makers.....the mighty dollar. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sql_pl Posted December 29, 2007 Report Share Posted December 29, 2007 So you guys think Angus' MBW OffShores and EoDs are reps of MBW reps? 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.