GMT Master II: we have a weird one here...

[millemiglia]

I just stumbled upon this auction on the bay, where a guy is selling a weird fish:

Note the GMT's two written like this "||"

The guy says it's a D serial from 2006 and as a matter of facts the watch he is selling doesn't have lugholes on the case (here's the link: ebay auc.).

What I'm pondering is, wasn't this type of dial a rare beast only released shortly a long time ago? (if I got By-Tor's guide correctly)

What exactly is he selling?

[w.genzo]

yes, and definetely gen

[By-Tor]

That watch looks 100% genuine, and it's just a rare II font variation. And these weird II's have been around a few years, they're not only on brand new watches.

The model with lugholes and SELs was briefly available in the early 2000's, but lugholes disappeared already in 2001 or 2002. Everything is correct on that watch, it's a beauty!

[millemiglia]

I thought only old GMTs with lug-holes had that type of dial!

So, it disappeared and then they put it back in production?

[By-Tor]

Rolex has always been inconsistent with those changes. That dial variation might have been in the older models as well.

There's no logic there, just inconsistency. Similar example is the bezel insert on the red/black GMT... on some red/black versions the red is extremely dark (maroon, almost no red at all) and it's a bit lighter and more "colorful" on the other ones. I've seen 2 brand new red/blacks in the AD and the inserts had different tone. Same thing with the Sans Serif font on the insert, versus the standard font (that this watch uses).

[millemiglia]

Rolex has always been inconsistent with those changes. That dial variation might have been in the older models as well.

There's no logic there, just inconsistency. Similar example is the bezel insert on the red/black GMT... on some red/black versions the red is extremely dark (maroon, almost no red at all) and it's a bit lighter and more "colorful" on the other ones. I've seen 2 brand new red/blacks in the AD and the inserts had different tone. Same thing with the Sans Serif font on the insert, versus the standard font (that this watch uses).

Could it be that producing watches in different factories is causing this mess? (where's their QC? )

At any rate, we now know that this type of dial doesn't come only for older GMTs!

Will you update the complete guide (it's not a "retro" dial anymore )?

[By-Tor]

I never said it was a "retro" dial on the gens... I only said that Joshua's "retro" GMT replica has that kind of dial.

[TwoTone]

I thought only old GMTs with lug-holes had that type of dial!

So, it disappeared and then they put it back in production?

Saw one in an AD just a few weeks ago...

2007 Model with another setting right next to it with the other II...

Rolex can be as inconsistent as our Factories...

Double T

[millemiglia]

Indeed,

My mistaken interpretation of By-Tor's guide might have come from the fact that the wrongly positioned Lug-holes on Joshua's rep are quite a pain, I used to think they were there because that dial "was to be coupled with that type of case", and we now learn they could have made an almost perfect out-of-the-box rep with a standard noob case...(why make a "retro" version at all?! )

[By-Tor]

You can modify the Noob 16710 to almost perfect state, but not all people have the passion and willingness to do the numerous mods. That's why the Retro is a great otb option.

And besides, the Retro has a perfect GMT hand and "triangle", just like the correct stack version of the "Noob". It's too thick on the wrong stack rep (for some weird reason). Retro also has excellent crown.

Mods required for the Noob:

Bezel

Insert

Crown guards

Crown

Possibly realign the cyclops

New thinner GMT hand (for the wrong stack version)

After all the mods the correct stack Noob GMT is almost perfect. Well, as "perfect" as replicas can ever be. Mine has a good smaller crown installed now (after shooting the picture).

Rep (after heavy mods, still the bad default crown

installed):

Gen:

Dials (gen on the right)

Why all these mods are required and the factory didn't fix those problems... beats me.

[JohnG]

Everything is correct on that watch, it's a beauty!

Lackluster feedback score for seller though. I would stay away.

http://toolhaus.org/cgi-bin/negs?User=%09e...by&ref=home

Add 6 neutrals (stealth negs) and 6 mutually withdrawn negs and you get 97.5% positive - not too hot in my book. Not when others selling the same items can maintain high 99s.

Edited May 19, 2008 by JohnG

[southcoast68]

Rolex has always been inconsistent with those changes. That dial variation might have been in the older models as well.

There's no logic there, just inconsistency. Similar example is the bezel insert on the red/black GMT... on some red/black versions the red is extremely dark (maroon, almost no red at all) and it's a bit lighter and more "colorful" on the other ones. I've seen 2 brand new red/blacks in the AD and the inserts had different tone. Same thing with the Sans Serif font on the insert, versus the standard font (that this watch uses).

Sometimes, it seems like the only thing consistant with Rolex is their INconsistency.

[By-Tor]

It's true. The best way to identify a gen is just to browse a lot of pictures. Case and overall construction on the gen always have certain characteristics that even the best reps can't capture 100%.

Sometimes we're talking about very small things. Occasionally I'm amazed even myself how much knowledge there is among our membership. It goes way beyond the Ultimate Geekdom.

[millemiglia]

I saw a TV show once that talked about how genuine luxury bags are assembled by underpaid illegal aliens in Italy and France for around 100 euro and then sold for 3500 (in working conditions similar to Rep factories in China).

I wouldn't be surprised in seeing official Rolex factories in similar situations (that would explain all those mis-aligned date wheels, uneven lumes, and general lack of QC...)

As for the rep factories themselves, what By-Tor said in one of his reviews (and here) is incredibly true: how can they nail a complex design like the Aquaracer at their first attempt and still make these mistakes on the Nth generation Rolex Replica?

Specially considering that they got those problems right here and there (TWB,MBW,NOOB-Factory,Joshua's Special etc.) but never altogether in the same watch

[By-Tor]

Yep... but modding the watches can be fascinating too. There are a few gems that have excellent bases, even among the modern Rolex reps.

I mean the ones that look fundamentally correct. Besides the MBW vintages, only WM9 Sub, "Noob" Explorer II and GMT II 16710 have excellent bases.

As nice the SSD is, it isn't in the same level. Everything is quite close, but the watch has fatal problems that you simply can't change. Just like the shallow rehaut on the Noobmariner.

Speaking of Noobmariner... it has perfect rehaut depth for the no-date Sub. Who's the first one to drill the lugholes, swap the dial and install a non-SEL bracelet there? That would be a smash hit, if the factory did that. But I'm not holding my breath.