By-Tor Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Here's a few good outside photos of the new GMTIIc, that I found from Ebay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsterRider Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Nice shots! Does anyone have the rep of this model yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Those are beautiful pic BT .. I'm wondering why the price tag on it is way below the norm... the lowest i was offered was 6500 which is a very good deal this is i believe below 5000 usd ?? may i add these..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Great sighting, By-Tor. Any rep owner have a pic showing your rep's date window from this angle (dead-on)? That is the 1 view I have not seen yet & the main thing that concerns me about this new rep. A poor font (too thin, odd shape, etc.), inaccurate cyclops magnification or obvious misalignment in the date window can undo the best of reps. On the other hand, it the GMTIIC gets this right, then this may just be a 'super' rep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Thanks Lani. That helps -- it looks like the magnification is similar. A major biggie in my book. But I want to compare apples to apples. Could you shoot a '22' (on its side), so I can see how the font matches the gen in By-Tor's picture? Or, even better, in addition to the 22, pics of 3, 13, 23 & 31 would be spectacular. And, just so we are all on the same planet here, I am assuming the pic you just posted is the new rep & not a gen......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 They dont want much round here do they This looks good apart from the size of the numbers in the bezel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 sorry .. double posted.... hope this post below is enough f333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 freddy333 Posted Today, 05:08 PM Thanks Lani. That helps -- it looks like the magnification is similar. A major biggie in my book. But I want to compare apples to apples. Could you shoot a '22' (on its side), so I can see how the font matches the gen in By-Tor's picture? Or, even better, in addition to the 22, pics of 3, 13, 23 & 31 would be spectacular. And, just so we are all on the same planet here, I am assuming the pic you just posted is the new rep & not a gen......... rep or genuine??? all I can say is .. wear it in "confidence"... the Sun is setting freddy and I don't have time to set up .. the sun is low and the light is bouncing all over the place.. so this will do until at least tomorrow sheesh.. don't you want the rest of the dates ???.. KIDDING >> KIDDING *note.. the 23 date is not off centered i left the crown open and while handling the rep.. inadvertently moved the crown.. so when adjusted it is centered correctly.. and regarding the lume .. it is getting stronger.. it really needs about 30 minutes of charging under lights .. but i haven't put this piece down yet.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 rep or genuine??? all I can say is .. wear it in "confidence"... the Sun is setting freddy and I don't have time to set up .. the sun is low and the light is bouncing all over the place.. so this will do until at least tomorrow That will do fine, Lani. Great work. Thank you. Except for the wide spacing between the '3' & '1' (By-Tor's 16710 has the same funky spacing on that date), I am sold. Where do I order? No, wait.......I already ordered. and regarding the lume .. it is getting stronger.. it really needs about 30 minutes of charging under lights .. but i haven't put this piece down yet.. I can see why not. And as long as the index markers are the correct size & in the right locations, the brightness of the lume is pretty much a secondary issue to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightstroker Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Ya that guy does take some nice photos....I have seen his stuff on ebay before....he has A LOT of Rolex for sale....every model it seems....at decent prices....looks like hes selling em right out of his house....posh neighborhood....he must be an AD or has direct connection to one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted June 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Am I the only one who's bothered with the engraving? It's not just the wrong and too dark font, but ROLEXROLEXROLEX should start exactly at '3 and 9' and it's way out of place on the rep. Why did they screw up something like that on a watch that's otherwise so well done? Especially when the engraving is at least symmetrically correct on almost all cheapie rep versions of this watch. Yeah, I've heard the engraving is not that noticeable, but I still think it's a serious flaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 That's the same pictures as this guy here is advertising with. Rolex24h.com Apparently someone on the other forums, RG or TZ, checked the information behind the URL and it was a Russian guy. Probably a scam. If it's too good to be true... Nice pictures though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Am I the only one who's bothered with the engraving? It's not just the wrong and too dark font, but ROLEXROLEXROLEX should start exactly at '3 and 9' and it's way out of place on the rep. Why did they screw up something like that on a watch that's otherwise so well done? Especially when the engraving is at least symmetrically correct on almost all cheapie rep versions of this watch. Yeah, I've heard the engraving is not that noticeable, but I still think it's a serious flaw. Hmmmm..... I did notice the darker appearance of the engraving, but, actually, when I see them side by side, the rep's darker engraving looks more 'gen' (I was planning to lightly sand the rehaut while I have the movement out to install the gen Triplock & I think that should lighten it up a bit). As for the alignment of the engraving at 3 & 9, you are right (never noticed that before). But, then, I have never noticed it (or bothered to look) once on any gen ever since Rolex started engraving the rehaut. It would be nice if they got that right, but, as you know, they ALWAYS get something wrong on an otherwise near-perfect rep. If this is that 'something', I can easily live with it since they did get right the part of the engraving I DO always check -- the engraved crown should be dead-on at 12 with the 'X' centered over the 59 minute mark & the 'R' centered over the 1 minute mark, which they are. But, as always, my benchmark is that the watch pass for a gen from a viewing distance of a few feet. And from that distance, especially the way light tends to cast either shadows or glare spots on the rehaut, I doubt that anyone would be able to see that much detail. Even so, if that is the biggest flaw in this rep, I think I can live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiparks Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 as mentioned, on the gen, from 12 around to the srail # at 6, the "X" in Rolex always lines up to a 5 minute marker. After the serial #, going back up to 12, it's always a "R" at the 5 minute markers... The biggest tell for me, is still the numbers on the bezel. On the gen, the numbers appear to be cut out of a thick layer of the black ceramic, so the inner edges of the numbers appear dark. On the rep, the numbers appear engraved into the metal with a thin layer of black applied over the top, so you have a sort of silver edge to them that the light catches, giving the illusion that the numbers are fatter.....maybe the next generation of reps can dupe the effect... That said, i really, really want one of these bad...like others, I'm not a big rolex fan, but I'm kicking myself for not ordering one of the first ones...if they become available again with the correct hand stack i won't hesitate.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 The biggest tell for me, is still the numbers on the bezel. On the gen, the numbers appear to be cut out of a thick layer of the black ceramic, so the inner edges of the numbers appear dark. On the rep, the numbers appear engraved into the metal with a thin layer of black applied over the top, so you have a sort of silver edge to them that the light catches, giving the illusion that the numbers are fatter.....maybe the next generation of reps can dupe the effect... Hopefully, 1 of the members who already received their watch can chime in, but it could just be the ambient lighting in the pictures. 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