besides AR is there anything else?

[rolexconfuse]

I went to the local AD today and took a look at the GMT II Ceramic and the AR makes a huge difference. Any rolex owner who has a gen or who's looked at the gen will be able tell that the rep is a rep without even having to handle the rep. The non AR cyclops on the rep sticks out like a sore thumb.

Besides sending the cyclops for AR is there anything else that one can use to stop all the reflective? isn't there some consumer anti-glare solution available?

[onzenuub]

Place a cloth over it, it will stop all the reflective. Sorry , couldn't resist.

[its_urabus]

as with the SSD, I believe the SEL's are a tell. they don't have the correct curve. anyone else agree? the lack of AR can be fixed now...

[HauteHippie]

I'd go with real AR. Nothing else is going to look.... real. And it makes a big difference. I should be able to start offering AR on GMT IIc magnifiers for $30 during regular AR runs.

[rolexconfuse]

I'd go with real AR. Nothing else is going to look.... real. And it makes a big difference. I should be able to start offering AR on GMT IIc magnifiers for $30 during regular AR runs.

Hey chief will you offer cyclops removal service as well? I'm not comfortable with doing it myself and I'm afraid that customs may take my watch if i have to send it out to a 3rd party. If it's a price thing or something else that you don't want to post publicly you can pm thanks. I'm based in the US

[HauteHippie]

Hey chief will you offer cyclops removal service as well? I'm not comfortable with doing it myself and I'm afraid that customs may take my watch if i have to send it out to a 3rd party. If it's a price thing or something else that you don't want to post publicly you can pm thanks. I'm based in the US

No, I won't be offering the service. But there are a couple US based people who I think will do it. You can PM me for their names, but I will tell you up front I know nothing about the quality of their work. So you'll want to do you due diligence before sending anything to them.

[lanikai]

Sorry Mr. confuse ... you can try and circumvent Chiefs AR.. and as we have tried to tell you .. there is no way to do this

But conversely most of the general population does not know this watch exists.. let alone what AR is unless your talking to an avid watch collector.. in which case you should not hold out your rep for inspection... give it some time.. and in time you will learn how to remove the crystal and the mag and then learn how to reinstall it.. by the time chief has his next run you may have learned how to do this by yourself..

believe me when I say "if I can do it you can too" .. it's just the fear factor in screwing up.. but it is not like tearing apart the movement believe me ...

of course that's easy for me to say since it took me awhile to take the initiative to do it..

[freddy333]

Assuming you know what to look for (the vast majority of gen Rolex owners KNOW NOTHING about their watches beyond the name on the dial), there is no way to hide the lack of AR on the underside of the cyclops. The gen GMTIIC has a very unique appearance because it is the only watch that I am aware of that was designed like this. But, again, few gen owners know that their GMTIIC contains AR or how to detect it from a non-AR watch.

[HauteHippie]

Assuming you know what to look for (the vast majority of gen Rolex owners KNOW NOTHING about their watches beyond the name on the dial), there is no way to hide the lack of AR on the underside of the cyclops. The gen GMTIIC has a very unique appearance because it is the only watch that I am aware of that was designed like this. But, again, few gen owners know that their GMTIIC contains AR or how to detect it from a non-AR watch.

While it's true that they don't know there is AR on their magnifier, they would certainly notice something odd about a watch whose magnifier looked different... It's quite a drastic difference, and I don't think even the casual know-nothing Rolex owner would miss it.

[rolexconfuse]

chief has it right, that non-ar cyclops is hugeee. If you check out the real deal you'll see what a big difference it is.

[lanikai]

chief has it right, that non-ar cyclops is hugeee. If you check out the real deal you'll see what a big difference it is.

So what your saying is what chief has said is correct ??.. sheesh .. imagine that..

[llsteve80]

when I handled the gen at the AD this weekend, I was the one who told them about the AR. didnt even abbreviate it or anything. The guy had to pull out an exp II just to see what I was talking about. He's been there 25 years too......

[freddy333]

when I handled the gen at the AD this weekend, I was the one who told them about the AR. didnt even abbreviate it or anything. The guy had to pull out an exp II just to see what I was talking about. He's been there 25 years too......

Yup, that has generally been my experience as well. For years, TZ has been filled with threads describing exactly the same thing & the conclusion is always the same - we are warped because we spend so much time neurosing over slight variations in watches, while the rest of the world mostly stops looking after they read the name on the dial. Do you really think this woman, who obviously has a thing for Rolex (she appears to be wearing 1), would notice that our GMTIICs lack AR on the bottom of the cyclops

[HauteHippie]

Clearly us WIS nerds are modding watches more for ourselves than for weird MILFs. Those who can live with fixable flaws have an advantage over me, for sure. Because I, for one, get too easily distracted by them.

Can't wait to see how lanikai's cyclops turns out!

[cskent69]

I am also pretty scared of trying to take the cyclops off. I guess the logical question for you Chief, is - is it possible to just buy cyclopes (somewhere) and have those ARed - so if I screw up taking the one I have off - I know that I have another that I can simply put on with UV glue?

Is there a place to buy these cyclopses. Like, could someone simply get a bunch from the rep manufacturers? Anyone have a connection?

Edited July 7, 2008 by cskent69

[lanikai]

Clearly us WIS nerds are modding watches more for ourselves than for weird MILFs. Those who can live with fixable flaws have an advantage over me, for sure. Because I, for one, get too easily distracted by them.

Can't wait to see how lanikai's cyclops turns out!

Agree 100% Chief.. remember when the GMTIIc first arrived members were saying it's so good they don't mind the lack of AR in the mag as a flaw . and there were those of us who said it's just a matter of time? .. that lasted 1 week.... not even .. as everytime I looked at the piece etc. etc. ...like you said "distracted"

And IMO.. your Ar will look better than the genuine...

Edit to add: it may appear to have a whole in the crystal with your AR.. come to think of it..

[indyberetta]

I think a source for the cyclops and sending them to chief might be a good idea. Anyone know a source for the cyclops purchased individually?

[HauteHippie]

I bought a krysworks "2.5X" Rolex cyclops once and it was probably more like 1.5X. So, avoid them for sure.

[lanikai]

I bought a krysworks "2.5X" Rolex cyclops once and it was probably more like 1.5X. So, avoid them for sure.

yes.. need to be certain that they are .. 2.5..

browse Ebay.. some of the saphire tropics are about 25 to 45 usd.... worth it to me to use for the mag only .. just make sure they are not the pexi crystals.. and not ladies models.. ...

Edit to add:

@freddy... all I have to say is:.. how quickly can you remove your rolex (with all sense of ugency).... be it Genuine or replica if U saw her approaching ??

[freddy333]

@freddy... all I have to say is:.. how quickly can you remove your rolex (with all sense of ugency).... be it Genuine or replica if U saw her approaching ??

Good point.

[Dizzy]

i have to agree with freddy.. 99% of watch guys wouldnt spot a new super rep if it jumped up and bit them in the ball sack. Its mostly the rep nerds like us that know all the ins and outs of the watches. I would be willing to bet that the senior guys here know MORE about gen watches than the senior guys on gen forums like Timezone. We seem to know EVERYTHING and every flaw and detail between rep and gen watches... no gen forum guys can touch our skills when it comes to small details.

Anyways.. I still dont understand why ROlex doesnt AR thier crystals.. just doesnt make sense to me. When i get my new GMT i'm going to send the whole crystal for double AR.. why not? I bet after doing double AR to mine.. i could put it next to some dude with a gen and CONVINCE him that his is fake because of the glare on the crystal LOL or at least convince them that his crystal is aftermarket haha. I wouldnt ever do that but i thiink AR on a rolex would put it to the next level. Im gunna do mine and post before and after pics and you guys can be the judge

dizz

[rolexconfuse]

guys let me know if you found a place where you can get some 2.5x crystals. I rather just have the whole thing AR'ed and then just find some watch maker to replace the crystal for me.

[Star69]

don't get my wrong i like the rep - but :

the AR is really easy noticeable - same the too fat font on the bezel -

but the easiest way to spot the rep are the way too long SELs.

if you have the rep in your hand you could spot the wrong

bezel-handling, GMT-time setting , rep-serial number ect

i would leave the watch as it is and just pray that the movement stays alive

cheers,

Frank

[jake48]

Have to agree that the AR is one of the easy tells on this watch, but most people here seem to have it right when they say that the AR is something only really anal watch freaks (like us) and WIS's will notice, and even then, probably only if you held the watch, not likely on the wrist. You have to get the watch 12 inches (304.78mm for my Euro buds) from your face to really notice anything that ditinguishes the Rep from the Gen.

As far as the AR goes, most people who are saying how EASY the AR flaw is to spot have probably never really looked at the Gen outside. It makes a huge difference. When you look at the watch under the flourescent lighting of an AD, or in some cases other types of artificial lighting, the AR (or lack of AR in the Rep case) is much more noticable. Take the two watches into natural light and it is almost impossible to see any differences in the cyclops reflection. Try it out if you have the chance - you might be suprised of the results...

[freddy333]

I would like to add that the 1st time I handled the gen GMTIIC (in an AD), I did not notice the AR on the cyclops (nor did the sales woman mention it). Later that evening, I saw the 1st good, close-up pic of the GMTIIC posted on TZ. Here is that picture

Of course, it was nearly impossible for me, an admitted WIS, not to see the way the cyclops reflected light differently than the rest of the dial, but I went away thinking, 'What a cool photographic effect. I have to figure out how he did that.' And I spent a couple days experimenting, trying to get the same 'effect' on 1 of my watches, but to no avail. Then, some time later, there was a thread on TZ where a couple of the long-time members were asking the owner of the GMTIIC how he did that effect? (Apparently, I was not the only 1.) After the owner explained that the cyclops was AR'd, I made my 2nd reconnaissance trip back to the AD to try on the GMTIIC again. That time I noticed it & it is 1 of those things that once you know about it, you see it all the time. Like suddenly becoming aware of a particular car that you have probably seen hundreds of times before without noticing, but once it gets associated with something special, you start seeing it everywhere. And that is the way the GMTIIC & its AR'd cyclops affected me.

The point is that even a WIS like me did not notice the AR'd cyclops until I had seen it up-close with that picture. And, even then, I attributed it to a photo effect. So I just do not see how the average gen owner or man on the street could possibly ID my rep as anything other than a gen Rolex watch when 'out in the wild'. At least, not based on the appearance of the cyclops.