Fake SD on timezone?

[Leifhaus]

A post by a new user on the Rolex Forum on TZ, is it a SSD Replica?

Honestly the SSD is such a good replica that it's hard for me to tell fake from GEN, but somehow immediately I sensed this was fake. What do you all think?

http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=msg...373#msg_3908036

[therebel]

EDIT I'm a moron.

[Leifhaus]

I don't know much about Rolex but I'm pretty sure this is gen.

The pearl looks too small and maybe just the angle of the light but the date wheel seems to be a bit deep. And something about the rehaut, but it could be the lighting.

[By-Tor]

That's a rep, and not very good one at that.

Look at the wonky, cheap ass SELs, bad (thin) rehaut, bad pearl, bad bezel, bad datefont, bad everything.

Looks like the Chinese "Super" SeaDweller to me.

[triplehd]

Hard to tell, but isnt the crown alot bigger than the gen crown? Looks like the CGs weren't modded either.

Again, dumb dumb dumb if that person did post a rep on a gen forum. Why? If ya want to fool someone, fool your 2 year brother or sister.

[polexpete]

Yeah pearl is way off, date font looks too big and the SEL's are just like on an SSD... offer him a 100 bucks

P.

[docblackrock]

That poster will get ripped a new one, that's for sure. What a moron, trying that on. I see James Dowling coming down the virtual corridor with a nail-studded shillelagh

[kbh]

First thing that jumped out at me was the HE valve in the reflection. That screams SSD.

[nkwell]

The CG's are what screamed REP to me on this one.

Just out of curiousity, what is the first thing you tend to look for when someone posts the "Rep or Gen" question?

I almost always drawn to the CG's first, but I am wondering if that is typical of the other members..

[ProZac]

Jesus! Nice rep, I hope this guy is faking his post

[JohnG]

No doubt this guy is a [censored] and the SSD has flaws and is not a super rep - fine. But WTF with the hostility towards this watch? I have not seen another rep that gets [censored] on as consistently as this watch.

Some of us own it and might even like it. It is entirely possible to point out tells on a rep without ridiculing it.

[Fidestro]

No doubt this guy is a [censored] and the SSD has flaws and is not a super rep - fine. But WTF with the hostility towards this watch? I have not seen another rep that gets [censored] on as consistently as this watch.

Some of us own it and might even like it. It is entirely possible to point out tells on a rep without ridiculing it.

I am just guessing, but it appears some of the hostility toward the ignorant assbag who posted a rep on a gen forum is being redirected to call the watch in question [censored].

[Sir-Lancelot]

I think the SSD is a great rep. The best SD we have seen yet and miles away from what we had. Prefect? No. Is this guy stupid for posting it on TZ? YES!

Hate the playa not the game.

[Dutchy]

I love the timeline on those threads. Perfect definition of a timebomb!

"Welcome to the forum!" ----> "Great watch" ----> "It looks fake" ---> "BAN HIM!"

LOL. You gotta love it.

And hey, look at that....2k posts for me

[JohnG]

I love the timeline on those threads. Perfect definition of a timebomb!

"Welcome to the forum!" ----> "Great watch" ----> "It looks fake" ---> "BAN HIM!"

LOL. You gotta love it.

And hey, look at that....2k posts for me

Congrats!

Though I am as aware as most people here of the myriad flaws in that watch, it is worth noting that the VAST majority of posters at TZ didn't notice - and one guy who OWNS a gen is saying he doesn't see the problem with it even after others have called it out. This reinforces me belief that most people, even gen owners, generally don't spend hours, days, and weeks analyzing the tells of fake versions of their own watches. There are a few people who will spot these things - and they are WIS's, suspicious by nature, AND have the benefit of a frozen target blown up about four times larger than life to analyze.

[JohnG]

From TZ:

I meant 16600, but it's still clearly a replica. It "looks ok to you"? Really? How depressing (but not surprising) some of you can't see the elephant in the room.

This guy is going to win some friends - he has 45 posts and is calling others in the forum idiots for not spotting the fake.

[Leifhaus]

Though I am as aware as most people here of the myriad flaws in that watch, it is worth noting that the VAST majority of posters at TZ didn't notice - and one guy who OWNS a gen is saying he doesn't see the problem with it even after others have called it out. This reinforces me belief that most people, even gen owners, generally don't spend hours, days, and weeks analyzing the tells of fake versions of their own watches. There are a few people who will spot these things - and they are WIS's, suspicious by nature, AND have the benefit of a frozen target blown up about four times larger than life to analyze.

Very ...Very well said. We are truly within the minority of the minority of watch aficiandos. I hate the term WIS.

It will be interesting to watch how this plays out. Since having just bought a used GEN SD I've become a little miffed at how good the reps are, and I STARTED WITH REPS so imagine how a regular gen owner must feel.

[By-Tor]

@JohnG:

I think SSD gets a lot of crap from many, because it was in production for ages. Angus asked all kinds of advice during its making from the membership, but then he disappeared and many things were left half-assed. The exceptations were super high, because promises and the hype around the SSD were probably the biggest around ANY Rolex replica ever.

We really tried to help, we offered him (and the factory) the advice and consultation but no... they went and released it with many fundamental flaws. I managed to get the smaller crown installed on it. You should have seen how huge the crown was on the initial release candidate.

Maybe the exceptations were too high, and most of the veteran Rolex guys here were very disappointed. These reasons (that I described above) probably caused some kind of frustration towards that particular rep.

Part of the membership accepted it with all its faults, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It was the best SeaDweller replica, and it still is. But membership went with the hype, called it 1:1 and "most accurate Rolex replica ever" and all that... which has nothing to do with reality. This hype is still going on, for unknown reasons.

Stephane received one and wanted to compare it to his gen, but decided against it... he said it's so far off of the gen (by our extremely ANAL standards) that it wasn't even funny. He didn't want to make the review because everyone were so happy with their new SSD's.

Me? I just post what I see... I always have. I have reviewed a lot of my inaccurate reps and gave them a honest but sometimes "brutal" treatments. That being said, I would have made the SSD review without a doubt. If someone takes my opinions personally, it's his problem. I'm not afraid to say (sometimes harshly) if I don't like a rep. Why would I? It's just a rep. I will continue to do so... I try not to swallow the hype, look at the facts and give as honest (and objective) opinions of the reps for the membership as I can. I'm not saying that SSD can't be a great rep, it absolutely can... it's just not terribly accurate (imho)... especially by 2008 standards.

Feel free to disagree my opinions though... I don't take that personally, either. Of course I'm not always right. But don't come here with your guns blazing and trying to stir up trouble. It's not going to work.

[stilty]

I hate the term WIS.

I think it is a very appropriate term since I = IDIOT!

[Greystash]

Though I am as aware as most people here of the myriad flaws in that watch, it is worth noting that the VAST majority of posters at TZ didn't notice - and one guy who OWNS a gen is saying he doesn't see the problem with it even after others have called it out. This reinforces me belief that most people, even gen owners, generally don't spend hours, days, and weeks analyzing the tells of fake versions of their own watches. There are a few people who will spot these things - and they are WIS's, suspicious by nature, AND have the benefit of a frozen target blown up about four times larger than life to analyze.

Well said, JohnG.

I believe rep owners have a much enhanced appreciation of gens.

[By-Tor]

People at the gen forums aren't usually very good at spotting reps. The collectors and WIS spot them, but 90% of the members don't.

Of course they're not even excepting to see them... at least not on regular basis. A bit different here.

[Dutchy]

OK, here's what I think. I think there's a possability this guy doesn't know it's a rep.

I've never understood these TZ guys that come with their (as By-Tor put it) "guns blazing." There is ALWAYS a chance (and a pretty big one to be honest) that the guy bought it thinking it was a genuine Rolex.

Think of how many fakes are being sold as gens on ebay EVERY DAY. 10's of them. Ebay can't catch them and most people have given up on emailing the bidders/winners and telling them it's a fake, because most of them think it's a tactic used by other interested parties to get them to stop bidding and keep the price low (if you're bidding on a genuine Daytona and I tell you it's a fake, you'll probably retract all your bids, and therefore lower the price which in turn allows me to buy it must cheaper).

I have emailed tons of bidders and winners of watches (Breitlings/Rolexes, etc) on ebay and generally the answer was "F*** off" or no answer at all. People weren't grateful at all which is what stopped me from letting them know.

Now back to this TZ guy. He is a new member (he has a post count of 3) and has showed another picture of his Rolex. 10's of comments on how nice and cool it is. I think TZ should chill the hell out.

[By-Tor]

Hey Dutchy, welcome back and congrats for your 2000th!!!

[Dutchy]

Hey Dutchy, welcome back and congrats for your 2000th!!!

Thanks bro

[JohnG]

@JohnG:

I think SSD gets a lot of crap from many, because it was in production for ages. Angus asked all kinds of advice during its making from the membership, but then he disappeared and many things were left half-assed. The exceptations were super high, because promises and the hype around the SSD were probably the biggest around ANY Rolex replica ever.

We really tried to help, we offered him (and the factory) the advice and consultation but no... they went and released it with many fundamental flaws. I managed to get the smaller crown installed on it. You should have seen how huge the crown was on the initial release candidate.

Maybe the exceptations were too high, and most of the veteran Rolex guys here were very disappointed. These reasons (that I described above) probably caused some kind of frustration towards that particular rep.

Part of the membership accepted it with all its faults, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It was the best SeaDweller replica, and it still is. But membership went with the hype, called it 1:1 and "most accurate Rolex replica ever" and all that... which has nothing to do with reality. This hype is still going on, for unknown reasons.

Stephane received one and wanted to compare it to his gen, but decided against it... he said it's so far off of the gen (by our extremely ANAL standards) that it wasn't even funny. He didn't want to make the review because everyone were so happy with their new SSD's.

Me? I just post what I see... I always have. I have reviewed a lot of my inaccurate reps and gave them a honest but sometimes "fatal" treatments. That being said, I would have made the SSD review without a doubt. If someone takes my opinions personally, it's his problem. I'm not afraid to say (sometimes harshly) if I don't like a rep. Why would I? It's just a rep. I will continue to do so... I try not to swallow the hype, look at the facts and give as honest (and objective) opinions of the reps for the membership as I can. I'm not saying that SSD can't be a great rep, it absolutely can... it's just not terribly accurate (imho)... especially by 2008 standards.

Feel free to disagree my opinions though... I don't take that personally, either. Of course I'm not always right. But don't come here with your guns blazing and trying to stir up trouble. It's not going to work.

Well I was with you right to the very end. I didn't know why there was hostility at this watch but it was very obvious there was. You explained the history (which obviously predates my tenure here) very concisely.

But if you think that I came here to stir up trouble then just ban me. I said nothing to deserve that accusation and I won't be cowed. I have been guilty of being a real jerk at times - but this is not one of them.

Feel free to cancel my recurring membership.

Don't bother, I will do it myself.