deemaster Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 I've read in two places now on dealer sites that this new "Ultimate" edition of the ceramic Big Bang (Ice) is "completely interchangeable with the genuine watch". If that is true, it seems you could also attain a gen Swiss Valjoux 7753 for about $500... hummm? If you could find someone who could swap the rotor on a 7753 with an engraved rotor you would essentially have an authentic Big Bang. I wonder what the dimensions of the rotor hole and thickness is on the two rotors and if they would be interchangeable without too much fuss? The only thing it would be missing would be the additional things Hublot does to the 7753 movement by La Joux-Perret... which is probably mostly BS (probalby not). Whole project would probably be under $2000 and the only thing that would set it apart exactly from the gen would be the H logo on the movement which could also be taken care of in the right hands. Anyone else thinking along these lines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anton Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 (edited) There are some members who have attempted this. In my recollection, I just remembered a Mellow Yellow that was swapped with a 7750 and a module that moves the running gears from 12 to 3. Oh, and BTW, the gen uses a 7750, not a 7753. Evidence of it is the lack of a "date pusher" on the left side of the case that is shown on virtually ALL 7753 watches. That and a slightly sunken datewheel that is not a characteristic of a 7753. My speculation is that the case parts in this so-called "Ultimate" version would or could be replaced with genuine parts (screws, strap, bezel, etc.) Everyone knows that the movement side of things would need some modding. Like changing the hands, for example requires replacement of parts or purchasing gen hands which would likely be VERY HARD to source. But good luck though. Edited November 2, 2008 by anton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 I've read in two places now on dealer sites that this new "Ultimate" edition of the ceramic Big Bang (Ice) is "completely interchangeable with the genuine watch". If that is true, it seems you could also attain a gen Swiss Valjoux 7753 for about $500... hummm? If you could find someone who could swap the rotor on a 7753 with an engraved rotor you would essentially have an authentic Big Bang. I wonder what the dimensions of the rotor hole and thickness is on the two rotors and if they would be interchangeable without too much fuss? The only thing it would be missing would be the additional things Hublot does to the 7753 movement by La Joux-Perret... which is probably mostly BS (probalby not). Whole project would probably be under $2000 and the only thing that would set it apart exactly from the gen would be the H logo on the movement which could also be taken care of in the right hands. Anyone else thinking along these lines? Sounds too good to be true...but if it is, then it'll be awesome, and i'm in! Where can we avail of the valjoux 7753 at 500 tho? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deemaster Posted November 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 (edited) There are some members who have attempted this. In my recollection, I just remembered a Mellow Yellow that was swapped with a 7750 and a module that moves the running gears from 12 to 3. Oh, and BTW, the gen uses a 7750, not a 7753. Evidence of it is the lack of a "date pusher" on the left side of the case that is shown on virtually ALL 7753 watches. That and a slightly sunken datewheel that is not a characteristic of a 7753. My speculation is that the case parts in this so-called "Ultimate" version would or could be replaced with genuine parts (screws, strap, bezel, etc.) Everyone knows that the movement side of things would need some modding. Like changing the hands, for example requires replacement of parts or purchasing gen hands which would likely be VERY HARD to source. But good luck though. Actually the gen Hublot does use the 7753. The only difference "generally" between the 7750 and 7753 is the 4 o'clock position of the date wheel. Starting out with a 7750 would only make life unnecessarily difficult. I understand that there have been other attempts on other versions of the HBB's but I'm referring to the new "Ultimate" that has just surfaced... Puretime's $700ish versions which claims exact replication on the case. I've also read in other places that the case is in fact an exact replication of the gen... inside and out. FYI: here's a link with more info about the gen movement in the Hublot: http://www.spitzwatch.com/WatchMaking/ljp/index.html Otis for the movement... Edited November 2, 2008 by deemaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donpedro Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 There have been HBB's with gen 7750's for sale on RG one or two times. If I recall correctly, it was a real nightmare to do the movement swap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deemaster Posted November 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 There have been HBB's with gen 7750's for sale on RG one or two times. If I recall correctly, it was a real nightmare to do the movement swap. Yeah I keep hearing about that old news... I'm not interested in that swap and it doesn't have anything to do with the topic of this thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donpedro Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Sorry - my bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b16a2 Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Actually the gen Hublot does use the 7753. The only difference "generally" between the 7750 and 7753 is the 4 o'clock position of the date wheel. Starting out with a 7750 would only make life unnecessarily difficult. I understand that there have been other attempts on other versions of the HBB's but I'm referring to the new "Ultimate" that has just surfaced... Puretime's $700ish versions which claims exact replication on the case. I've also read in other places that the case is in fact an exact replication of the gen... inside and out. FYI: here's a link with more info about the gen movement in the Hublot: http://www.spitzwatch.com/WatchMaking/ljp/index.html Otis for the movement... I wonder if that relates to all Hublots, as I was always under the impression it was just a modded 7750? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Actually the gen Hublot does use the 7753. The only difference "generally" between the 7750 and 7753 is the 4 o'clock position of the date wheel. Sorry, but this is not true. The Hublot uses a modded 7750, just like the reps. How can you be sure? Apart from the photos of the movement showing the "7750" text clearly, the 7753 cannot change date with the crown. As there is no pusher at 10 o' clock, it's not a 7753. The last piece of proof it's a modded 7750 is that the date is recessed, just like on the reps. This is why the Big Bang is so accurate a replication. If that's not enough proof, look to Hublot's documentation where they repeatedly say they're using the 7750. Why do they not use a 7753? Because they're cheapskates, just like the replica makers. Can we please lay the false assumption it's a 7753 to rest now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deemaster Posted November 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Sorry, but this is not true. The Hublot uses a modded 7750, just like the reps. How can you be sure? Apart from the photos of the movement showing the "7750" text clearly, the 7753 cannot change date with the crown. As there is no pusher at 10 o' clock, it's not a 7753. The last piece of proof it's a modded 7750 is that the date is recessed, just like on the reps. This is why the Big Bang is so accurate a replication. If that's not enough proof, look to Hublot's documentation where they repeatedly say they're using the 7750. Why do they not use a 7753? Because they're cheapskates, just like the replica makers. Can we please lay the false assumption it's a 7753 to rest now? Ha... that's funny about Hublot being cheap themselves... that sounds about right. Let me ask, you mention "Hublot's documentation where they repeatedly say they're using the 7750" - where exactly can I find that? I don't know anybody more qualified than Dan Spitz besides the actual Hublot factory... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 The movement is not a 7753 in a gen. It is a tri-compax modified 7750. And by the way the Spitz write-up is completely messed up. 7753 is a derivative of a 7750 but it isn't used in any Panerai other than the chronos with date pusher on the side. The automatics spitz refers to uses a 7750 base movement. You can ask Panerai. I am guessing that for purposes of his article he simply lumped together 7750's (the base movement) with 7753's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Let me ask, you mention "Hublot's documentation where they repeatedly say they're using the 7750" - where exactly can I find that? http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.hublot.com+7750 Repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deemaster Posted November 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 oh wow, I just found an article that discussed how Hublot does indeed use the 7750 which it still sources from ETA but they only uses about 40% of the original movement. Lots of talk about how the original patent expired and how ETA doesn't mind them ripping them apart (why would they)? The movement is then rebuilt in-house by La Joux-Perret by manufacturing their own bridges and plates from the ground up. I suppose that is correct and I also suppose Hublot attempts to keep the fact that the backbone is ETA because they want to validate the expense of the BB. Only using such a small percentage of the original movement also frees them to name the movement as if it were in-house. The article was refereeing to the fact that they Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 We knew you would come around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slay Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Ha... that's funny about Hublot being cheap themselves... that sounds about right. Let me ask, you mention "Hublot's documentation where they repeatedly say they're using the 7750" - where exactly can I find that? I don't know anybody more qualified than Dan Spitz besides the actual Hublot factory... JC Biver (big boss of Hublot) and the other US Hublot guy confirmed that it is a 7750 with added module. Thats also the reason why the datewheel is a little bit sunken on the gen. They don't call it 7750 officially, because firms like Hublot like to give their movements fancy names to make it appear they created them themselves while in reality the just used 400$ ebauche from ETA which is nothing special. Just go on TimeZone and search for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael888 Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 look at this pic of the movement <a href="http://img530.imageshack.us/my.php?image=23225jg6.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/6258/23225jg6.th.jpg" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a><br /><br /><a href="http://img604.imageshack.us/content.php?page=blogpost&files=img530/6258/23225jg6.jpg" title="QuickPost"><img src="http://imageshack.us/img/butansn.png" alt="QuickPost" border="0"></a> Quickpost this image to Myspace, Digg, Facebook, and others! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael888 Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 (edited) sorry wrong link : http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/6258/23225jg6.jpg Edited November 3, 2008 by Michael888 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