Quick tell on most Rollie reps.... how easy to rectify?

[By-Tor]

A lot has been written about the 904 steel. It has higher corrosion resistance, and as the metal is a bit harder it doesn't scratch as easily.

Corrosion resistance is pretty much meaningless on a wrist watch. How many rusty old diver watches you have ever seen?

PS: Moved this thread to the correct section.

[freddy333]

Now all I need to do is see if I can get some in the UK.

All watch parts houses sell something similar. Try cousinsuk.com.

[Fidestro]

A lot has been written about the 904 steel. It has higher corrosion resistance, and as the metal is a bit harder it doesn't scratch as easily.

Corrosion resistance is pretty much meaningless on a wrist watch. How many rusty old diver watches you have ever seen?

PS: Moved this thread to the correct section.

I knew about the corrosion resistance part, I meant the price. To hear Rolex tell it, it costs a good deal more.

[freddy333]

Rep and gen Rolexes are both just automatic watches that keep time, made of cheap and cheaper stainless steel base metal. Something like WM9 v2 looks and feels almost exactly like the gen after you have "treated" the bracelet. I'd say the best Rolex reps are visually in the 95% range, WM9 even closer.

God, as they say, is in the details. And it is in those details that the differences between the very best reps & gen Rolex watches become apparent. The fit-&-finish of a genuine Rolex is several notches above a WM9 or anything similar. Real white gold bezels sparkle & glisten in a way that polished steel cannot match, no matter how well you polish or oil it. Genuine Twinlock & Triplock crowns/tubes have a smooth, quality feel that aftermarket parts cannot provide. Genuine crystals have a shimmer that few aftermarket crystals can match. Etc, etc. In my opinion, the sum of the gen parts adds up to a whole that no commercially made rep will ever match.

[Fidestro]

God, as they say, is in the details. And it is in those details that the differences between the very best reps & gen Rolex watches become apparent. The fit-&-finish of a genuine Rolex is several notches above a WM9 or anything similar. Real white gold bezels sparkle & glisten in a way that polished steel cannot match, no matter how well you polish or oil it. Genuine Twinlock & Triplock crowns/tubes have a smooth, quality feel that aftermarket parts cannot provide. Genuine crystals have a shimmer that few aftermarket crystals can match. Etc, etc. In my opinion, the sum of the gen parts adds up to a whole that no commercially made rep will ever match.

I find some of that hard to believe. I agree that the fit and finish are off, but materials are materials for the most part. My bracelet does not care if it was machined on a CNC in Switzerland or in China as long as the same materials were used. Every gen Rolex I ever felt was, to me, cheap feeling. I imagine most people would pick a UPO over a gen Rolex in a test of "Which one is Real"

EDITED TO ADD:

My post was not for just Rolex, but all brands. Pehaps more for other brands than Rolex as the steel is not 100 percent identical in this case. I should also add however, that I never met anyone who owned a gen Rolex who knew the first thing about it, so many of these details are a moot point to owners. They bought it because it says Rolex and has the crown.

[freddy333]

I find some of that hard to believe. I agree that the fit and finish are off, but materials are materials for the most part. My bracelet does not care if it was machined on a CNC in Switzerland or in China as long as the same materials were used. Every gen Rolex I ever felt was, to me, cheap feeling. I imagine most people would pick a UPO over a gen Rolex in a test of "Which one is Real"

It is not just the type of steel that differs, but also, at least in the case of bracelets, the gauge of the steel used. Rolex uses a slightly heavier gauge of metal which makes a quite discernible difference in the feel of their 'cheap' clasps, especially on vintage models.

[ammandel]

This is turning into a very very interesting discussion. BT I am extremely surprised at hearing you say those things especially since you are an owner of a gen (or two?) Rolex's.

In my experience; I've had even Non-WIS tell of the 'differences in the shininess of real rolex' vs fakes, but this word of mouth comparison is really nothing to go by I'm sure. It'd be easy for example to compare those horrid horrid, dull jubilee bracelets of old with even new polished rep ones.

But beyond that, surely theres a huge difference in finish.. ? I was one that believed the difference would be largely apparent, for I do not own a gen.

The machining, the weight, the perfection? .. Or maybe we really are buying into the whole marketing jargon. Thinking that this watch IS infact greater than the sum of its parts..

Keep this thread away from RobbieG man, I tell ya! He'll bring the hammer down on that 904L comparison

[freddy333]

Keep this thread away from RobbieG man, I tell ya! He'll bring the hammer down on that 904L comparison

Fortunately, even Rolex themselves will admit that the differences between the types of steel used on their older & newer watches lie mostly in the latter's anti-corrosive qualities & not so much in visible differences. I cannot tell them apart unless I see them both together under controlled lighting conditions. But others may have better eyes than I do (the visual differences between WG & SS are another story altogether).

[Fidestro]

It is not just the type of steel that differs, but also, at least in the case of bracelets, the gauge of the steel used. Rolex uses a slightly heavier gauge of metal which makes a quite discernible difference in the feel of their 'cheap' clasps, especially on vintage models.

Got it, also wanted you to know that I mean no disrespect in my post and I actually edited it to reflect that I am mostly ignorant of Rolex watches. I do feel like I know more about them than their average non WIS consumer who just goes into Tourneau and buys one because of the name.

I hope I did not offend you in any way, and part of my post stems from the fact that I used to work for a company that made, lets just say widgets. We made original equipment branded widgets and aftermarket branded widgets that were sold under different brands. Our customer's customer's would often times claim that they could tell the difference between Brand X widgets and Brand Y widgets even thought they were the exact same part, made from the exact same print, exact same bill of materials, etc. They really thought the OE branded widgets were better at a higher price.

[ammandel]

This is extremely interesting to me, like I said earlier: The higher nickel content in 904 SHOULD by all means make it appear somewhat whiter, of course this would be difficult to spot unless everyone only ever saw the same 2 pieces in the same 2 conditions under the same lights. The human factor is a big part of what is being discussed here.

For example; Maybe to some of us CZ and diamond would look the same. To the others; not so.

[Fidestro]

In my experience; I've had even Non-WIS tell of the 'differences in the shininess of real rolex' vs fakes, but this word of mouth comparison is really nothing to go by I'm sure. It'd be easy for example to compare those horrid horrid, dull jubilee bracelets of old with even new polished rep ones.

Were they telling this in the presence of both, or were they repeating the marketing they had heard? Most people will repeat the marketing as fact even though they have no firsthand experience of it. Something about a Rolex and the number of fakes makes everyone an expert and I would assume what you stated above is another on of those stories everyone hears and likes to pass off as something they can tell the difference in.

Think of it like this, everyone likes to go to the magic show and say "I know how the magician did that, there is a hole in the floor!" and ruin the trick. A fake Rolex is no different. The name Rolex will forever be tied to quality but it will also forever be tied to fake watches. People don't like being fooled, they will spout off whatever BS necessary to appear smarter than the rest of the room.

[By-Tor]

@freddy: Yes, none of the "precious metal" reps can't compare. I'm talking about steel watches... WM9 v2 uses the Clark crystal which is just as bright as the gen. The dial print quality is similar, the lume is similar. Gen crown has a bit more substantial "feel" on it, yeah and the gen bracelet is "butter smooth".

Something like my SFSO replica impresses absolutely everyone who sees it. It screams "expensive" and "quality". Gen Rolexes are light, flimsy and have a cheap feeling... they aren't impressive watches visually, and they usually impress NO ONE.

That doesn't mean they aren't great watches. They absolutely are, and I love them. And I agree about the extreme details... they are important for us WIS. But for the 99,9% of people... no. Technically and historically Rolex is above Breitling and Omega any day... the 3135/3185 inhouse movements are legendary, and their innovations in the watch world are beyond comparison.

You know how big of a Rolex fan I am... but that doesn't stop me from looking at these watches objectively. I don't think the "superb quality" (that they definitely possess) is very apparent or invasive to any "outsider".

Best reps are visually closer to the gen than some people are willing to admit. I agree the "overall construction quality" isn't there, but that's a different issue.

[freddy333]

I hope I did not offend you in any way, and part of my post stems from the fact that I used to work for a company that made, lets just say widgets. We made original equipment branded widgets and aftermarket branded widgets that were sold under different brands. Our customer's customer's would often times claim that they could tell the difference between Brand X widgets and Brand Y widgets even thought they were the exact same part, made from the exact same print, exact same bill of materials, etc. They really thought the OE branded widgets were better at a higher price.

No offense taken (I have a thick skin anyway & rarely take offense from respectful commentary).

I would encourage you to take this test - take a reconnaissance trip to your local AD & try on a few Rolex watches (do not worry about wasting the sales person's time, that is what they are there for - just do not tell them that you are comparing gens to reps ). Place the watches on your wrist, operate the bracelet clasps, wind the crowns & set the time. I think you will come away with a new appreciation of Rolex & a better understanding of the differences.

[FxrAndy]

I am allergic to Hublot Big Bangs, they make me throw up in my mouth a little.

I think they affect their owners too as they seem to suffer from assholeitis.

I have that same problem, is there a support group?

[Fidestro]

No offense taken (I have a thick skin anyway & rarely take offense from respectful commentary).

I would encourage you to take this test - take a reconnaissance trip to your local AD & try on a few Rolex watches (do not worry about wasting the sales person's time, that is what they are there for - just do not tell them that you are comparing gens to reps ). Place the watches on your wrist, operate the bracelet clasps, wind the crowns & set the time. I think you will come away with a new appreciation of Rolex & a better understanding of the differences.

Glad to hear I did not upset you. And I won't argue with the clasp part, I have scars on my fingers from opening and closing some of the rep clasps on here. I suppose what I was getting at was meant to be closer to what By-Tor said about the clarity of the Clark crystal versus gen, etc.

[ammandel]

This topic is so interesting but at the same time very hard to discuss; we are starting to breach on the area of 'value'. Value in itself is very difficult to discuss because of its variation of importance.

In essence, we should *really* only pay marginally over somethings cost. We are happy to do that with most groceries for example. Luxury items are different and value and its idea changes in each different persons mind.

RobbieG for example has written about this a number of times and is a large advocate of something is 'worth' what people are willing to pay for it. Others question this motive and feel that prices for certain items are unethically driven up based on hype and marketing. Beyond the price is the idea of the human factor, and our item attachment.

In short; I'm saying maybe in essense the simple, single fact that you are paying a large amount of money on something gives it its worth and is then romanticised by your mind. On the other hand, maybe not..

[Fidestro]

I have that same problem, is there a support group?

I will start one. Hublot Haters World Wide.

[ammandel]

No offense taken (I have a thick skin anyway & rarely take offense from respectful commentary).

I would encourage you to take this test - take a reconnaissance trip to your local AD & try on a few Rolex watches (do not worry about wasting the sales person's time, that is what they are there for - just do not tell them that you are comparing gens to reps ). Place the watches on your wrist, operate the bracelet clasps, wind the crowns & set the time. I think you will come away with a new appreciation of Rolex & a better understanding of the differences.

Just to add; I'd love to do this, except like you said.. I'm scared of the salespeople.

[freddy333]

@freddy: Yes, none of the "precious metal" reps can't compare. I'm talking about steel watches... WM9 v2 uses the Clark crystal which is just as bright as the gen. The dial print quality is similar, the lume is similar. Gen crown has a bit more substantial "feel" on it, yeah and the gen bracelet is "butter smooth".

Something like my SFSO replica impresses absolutely everyone who sees it. It screams "expensive" and "quality". Gen Rolexes are light, flimsy and have a cheap feeling... they aren't impressive watches visually, and they usually impress NO ONE.

Yes, but you are comparing apples & oranges.

Now I would be the 1st to agree that Rolex holds no stranglehold on timing accuracy (any properly serviced ETA or Asian-made POS can be made to match a Rolex in time-keeping accuracy), but if 1 inspects & handles even the most basic of Rolex staples like my old 16014, with its 'cheap' bracelet, & compares it to any commercially made rep of the same model, I am sure that they would come to the same conclusions I have

I wish I could find it now, but a year or 2 ago Ubi did a brilliant macro photo comparison of crowns - a gen Triplock compared with a rep. A number of differences were revealed, but the most obvious & telling was the crispness & definition of the gen crown's 'teeth' & the construction of the spring assembly that controls the crown's release functions (from the tube). Again, the difference is in the details, but those relatively small differences, when taken in tandem with similar differences in other parts of a watch, produce a fit-&-finish that just cannot be matched at rep prices. This is not to say that Rolex (& other luxury brands) does not overcharge for their goods. They do. But, then so do the rep makers who charge $200 for a watch that cost them $25 (or less) to make.

You have to keep in mind that Timex, Casio & Seiko make watches. Rolex (& other luxury gen makers) makes jewelry that tells the time. And, while these 2 groups have overlapping purposes, I think their design goals are more tangential than parallel.

[Fidestro]

This topic is so interesting but at the same time very hard to discuss; we are starting to breach on the area of 'value'. Value in itself is very difficult to discuss because of its variation of importance.

In essence, we should *really* only pay marginally over somethings cost. We are happy to do that with most groceries for example. Luxury items are different and value and its idea changes in each different persons mind.

RobbieG for example has written about this a number of times and is a large advocate of something is 'worth' what people are willing to pay for it. Others question this motive and feel that prices for certain items are unethically driven up based on hype and marketing. Beyond the price is the idea of the human factor, and our item attachment.

In short; I'm saying maybe in essense the simple, single fact that you are paying a large amount of money on something gives it its worth and is then romanticised by your mind. On the other hand, maybe not..

By definition a luxury item is one that is grossly overpriced. A diamond is a good example of something that is unethically expensive and yet millions of poor saps, I mean young gentlemen, fall for the commercials where they say "A Diamond is Forever" and they go take out a loan equal to the GDP of a small country for a ring with pressurized coal in it. I don't have a problem spending on a watch but had a hard time coughing up for a ring. All brand name products are purchased due to being romanticized by consumers in their own minds. My old man won't drink Coke at all, loves Pepsi. Mom used a detergent because her mom used it. My brother only uses certain motor oil because he had good luck with it, another way it is superior in his mind, etc.

[By-Tor]

In short; I'm saying maybe in essense the simple, single fact that you are paying a large amount of money on something gives it its worth and is then romanticised by your mind.

I completely agree about this.

Some people become "fanboys" and they lose their objectivity. Completely natural. And there's also the human nature that always wants to convince itself that "I made a very good deal". This is very important aspect when you're paying $5000 for a basic automatic stainless steel wristwatch.

When you go to the Rolex forums and you see those guys who brag about how their Rolex has never lost a minute in the past 20 years. Well you know what... neither did my uncle's Casio.

What is "quality" and how do you even measure it? Can you compare a $250 Chinese replication and a $5000 genuine Rolex? I think you absolutely can.

I have done that, and other people have done that in RWG. The final outcome is often very different and there are no absolute truths... only opinions. This was mine.

@freddy: I agree, but I think the general problem with most Rolex reps is that they're not very well made. Generally, many other brands have been replicated much better. There are only a handful good Rolex reps, that are up to today's replication standards. Some replications (of other brands) have superb fitting SELs and awesome bracelets... take the (already mentioned) Swiss SFSO for example.

[iceberg1459]

easiest tell for me is by the insert pearl...afaik no rep has perfect stock pearl and a very good tell unless its modded

or the crown guards of course

[freddy333]

@freddy: I agree, but I think the general problem with most Rolex reps is that they're not very well made. There are only a handful good ones, that are up to today's replication standards. Some replications have superb fitting SELs and awesome bracelets... take the (already mentioned) Swiss SFSO for example.

True, there are some Super reps (the Patek Nautilus, CHS GMTIIC & your SFSO come to mind), which are very good, indeed. But even a Super rep, as good as it is, is bested when placed side-by-side with its gen counterpart & 1 makes a tactile (hands-on) inspection. At least, that has ALWAYS been my experience. This, as you know, is the reasoning behind franken-building.

[freddy333]

Just to add; I'd love to do this, except like you said.. I'm scared of the salespeople.

Do not bring your rep in the store with you (or leave it in your pocket). You are there ONLY to gain experience with gen watches, not to do comparisons with reps. For that, there is nothing to be afraid of. Especially in the current global economy, the sales people should be more than happy to assist you. If they ask whether you are buying today, be honest & tell them you are just looking. But I would not say that you have no intention of buying. Who knows, you may some day.

[P4GTR]

I never met anyone who owned a gen Rolex who knew the first thing about it, so many of these details are a moot point to owners. They bought it because it says Rolex and has the crown.

Sure you have. (and not YOU Fide, i've said what you said before too. But think about it.)You've met Nanuq, BT, etc. etc.. Most WIS own and enjoy a Rolex or two. What serious watch collection is complete without at least one?

Look at all the watch lovers here as an example. We've picked apart the submariner 1000 times more than any other watch on this board.

What type of preconception do you have when you see a stranger wearing a Rolex? They could be WIS like us.

As far as the screws in the bracelet, i've had watchsmiths out my 16610 using the screws as an example. Gen bracelets should have a nice.. SUPERB fit and finish on each end. The reality is, I look at this on every gen I handle and some have been worse then my rep, which.. is pretty flush. I've pointed it out to AD's (no reps with me.) how horrible the fit is on some gen bracelet pins and asked them "if they were selling reps now?" They get mad.