The amazing and much sought after AP ROO. I've finally gotten around and picked one up. With the Sec@12 modification to the A7750 movement have made this replication a true masterpiece. Also with the plethora of limited editions that AP has released for the ROO series, the chances of being caught out is also quite slim. That said, with any replication, there are flaws. Most of you know my review system, and in truth this piece has been reviewed countless times before, so I'm just adding to an already large database of reviews.
I personally was looking for a blue strap white faced watch and initially was set on building a PAM114 with a blue leather strap, then chanced upon the gen Navy Themes. This was a limited edition issued by AP of 4 nature themed watches supposedly.
Front
1) The tip of the crown extends a smidgen too far out as compared to the gen. The color of the rubber crown and pushers is also off. Being of a lighter shade of blue rather than dark navy. Add to this the quality of rubber is quite shoddy, easily picking up dust and leaving dusty prints behind after being touched with your fingers.
2) Date window is too far to the right by 0.5mm. This should be inline with the "2" & "4" and the is the biggest most obvious tell
3) The dial is a creamy and shiny white. Closer to the Safari model than what the gen requires which is a pure matte white dial
4) The colors of the numbers on the dial are off as well. Too light a shade and should be a darker navy. The subdials are accurate though.
Dial
1) Just overall finishing, the gen is flush with a slight concave to the hex screws in the bezel. The rep is a smidgen down and you can see QC was a little off as a bit of cloth is stuck in one.
2) The chapter ring is brushed and to shiny. The previous issue of a shiny creamy dial is obviously seen here.
3) Color of the numbers already mentioned
4) Color of the dial
5) Text printing on the gen is sharper and the 5 is a slightly different font
Side
I personally could not spot anything significantly different from the overall case shape
Lug
1) Being anal, the depth of the screw is off
Other than that, very close profileCrown
1) The AP logo though close is not as finely engraved and the A is missing a serif at the tip
2) Another flaw is the thickness of the caseback. The rep is 1mm thicker than the gen
3) Not illustrated is the that the pushers on the rep are inline with the rep due to the A7750 movement being used, which is an integrated chronograph movement. The gen utilises a chrono module which results in the pushers being above the crown.
Caseback
No real tells that I can spot except the originally mentioned thicker caseback.
Buckle
1) The profile of the buckle tongue is thinner than the gen, though the engraving is accurate overall.
2) The cutout in the A is bigger on the rep than the gen and less sharp.
Wristie
Wristie shot on a 6.75" wrist.
Conclusion
Well it has its flaws. Some of them major, some very minor. Most are inherent across all the different ROO replica models. Overall it still is a beautiful piece. What must be said though is that I would definitely also mention the movement. A lot of discussions have been made about it and I would say the general consensus is to get it serviced and modded as soon as you can. I personally will if you want to keep this watch around for a long time. It certainly has a lot of wrist presence as can be seen above.
Glamour Shots
