So let me explain, when you see a KVF rep of the RM 011 at first, everything looks pretty much right, but the longer you look at gen pictures the more you can start to tell that there is just something wrong with the KVF and why's that? Well if you look at the overall case and bezel assembly really closely...you can see that it is actually much different.
First let's talk about the bezel itself in comparison with the size of the crystal. You can see on the gen, the width of the crystal is actually wider than the KVF. The gen also looks that way due to having due to the dial being more curved which leads me to my next point.
The reason why the gen dial looks to be not only wider but deeper is due to the curvature of the gen case. The gen seems to have much more of a curvature to the bezel and case as opposed to KVF.
I can prove this also by looking at the two screws on the top and bottom of the bezel. You can't even see the screw head of the screws under 7 and 5 because of how curved the bottom of the case is. On the KVF you can clearly see the screw heads of the bottom two screws because the bezel is much less curved than the gen. Knowing this, the overall bezel and case of the KVF now just looks so much more flat to me and in doing so, it makes the entire watch look shorter in height and fatter... and talking about fatter... if you look closely at the bezel screw placements of the KVF (this time not the top or bottom two screws but the four screws on each side of the case) you can see that the screws placements are not placed directly in the middle between the edge of the bezel and the dial. It is placed just a little bit further away from the dial and closer to the bezel edge. On the gen it is placed directly in the middle.
Last thing, the bezel screws on the KVF also seems a tiny bit bigger in size than the gen, making it seem even fatter.
Simply put, the bezel on the KVF rep is WIDER and SHORTER than the gen. It is also flatter and has less curvature than the gen. The screws also seem a tad bit larger.
In conclusion: that "somethings a little bit off" aspect of the KVF RM 011 rep is just that it looks a bit fatter than gen. I am really hoping ZF nails the case to 1:1 as that is one of the biggest thing I am looking for in a RM rep to really get an idea as to how the gen RMs sit on your wrist.
^Holy shit I have not written an essay since college and did not even realized I wrote this mini review in essay format LOL. Guess school did kinda help...kinda..
The skull model looks like crap either way. Why would they waste resources on that?
High demand and it's a well-known rm model for general public
Reps are clearly fatter. No doubt about it.
Whether curvature or thickness they are no way close to the beauty of the gen.
There was a guy here a couple of years ago who made a gen vs rep with his rm35-01. From 10 feet the rep holds on..
Anyway my major gripe with rm reps is the npnt pattern
So let me explain, when you see a KVF rep of the RM 011 at first, everything looks pretty much right, but the longer you look at gen pictures the more you can start to tell that there is just something wrong with the KVF and why's that? Well if you look at the overall case and bezel assembly really closely...you can see that it is actually much different.
First let's talk about the bezel itself in comparison with the size of the crystal. You can see on the gen, the width of the crystal is actually wider than the KVF. The gen also looks that way due to having due to the dial being more curved which leads me to my next point.
The reason why the gen dial looks to be not only wider but deeper is due to the curvature of the gen case. The gen seems to have much more of a curvature to the bezel and case as opposed to KVF.
I can prove this also by looking at the two screws on the top and bottom of the bezel. You can't even see the screw head of the screws under 7 and 5 because of how curved the bottom of the case is. On the KVF you can clearly see the screw heads of the bottom two screws because the bezel is much less curved than the gen. Knowing this, the overall bezel and case of the KVF now just looks so much more flat to me and in doing so, it makes the entire watch look shorter in height and fatter... and talking about fatter... if you look closely at the bezel screw placements of the KVF (this time not the top or bottom two screws but the four screws on each side of the case) you can see that the screws placements are not placed directly in the middle between the edge of the bezel and the dial. It is placed just a little bit further away from the dial and closer to the bezel edge. On the gen it is placed directly in the middle.
Last thing, the bezel screws on the KVF also seems a tiny bit bigger in size than the gen, making it seem even fatter.
Simply put, the bezel on the KVF rep is WIDER and SHORTER than the gen. It is also flatter and has less curvature than the gen. The screws also seem a tad bit larger.
In conclusion: that "somethings a little bit off" aspect of the KVF RM 011 rep is just that it looks a bit fatter than gen. I am really hoping ZF nails the case to 1:1 as that is one of the biggest thing I am looking for in a RM rep to really get an idea as to how the gen RMs sit on your wrist.
Ok guys
Let’s see
which one is gen
Picture A:
Picture B:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Good points
But I want to talk about a few things
A-there are only 30 of this watches worldwide
B-in regards to the size of the beZel screws you might be correct that they are bigger but it’s a very small difference. Maybe 10%. They look fine to me. Much smaller than APs and hublots
C-in regards to the case being more slanted and curved I don’t think so. Will add pic below. Bare in mind the white rep is tilted a little. Looks same curvature to me or if there is a difference it’s 10% max
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pic A - Gen on the left
Pic B - Gen on the right
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You sure ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Think about it this way; If you were to take just the top bezel from the gen and the rep and flattened both completely, the gen bezel will be significantly longer due to it being more curved prior to flattening. This also makes the gen bezel look less wide because in reality it is a longer case that has just been curved.
But you're right, nobodys gonna know what the hell's even on your wrist. It really ends up being personal preference and how you personally enjoy the piece.
Going back to my point of the bezel curvature: Actually the pictures you posted showcases my point exactly. You can tell it curves down more by comparing how tapered the midcase is at the lugs where it connects with the strap. Gen has a more tapered midcase at the lug since the bezel slopes down more.
As much as thickness goes...they honestly look to be the same thickness lol.
Man nobody nobody will know
I’ve been wearing modded reps and Frankens for 7 years. Nobody is crazy like us here
Plus let’s not forget that Watch retails for $180,000 plus tax
And look at how close the rep is
Here are the mods I’m doing:
-Gen rubber
-Matte case
-Sunken screws
-2 x AR
-Silence rotor
-Waterproof
-Paint certain parts on dial (currently gold) paint them to silver
-Paint rotor light gray medium gray and dark gray (pic belo)
-Paint balance wheel silver
-Paint blue screws silver
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
High demand and it's a well-known rm model for general public
What’s this discussion even about? ALL Rm reps to this date are blatantly off and bad. The essay posted above is 100% true. Everyone here who is talking shit has never seen a gen up close, let alone had it in their hands.
If you are just slightly familiar with gen RM, you’ll be able to spot a rep with one glance on the other side of the table. It’s that bad.
What’s this discussion even about? ALL Rm reps to this date are blatantly off and bad. The essay posted above is 100% true. Everyone here who is talking shit has never seen a gen up close, let alone had it in their hands.
If you are just slightly familiar with gen RM, you’ll be able to spot a rep with one glance on the other side of the table. It’s that bad.