That's exactly what I'm talking about. It was issue with old Speedmasters but shouldn't be with this one. I don't know much about it's movement either but just compare pictures below and you'll see it has potential.
This is the old Speedy where it's impossible to make good copy of it with 7750 because of the subdial spacing (although gen is handwinding but just for the comparison)
Left one is new Mark II, right one is 1969 Mark II. You can clearly see right one has the same impossible-to-rep subdial spacing but left one has the same spacing as all chrono watches we see in our rep market all of which are using 7750/7753 movements.
Just for the comparison, here is a rep Speedy with 7750 (not good one but shows what I want to point out):
I hope my observations are correct and that this watch has it's future in rep world. Fingers crossed!
Sorry bud, I didn't really understand what you are trying to say. For the DW, this one should use 7753 movement as it has quick date change pusher @10 and at 7753 datewheel isn't sunken like on 7750 (good examples of the same watch replication with different movements (7750/7753) are PAM 187 and Montblanc Timewalker Chrono so check differences in their DW's.
As for the position of DW, if I understood correctly, you are saying function of the subdial @6 should be removed in order we could have date on this position? I don't think so as if you look at the pic from Puretime and compare it with gen pic above, you can see date window is part of the subdial and they would both be in the same position.
This could be a problem but I'm sure if they ever decide to rep it, they'll use 7753 in order to properly replicate the quick date change which gen has.
Oh I understand now, sorry.
