I'm sorry but I will have to disagree. The lugs make it not a super clone. The lug shape is not accurate to gen and is a glaringly obvious difference to me. VSF is getting better with SELs but until they fix the lug taper it is absolutely no super clone with a different case shape. I remember you posted that inaccuracies aside it's a better watch for you compared to the 116610 and I definitely understand that. Judging it as a watch on its own merits it's a fantastic watch for the money! But to take it a step further and call it a super clone with obviously different lugs? No way IMO. Still a good rep though. I'd call the 116610 by VSF a super clone. Same for the TC watches. This is not that level. It could be in a year.
Well, as I said before I respect your opinion
How could you call a TC a super clone if it doesn’t house a clone of a gen movement, it’s not a clone at all.
The 116610 case there’s still things not 100% with Gen with it. It’s has more wokky shaped Rehaut for instance.
I think for every thing found wrong on the 126 we can find something for the 116.
Someone should shoot that point out and list the differences for both (non biased of course) I’d be interested to see if that’s the case.
I’d regard both as super clones they are whole clones of the genuine watches albeit with small differences.
Clones in a biological sense are never exact copies anyway. (Maybe I’m going off the point)
If a TC with minor differences in case bracelet xtal hands etc was a ‘super rep’ then these VSFs with thier Gen clone (spec/interchangeable with gen parts) movements are definitely super clones.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk