-
Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!
A different type of rep GMT bezel
- Thread starter KJ2020
- Start date
@CTime could you please pass this on to CF? Their V4 should definitely have this improvement on them. Thanks.
Mate, CTime had load of information that they passed, or at least could pass on CLEAN for improving the bezel thematics.
AFAIK from CTIME Clean is working this year on patek and AP watches and the models they already have in stock they wont improve.
@KJ2020 and some other users gave great input and feedback how to improve, but CLEAN did not take this extra step sadly.
And another point I see, clean is suppose to replicate the real thing. As good as this bezel can work is not like the real watch is manufactured so I don’t see why they would change it. Also it would limit the frankening process.
I did not want the bezel to be like that, there are TONS of improvement possibilities to make it to the real deal with NO extra money for CLEAN taking in hands.
@derjenigewelcher I understand your perspective, but I think these improvements can be quite complex. While experienced modders and advanced amateurs might handle them easily, typical users often don’t have access to modding services. That’s why an out-of-the-box solution from CF is essential—whether by adopting the real design or implementing an alternative.
@Paul Newman while CF has been trying to replicate the real thing in every component, it’s not always the case across all their watches. This often depends on their capabilities and budget, which can affect the overall quality and authenticity of their replicas.
I get your point about frankening being an option for some, but it might not be practical for everyone. If a part functions just like the real watch, why would someone choose to franken it, especially when dealing with expensive components? It seems counterproductive when a well-designed replica could serve the purpose.
I get your point about frankening being an option for some, but it might not be practical for everyone. If a part functions just like the real watch, why would someone choose to franken it, especially when dealing with expensive components? It seems counterproductive when a well-designed replica could serve the purpose.
Its literly 5 seconds of work pulling on the spring to get more tention. Plus they save 70% of grease. thats all. No skills, no time, no investment.
Tutorial: How to fix the Bezel on a CLEAN GMT Master 2
Hi Guys /// Update 1. May 2024 Second part under this one: Best results with stock parts only // Update 26.2.2025 more pictures // 7.3. Video Those who follow me a little know that I do reviews from time to time or that I take photos of a build from time to time. This time it's different and I...
forum.replica-watch.info
From my point of view, copying is way easier than innovate, so again if CF already produces a copy of the real bezel assembly (with rep tolerances), I don’t see why they would change it to something that is not gen like even if it works like it.
CF bezels had been upgraded a lot to the point that they are really smooth, if you want that extra gen feeling you need that extra spend on some gen parts (which are not crazy expensive).
I have 3 GMT’s and only My Pepsi is frankened, and to be honest there is almost no difference in real usage.
Last edited:
- 12/3/18
- 37,150
- 78,117
- 113
CLEAN isn't going to do it so it's really a moot point but I would take a Rollerball bezel over a CLEAN bezel every time.
CLEAN bezels suck and always have. I have 3 or 4 ~2019ish 2836 GMTs from BP whose bezels are gen-spec and have smooth crisp movement, snappy detents and near zero back play. If you had one next to a VSF Rollerball (whose action is better than gen) you would be hard pressed to tell which was which. And the kicker? NO GREASE, none, dry as a bone.
We shouldn't have to rebuild a rep bezel every time we get a CLEAN. Their insistence on using cheap parts hidden by excess grease is inexcusable.
CLEAN bezels suck and always have. I have 3 or 4 ~2019ish 2836 GMTs from BP whose bezels are gen-spec and have smooth crisp movement, snappy detents and near zero back play. If you had one next to a VSF Rollerball (whose action is better than gen) you would be hard pressed to tell which was which. And the kicker? NO GREASE, none, dry as a bone.
We shouldn't have to rebuild a rep bezel every time we get a CLEAN. Their insistence on using cheap parts hidden by excess grease is inexcusable.
Last edited:
So VSF also adopts this Rollerball bezel in their GMT’s? Do you know if their case is compatible with the DD3285?
- 12/3/18
- 37,150
- 78,117
- 113
AFAIK GSF is a partner / sub-factory of VSF. It is really only one factory offering this type of bezel.
There are GSF GMTs offered with both VR3186 and SH/VR3285s
Trusty is still only listing VSF GMTs with VR3186 but I have seen one with an SH/VR3285
So the rep 3285 movements, and the case insides were made slightly bigger for some reason despite both gen movements being listed at 28.5mm.
Bottom line is a VR3186 movement can be made to fit a rep 3285 case with some extra material (skinny bespoke movement holder, gasket, etc) and / or long movement tabs.
But a rep 3285 movement will not fit in a 3186 case, without some lathe or manual modding of the interior structure.
The DD and SH/VR 3285s are the same diameter so that should answer all the possible scenarios.