- 18/2/11
- 1,382
- 83
- 48
So I had been after a Graham for a while and finally bought one. Not the one I wanted which is a diver oversize, but this Titanium Commander.
I really like this watch and was wandering what the differences between it and a gen where so went looking online for some pics.
So here is my quick and dirty comparison. Sorry I made the pics a bit small! Gen on left rep on right.
1st from the front. The most obvious tells are from top left accross.
1) The length of the trigger return on the top, when you look at the back you will see why this is actualy longer on the gen.
2) There is also a slight difference in the shape of the pusher button, the gen is a bit more rounded and pointed with the crown also sitting more flush to the body.
As you can see from this image the top of the trigger is supposed to rest the full length along the little block to stop it being pulled up and backwards.
Moving on to the dial itself (and this is real loupe stuff) is the font while damn close is not quite right, the lettering and tick markers etc on the sub dials; is just a fraction too thick. The number 6 for instance, is not quite right, the tail on the gen not closing onto the bell as can be seen in the rep 6. The four not being quite as open in the middle on the rep.
The numbers in between the orange markers are also not bang on square to the middle as they are on the gen. Apart from these very minor things you really would need to get a loupe to see its scary close!
Moving on to the back, the engraving on the gen from what I can tell is just a little sharper and crisper while being a little less deep. The logo on the gen is more shaped and runs up a bit more to a sharp ridge while the rep is flat.
from the side angle I am hard pushed to spot anything at all.
The shape of the crown is amazingly similar and the lugs appear to be spot on in shape too from my looking at other images The biggest flaw I can see is the carbon fibre is just too shiny both on the dial and bezel. Its supposed to be more matte and subdued.
The clasp is another minor tell, with the gen being engraved and the rep as you would expect being laser etched.
So there you have it a quick and dirty comparison, If I ever get my hands on a gen long enough to do a proper comparo I will try to take some better pics!
One final one large size of the rep close up.
Ok let the hand grenade jokes begin :lol:
Cheers AMA
I really like this watch and was wandering what the differences between it and a gen where so went looking online for some pics.
So here is my quick and dirty comparison. Sorry I made the pics a bit small! Gen on left rep on right.
1st from the front. The most obvious tells are from top left accross.
1) The length of the trigger return on the top, when you look at the back you will see why this is actualy longer on the gen.
2) There is also a slight difference in the shape of the pusher button, the gen is a bit more rounded and pointed with the crown also sitting more flush to the body.
As you can see from this image the top of the trigger is supposed to rest the full length along the little block to stop it being pulled up and backwards.
Moving on to the dial itself (and this is real loupe stuff) is the font while damn close is not quite right, the lettering and tick markers etc on the sub dials; is just a fraction too thick. The number 6 for instance, is not quite right, the tail on the gen not closing onto the bell as can be seen in the rep 6. The four not being quite as open in the middle on the rep.
The numbers in between the orange markers are also not bang on square to the middle as they are on the gen. Apart from these very minor things you really would need to get a loupe to see its scary close!
Moving on to the back, the engraving on the gen from what I can tell is just a little sharper and crisper while being a little less deep. The logo on the gen is more shaped and runs up a bit more to a sharp ridge while the rep is flat.
from the side angle I am hard pushed to spot anything at all.
The shape of the crown is amazingly similar and the lugs appear to be spot on in shape too from my looking at other images The biggest flaw I can see is the carbon fibre is just too shiny both on the dial and bezel. Its supposed to be more matte and subdued.
The clasp is another minor tell, with the gen being engraved and the rep as you would expect being laser etched.
So there you have it a quick and dirty comparison, If I ever get my hands on a gen long enough to do a proper comparo I will try to take some better pics!
One final one large size of the rep close up.
Ok let the hand grenade jokes begin :lol:
Cheers AMA
