One would hope so. But there are examples which would suggest that this is not always the case.
-
Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!
[CONSENSUAL LIST] Super Reps NWBIGs
- Thread starter Omagad
- Start date
One would hope so. But there are examples which would suggest that this is not always the case.
This question have already been answered and this discussion already happened in this thread. Feel free to check it in previous pages, you'll understand why.
There will be no dispersion what so ever. This thread is simpler to read, more demanding and more accurate, but these are not the only reasons.
Thanks for your concern.
If the answers are the ones in the posts #34 and #40 of this thread, again I do not agree.
#34 is about noobs relieved from reading a 50 pages long thread, which imho they should be doing to improve from their noob status;
#40 states that you started this new thread as a spin off of the original one in order to get a deeper and more demanding discussion. You could have obtained both in the same thread.
Again, I cannot understand why the need to duplicate something which already exists and that @timnic54 has ideated first.
Please enlight me.
@Raddave, could you please help about this? Is there any need about this spin off? Thanks in advance.
This question have already been answered and this discussion already happened in this thread. Feel free to check it in previous pages, you'll understand why.
There will be no dispersion what so ever. This thread is simpler to read, more demanding and more accurate, but these are not the only reasons.
Thanks for your concern.
Sent from the RWI App
May I suggest which Tag Heuer Carrera calibre 1887 you're talking about? There are several versions with this generic name, maybe use the gen ID number to differentiate between the models.
I appreciate your envy to influence things but :
1. timnic54 didn't complain about this thread, neither did anyone I was inspired by.
2. The community is happy with that, both threads can exist in their own way.
3. I really doubt that moderators will do anything about that and I find your attitude a little weird. This is none of your concern. Again, in case you didn't understand yet, this is not the same as timnic54 NWBIG guide, this is about Super Reps, and the difference is now explained on the original post. I've removed watches that are in his list and added watches that aren't. I've also included many more informations.
You are absoluetly right tho, there is no need to duplicate something which already exists and this is the limit of your argument, this is no duplication of any kind, this content took tens of hours of dedicated work.
It's this model : https://puretime03.com/carrera-cali...-bezel-black-dial-on-ss-bracelet-cal1887.html
Now specified on original post, thanks.
For that 1887, isn't the subdial ring too thick compared to gen? Sorry not familiar with 1887 but the carrera before that the calibre 16 i have a gen and the rep subdial is a visual tell with the too thick rings. Can soneone confirm if the same issue on the 1887?
Also how is the thickness? Is it 1.5mm thicker than gen? I have the grand carrera rs and it is around 1.5 thicker due to movent and complications, but yea the added thickness not noticeable.
Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk
- 28/4/17
- 19,509
- 11,067
- 113
Outstanding ! Thanks for sharing. I recently added a Noob V7 Smurf to my rep collection. Given the fact that repping
a $23k white gold using steel is ballsy, IMHO I think it's done very well. Would appreciate fellow members thoughts on it.
a $23k white gold using steel is ballsy, IMHO I think it's done very well. Would appreciate fellow members thoughts on it.
For what I have read in another threat the shown model is considered as Super Rep. I own the one with the black dial as well as the one with the grey/sunburst dial. Both considered Super Reps.
No idea of a side by side comparision....
Sent from the RWI App
Since it's this specific model and the only thing wrong is the sub dial spacing in front and you can obviously tell its a rep by looking at the back.
This would make the Noob CrPO a super rep as you can only tell by the open case back. I have both these reps.
Sent from the RWI App
Yes but this is too hard to notice. Super Rep doesn't mean perfect, remember.
You mean you consider it as a Super Rep ?
Any good review that could confirm this ?
This is not a spin off. The OP didn't handle any of the so called "nwbig/ super reps" or in fact any rep watch at all. This thread is just a collection of decent reps based on reviews with a misleading title.
Timnic54 on the other hand handled lots rep watches and in addition to that he handled both gen and rep of all the watches he listed. Based on that he gave his personal opinion, which you can trust or not.
This thread has it's place but with a different title to avoid confusion. There won't be a "consensual nwbig list" without set standards as already previously mentioned. E.g. you'll find enthusiastic reviews of bad reps and very critical reviews of really good reps.
If one really wants to create a somewhat consensual list you'd need to be in contact with experts of the respective brands, as it is impossible for one guy to know each and every watch and its respective flaws. E.g. as the correct thickness of a watch has just been mentioned: For some models 1,5mm can make a huge difference whereas for others it doesn't really matter.
A big part of the list even fails the self-set standard of the OP:
"Please, you have to understand that I've been very demanding.
If there is any obvious tell you can spot quickly, it's NO SUPER REP."
Sure....check this for the IWC BP LPP mate:
https://forum.replica-watch.info/threads/iwc-big-pilot-5009-rep-vs-gen-comparison.324060/
Sent from the RWI App
Actually, all the watches here has been handled, reviewed and discussed. All the watches that Timnic54 handled (and the others) are here. Some disappeared of the list because there are obvious tells.
Some watches, even tho they have been handled, have been removed from the lists.I'ts called CONSENSUAL because none of the watches listed here has been added to the list based on a single review or one person's subjectivity. In this case, this thread is really more demanding than all the others you can find.
Again, as explained with Timnic, this is not about NWBIG, this is aboug Super Rep NWBIGs. One step ahead.
Therefore, I really think you don't understand the point of this thread.
It's called CONSENSUAL because ANYONE (you included) can decide to remove one watch from the list with any sufficient argument.
Actually, all the watches here has been handled, reviewed and discussed. All the watches that Timnic54 handled (and the others) are here. Some disappeared of the list because there are obvious tells.
How many did you handle personally? Rep and Gen?
Reps, about 8 or 9. Gens, about 4 or 5. Of the list ? Only one. (ordered 4 of the list yesterday).
But again, this is not even relevant, because this thread is about the community's opinion, not about mine.
These are your words:
Ultimately the list is, as you already said yourself, what you consider the super reps list. This thread has good intentions and the potential to help out new members but it shouldn't create false hopes.
The whole "not worth buying in gen consensual list" is just misleading for new members because a big part the watches listed have flaws that are "quickly" spotted. Some reps get scrutinized to the maximum (e.g. subs) while others aren't reviewed or inspected on the same level of detail because there isn't that much interest or for other reasons.
There isn't a community consensus about what is spotted quickly and what not or about what is acceptable and not acceptable. There probably will never be.
Ultimately the list is, as you already said yourself, what you consider the super reps list. This thread has good intentions and the potential to help out new members but it shouldn't create false hopes.
The whole "not worth buying in gen consensual list" is just misleading for new members because a big part the watches listed have flaws that are "quickly" spotted. Some reps get scrutinized to the maximum (e.g. subs) while others aren't reviewed or inspected on the same level of detail because there isn't that much interest or for other reasons.
There isn't a community consensus about what is spotted quickly and what not or about what is acceptable and not acceptable. There probably will never be.
If you think "a big part of the watches listed have flaws that are quickly spotted", you can just give me the list, the arguments, the comparisons and then they'll drop from Super Reps to FIRST CLASS category.
Your opinion is contradictory. Either you're a part of this community and you want to make this list as accurate as possible by pointing out the watches that don't belong there (because this is, if you didn't get it yet, the whole point of the thread), either you're not part of this community and you're just here to criticize, and at that moment your opinion has no value what so ever because you're talking about things you can't demonstrate.
I'm pretty sure you are serious and you really know the flaws of many watches there; I'm also pretty sure you're a good guy and you're not here to criticize my work or just show off, so just show me, for example, only one watch in that list with a real obvious tell, and you'll see it drop in FIRST CLASS right away.
In summary, all I ask you is to be CONSTRUCTIVE. Please, join us, work with us and help us achieve the perfect Super Replicas list. That's what this is all about.