I just wanna post a general consideration.
I'm a watch "casual enthusiast", that means that I can spot which watch someone is wearing at first glance, I can distinguish a SD from a SUB or recognize a GP Laureato...but that's it. How many people, out there, can do this? Maybe 5/10%? But that's it. I'm not, in any way, an expert.
For a noob like me reading your discussion about thickness, size of the crown, etc...is very useful. It helps people like me to understand what (and how) to look for to have a deeper knowledge. Those discussion give also general advices on which are the best OOTB replicas (and that's what a lot of people is looking for on this forum).
It's a pleasure to read people like Hinclimincli BIONONE GingerBubba or the despicable french guy discussing all those little stuff that make a replica better than the other. That's what this passion is about. Those are the discussion from where noobs like me can get the "what's the best replica of XX model" answer. But that's because those guys make pretty clear that YES: the gen is 0.2mm thinner/the 12 indices are a little misaligned/the date font is slightly thinner/fatter, but NO: nobody can see that on your wrist, sometimes nobody can see those things without a 10x zoom. They're doing something useful for everybody.
What I don't get is how in the world a 0.3 mm difference is an instant tell. I mean, everybody is free to decide which level of flaw can tolerate. I can totally see someone considering a 0.3mm difference a reason not to buy a replica.
But an instant tell? Something you can see from 2 feet away? Come on!
There's no point on doing this, it's simply false and can generate a false perception affecting all those who are approaching this world.
I'm a watch "casual enthusiast", that means that I can spot which watch someone is wearing at first glance, I can distinguish a SD from a SUB or recognize a GP Laureato...but that's it. How many people, out there, can do this? Maybe 5/10%? But that's it. I'm not, in any way, an expert.
For a noob like me reading your discussion about thickness, size of the crown, etc...is very useful. It helps people like me to understand what (and how) to look for to have a deeper knowledge. Those discussion give also general advices on which are the best OOTB replicas (and that's what a lot of people is looking for on this forum).
It's a pleasure to read people like Hinclimincli BIONONE GingerBubba or the despicable french guy discussing all those little stuff that make a replica better than the other. That's what this passion is about. Those are the discussion from where noobs like me can get the "what's the best replica of XX model" answer. But that's because those guys make pretty clear that YES: the gen is 0.2mm thinner/the 12 indices are a little misaligned/the date font is slightly thinner/fatter, but NO: nobody can see that on your wrist, sometimes nobody can see those things without a 10x zoom. They're doing something useful for everybody.
What I don't get is how in the world a 0.3 mm difference is an instant tell. I mean, everybody is free to decide which level of flaw can tolerate. I can totally see someone considering a 0.3mm difference a reason not to buy a replica.
But an instant tell? Something you can see from 2 feet away? Come on!
There's no point on doing this, it's simply false and can generate a false perception affecting all those who are approaching this world.
