New TW Ceramic subs

[ispytonyv]

...

The numbers clearly have some depth and some refractive properties, when you light them the right way the look much, much bolder then they actually seem to be. If you assume that every dealer photo is 100% accurate and not at all enhanced with special lighting then you could assume that those are two different watches. Based on what we've been told (that only one factory is making the SA3135 for now and they're not selling it separately) it's safe to assume that these two are the same watch from the same factory with different dealer photos. If someone wants to actually buy both watches and compare them and prove me wrong I'll happily stand corrected but until then the evidence weighs heavily in my favor from where I'm standing.

I've already reported on the fit and finish of my 16610 SA3135 sub and based on the inconsistencies with the movement taking or not taking gen hands it wouldn't surprise me if the bezels had some inconsistencies too.

icard:

I can't believe you're still arguing these are the same. It's a slow Friday at the office, guess maybe I'm going to have to fire up Photoshop and do an overlay comparison. Based on pictures alone, I will GUARANTEE these are not the same insert, at the very least. There is ZERO chance these are the same inserts. None. At all. Period.

IF THEY'RE THE SAME, I WILL BUY YOU ONE OF YOUR CHOICE!

 

[agrigoras]

I'll be honest, the pearl on the TS watch looks thicker and taller.

I'm with Ispytonyv on this one, lighting wouldn't produce those results, pics are either altered or the watch they photographed was touched up by hand to differentiate itself from PT's offering. It's also very possible for them to have swapped out the bezel, since as most of us are aware, darthalex built a really nice subc using that case and a noobfactory bezel.

 

[Fidhle007]

icard:

I can't believe you're still arguing these are the same. It's a slow Friday at the office, guess maybe I'm going to have to fire up Photoshop and do an overlay comparison. Based on pictures alone, I will GUARANTEE these are not the same insert, at the very least. There is ZERO chance these are the same inserts. None. At all. Period.

IF THEY'RE THE SAME, I WILL BUY YOU ONE OF YOUR CHOICE!

Ok, the bezel may be different which I suggested (fit and finish consistency issues) but that doesn't mean it's not the same watch... I'll buy the PT one and someone else buy the TS one and send it to me so I can do a comparison and write up.

I'm serious...

Pretty sure the case is identical to the one used in the timeshops hulk. Which has the engravings on the back from a TT sub i guess.

If I'm right, the SA3135 stem would be dangerously close to snapping since the case isn't built for it. So much for a simple relume, pearl mod, and AR cyclops.

They need to offer it in an ETA clone!

The crown heights are different, you can see that in these pics. I think the SA3135 SubCs and YMs are probably the only offerings WITH correct crown height these days. It's been well documented (by me) that the crown height on the 16610 is completely wrong.

Are we suspecting that the SA3135 is actually a Noobfactory offering?

 

[giobo]

icard:

I can't believe you're still arguing these are the same. It's a slow Friday at the office, guess maybe I'm going to have to fire up Photoshop and do an overlay comparison. Based on pictures alone, I will GUARANTEE these are not the same insert, at the very least. There is ZERO chance these are the same inserts. None. At all. Period.

IF THEY'RE THE SAME, I WILL BUY YOU ONE OF YOUR CHOICE!

As said before: same dial,movement,bracelet and case shape...Even the same wrong date postition...Insert and rehaut engraving are different

The crown heights are different, you can see that in these pics. I think the SA3135 SubCs and YMs are probably the only offerings WITH correct crown height these days. It's been well documented (by me) that the crown height on the 16610 is completely wrong.

TC Sub,Sean Sub and YM have correct crown height also..

 

[Fidhle007]

I meant in terms of the SA3135 offerings, which is why I did not count the TC or the Sean sub. I have a Sean sub with an SA3135 inside it but that's a custom job ;-)

 

[giobo]

I meant in terms of the SA3135 offerings, which is why I did not count the TC or the Sean sub. I have a Sean sub with an SA3135 inside it but that's a custom job ;-)

Have seen yours and it is great!!!
The Sean case is the best base..Of course it is the exepensive one alslo:frusty:

 

[ajs914]

Why do I feel like I'm the only one who can't stand the noob subC? I think using the wrong case is completely unacceptable and (snip)...

Can someone school me on why the case is wrong? I have a regular noobmariner and a noob sub-c. The noob sub-c case is definitely heavier and beefier than the regular noob sub. So, what case does this really belong to?

TIA

 

[Fidhle007]

A GMT IIc. The SubC has a thicker lugs and crown guards then the GMT IIc.

 

[correctime]

The TW ceramic look good although it is expensive...
Did you saw this:

http://www.timeshops.net/11857-ro1080hou-rolex-submariner-black-dial-ss-ss-tw-best-edition-asian-3135


TC sub

Not too bad.
Even with the Bracelet numbers stamped as an Exp.II SEL Bracelet

 

[Fidhle007]

You know, if those were $250 they would be the new gold standard, they're quite good out of the box but not for that price. At $400 it's just a really expensive movement holder...

 

[giobo]

Yes for 400$ and with the timebomb movement i woul pass..Maybe they can use another movement and will sell like crazy!