Reliability clone P9010

[maitre yoda]

Hello everyone.
How reliable is the P9010 clone ?
Is it a movement that holds up or is it a time bomb like certain movement SH3510 ?
Should we plan to open it to clean and oil it ?
Basically do you have positive feedback and experience or not ?
Thank you in advance for your feedback.

 

[KOT1917]

Yes, this is a fairly reliable movement, moreover. Any rep movemt is recommended to service upon receipt if it possible. Most often they complain about a noisy rotor, which is worth lubricating. How to do this and what are the reviews about this movement, you can easily find in a huge number of similar topics.

 

[maitre yoda]

Bonjouf Kot and thank you for the return.
For the noise of the return it does not bother me, I have a Valjoux 7750 which is a real tractor.
Actually I was thinking more about cleaning and oiling the whole thing.
In fact the most complicated for me is to find a local watchmaker for this job.
I think let me try for a PAM960 next year.

 

[KOT1917]

I believe that more experienced members can advise any master in the EU who can provide such a service, or have to look for a local one. Honestly, with clones I prefer to use until the first problems, but they often do not occur. In any case, reliability is a concept formed by the operating life, and this clone has appeared not so long ago to substantively talk about possible risks.

 

[KOT1917]

Bonjouf Kot and thank you for the return.
For the noise of the return it does not bother me, I have a Valjoux 7750 which is a real tractor.
Actually I was thinking more about cleaning and oiling the whole thing.
In fact the most complicated for me is to find a local watchmaker for this job.
I think let me try for a PAM960 next year.

960 is a good choice. I have been wanting a carbotech model for a long time, and at the same time I have long wanted to try something smaller than 44mm.

 

[mysterio]

The P.9010 "clone" is nothing more than an A7750 with decorative plates made to look like the gen P.9010. This was the configuration of the first P.9000 "clone" movements until VSF came up with the gen like clone with the balance wheel @7. So from a reliability perspective, the P.9010 "clone" should be reliable as its base is the work horse A7750 movement. That also makes its repair easier as the watchmaker would just need to remove the decorative plates and service it like any Valjoux 7750 movement.

 

[maitre yoda]

Hello, if it's a Valjoux clone it's a good thing because the original is really strong.

 

[KOT1917]

Hello, if it's a Valjoux clone it's a good thing because the original is really strong.

I apologize, but does the movement used by vsf 960 have a decorated 7750? By puretime there it is a clone similar in function to p.9000, marked as p.9010, like other new submersibles with solid caseback.

 

[superspark69]

I apologize, but does the movement used by vsf 960 have a decorated 7750? By puretime there it is a clone similar in function to p.9000, marked as p.9010, like other new submersibles with solid caseback.

No it’s the p9000 clone movement

 

[johnlogan]

Will winding the P9010 damage the movement ?

 

[mysterio]

Will winding the P9010 damage the movement ?

If it's the one based on the A7750, I don't think so. At least so far, I have not damaged any of my 7750 based reps by giving them 10 winds to give it a push before putting the watch on.

 

[johnlogan]

If it's the one based on the A7750, I don't think so. At least so far, I have not damaged any of my 7750 based reps by giving them 10 winds to give it a push before putting the watch on.

Thanks !

 

[Klaus]

So is this actually still the case that's it's just a decorated 7750? As I've seen reports on the 1616 that the first position detent actually does the hour quick change instead of the date quickchange as per gen which I didn't think was possible with a 7750 unless I'm misunderstanding something. Thoughts?

 

[KOT1917]

So is this actually still the case that's it's just a decorated 7750? As I've seen reports on the 1616 that the first position detent actually does the hour quick change instead of the date quickchange as per gen which I didn't think was possible with a 7750 unless I'm misunderstanding something. Thoughts?

Pam 1616 vsf has a real p9000 clone with gen functions, which is labeled p.9010 but looks different. This is not important, because, there is a solid caseback. This is not 7750. Gen has p.9010.

 

[Klaus]

Sounds about right, curious though as the case seems to be the correct thickness for a 1616 so wondering if they figured out a way to slim down the p.9000 clone in this to fit?

 

[KOT1917]

You should familiarize yourself with the topic of the release of pam1616, they discussed everything that may be important when buying this watch. Based on a discussion of the best releases of 2019, these are probably the best.

 

[Klaus]

You should familiarize yourself with the topic of the release of pam1616, they discussed everything that may be important when buying this watch. Based on a discussion of the best releases of 2019, these are probably the best.

Read that one page for page I'm more active on RepGeek, but there wasn't nearly as much on the 1616 there as here, and I honestly haven't seen much in depth on the movement- noticed there was even a member in that 1616 thread here that thought the hours moving on the first detent was a defect lol. I have a Gen 359 so was pretty stoked to see they mirrored that function which I've grown to like as I travel a lot.

 

[KOT1917]

Read that one page for page I'm more active on RepGeek, but there wasn't nearly as much on the 1616 there as here, and I honestly haven't seen much in depth on the movement- noticed there was even a member in that 1616 thread here that thought the hours moving on the first detent was a defect lol. I have a Gen 359 so was pretty stoked to see they mirrored that function which I've grown to like as I travel a lot.

I apologize, you're right. I don't have rep carbotech, but as I can see, rep case 1616 and 616 are the same. I do not know what the situation is with gen, is there a difference between them in the shape of the protrusions and the thickness as between 382 and 671. I have not seen gens comparisons on the Internet, but there are probably members who have a rep of both models, I'm sure they can answer this question.

 

[KOT1917]

In any case, the gen function is there, it is clearly seen from puretime photographs that a clone was installed in 1616 and the description says about the gen function. B
y the way, from what I found, the thickness of gen 1616 is 15.8mm., With a thickness of 616 in 17mm. I suppose someone should be able to measure the thickness of their reps? (It seems to me that they are the same, but my eye is clearly not what it makes sense to lean on )

 

[johnlogan]

Pam 1616 vsf has a real p9000 clone with gen functions, which is labeled p.9010 but looks different. This is not important, because, there is a solid caseback. This is not 7750. Gen has p.9010.

Just to be clear- the VS P9010 close is not a 7750 -or based on a7750?