Recieved a Sub C from TS last week, not as happy with it as the GMT I recieved a while ago, I've found a nice pic of a gen on the rolex forum and photographed mine at the same angle, how many differences can you see?
-
Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!
Sub-c TS v Gen spot the difference.
- Thread starter drozd
- Start date
You could have possibly put the same time on your rep as the one on the gen for a better comparison.. ;-)
To begin with, the lume looks very uneven on your rep.
The pearl is less filled in the gen.
The hour hand is thicker & kinda short on the rep.
To begin with, the lume looks very uneven on your rep.
The pearl is less filled in the gen.
The hour hand is thicker & kinda short on the rep.
Also the font on the dial is different...
the "1000ft=300m" writing has a visible difference, and the other text on the dial is crisper on the GEN (look at the SWISS MADE for example)
...The Rolex coronet at 12 o´ clock is taller and thiner on the gen.
Cheers,
Spirit.
- 18/2/11
- 1,382
- 83
- 48
crown too fat
not enough gap between lower writing
1000ft etc are too tall
bezel numerals are thin
pearl triangle is not straight along the top
tick markers too thin
lume steels are the wrong edge shape
the arm is too hairy
not enough gap between lower writing
1000ft etc are too tall
bezel numerals are thin
pearl triangle is not straight along the top
tick markers too thin
lume steels are the wrong edge shape
the arm is too hairy
I was going to change the time but I'm in the middle of an accuracy test.
That is my biggest gripe, the lume is too thick and it is got grey swirls in it I think this is to do with the blue lume as on my GMT C it is perfectly smooth and even identical to the gen....anyone else had issues with this?
In addition to what AskMe and Spirit have pointed out -
The hour hand is WAY wrong
ALL the dial printing and font are off
The bezel numbers are too big and the 2 in 20 is wrong
Lume looks horribly grainy/chunky
The hour hand is WAY wrong
ALL the dial printing and font are off
The bezel numbers are too big and the 2 in 20 is wrong
Lume looks horribly grainy/chunky
Also the bezel is set in too low, leaving a gap all around the rim,I think this is going into the sales section ..will make an ideal starter sub for someone
Ok here is the question
"WHO HAS THE BEST SUB?"
This still baffles me. Look at other "Super Reps" like the Ploprof V2, or the new 111M, the new PAM and Big Bang Josh posted... or even the Jacob & Co. EPIC II. Why can't the factories make a decent Submariner? The only one who could make a really nice Sub was WM9 and he few the coop. Seriously, a freakin Sub can't be as complex as a Big Bang. And it pretty much goes for ALL Rolex models. The Daytona even with the secs at 6, the rehaut is wrong and the hands are all wrong. The only Rolex you can get that is able to get to reasonable accuracy is the vintage (mainly MBW, but I haven't checked out the newer ones). You name a Rolex model and I'll name the stoopid flaws that CAN be fixed...
Normal Sub - All bad except WM9 and WM9 V1 clone (Supreme, TW) but still has crown issues, and insert issues and the bracelets NEVER fit right EVER, EVER, EVER. Vintage MBW 1680 is hella nice for modding.
Ceramic Sub - Bad pearl, bad engraving, no gen crystal, bad hands, no AR on cyclops
GMT IIC - No AR on cyclops, hand stack, engraving
DSSD - All of them, bad pearl, no semi-matte dial - OK, so maybe the DSSD is better than most, it's still ugly
Datejust/Day-Date - All SS models have 18k stamped on the underside of the case, the 18k ones have the weight and color problems, but not bad.. I've seen a few Datejusts I like. DJ gets little respect though.
Explorer II - (see GMT II for the new ones, and the old still have hand stack issues)
Explorer I - Old one is not bad, but needs to be able to put a Clark crystal in, new 39mm Exp needs correct lume and correct hands and gen/clark crystal compatibility
Daytona - Wrong hands (too thin for new models) rehaut is too deep on SS ones. The best I've seen are the Spinmaster and DW vintage ones.
Sea Dweller - SSD had wrong rehaut, no gen crystal compatibility, other than that, not bad. Vintage MBW can be modded to look near perfect.
Yacht-Master - WM9 was near perfect, as perfect as I've seen a rep. The others... not as much. Bad CG, dial color off. The CG's on a YM almost look like a cup the crown is sitting in. WM9 got it right.
This is all I have time for now.. so /rant off
Normal Sub - All bad except WM9 and WM9 V1 clone (Supreme, TW) but still has crown issues, and insert issues and the bracelets NEVER fit right EVER, EVER, EVER. Vintage MBW 1680 is hella nice for modding.
Ceramic Sub - Bad pearl, bad engraving, no gen crystal, bad hands, no AR on cyclops
GMT IIC - No AR on cyclops, hand stack, engraving
DSSD - All of them, bad pearl, no semi-matte dial - OK, so maybe the DSSD is better than most, it's still ugly
Datejust/Day-Date - All SS models have 18k stamped on the underside of the case, the 18k ones have the weight and color problems, but not bad.. I've seen a few Datejusts I like. DJ gets little respect though.
Explorer II - (see GMT II for the new ones, and the old still have hand stack issues)
Explorer I - Old one is not bad, but needs to be able to put a Clark crystal in, new 39mm Exp needs correct lume and correct hands and gen/clark crystal compatibility
Daytona - Wrong hands (too thin for new models) rehaut is too deep on SS ones. The best I've seen are the Spinmaster and DW vintage ones.
Sea Dweller - SSD had wrong rehaut, no gen crystal compatibility, other than that, not bad. Vintage MBW can be modded to look near perfect.
Yacht-Master - WM9 was near perfect, as perfect as I've seen a rep. The others... not as much. Bad CG, dial color off. The CG's on a YM almost look like a cup the crown is sitting in. WM9 got it right.
This is all I have time for now.. so /rant off
I think I'm getting too fussy It's all you lots fault! I've just been looking at BKs blue Ceramic sub its almost Identical to mine same font and markings on the dial same hour hand and pearl he changes the date overlay and movement plus straightens up a couple of things he even said the matt lume is better than the shiny on the other models.
Damn... I love looking at gen sub-c's.... They are just so damn... Perfect. I want a gen. Too bad they are ridiculously priced.
Really?
In my opinion the crystal could do with AR treatment. It is far too expensive not to have it.
And there are better lumes out there than this one.
But it is so damn..........Gen.
They do have one sided AR. Not sure why you would want double AR though. I agree double AR would look much more expensive but that defeats the whole purpose of the roots of Rolex.
But if you have enough money for a sub-c then you got enough money to double AR that mofo!
But if you have enough money for a sub-c then you got enough money to double AR that mofo!
I'm ok with imperfections that I can't see by myself. Until someone points them out. That's when they become glaringly obvious. End of the honeymoon and into the drawer