They are the same mate, both the V1 !Is this some kind of a rep-striptease when u hide the inserts with a thong... i mean lens
Give us the inserts comparison bud
Reason is I got the V2 insert broken in two pieces during transport. Solving that with @CTime. But color wise, it’s veeeery close to xing v5 irl. Much thinner as well
If you’re not too anal, latest CF. It’s really if you wish to take your 90% genlike watch to 95% that you start swapping parts, frankening etc. And then you will want a CF donor to harvest all the good parts for your C+
Agreed. The lugs are also better shaped, I did not pick that up in my earlier review, but now I really notice it. Lugs are thinner than CF, maybe 0,5mm thinner, but it changes the overall look and improves the caseshape a lotThe new C+ is a very impressive. Especially the Oyster Bracelet Quality and details. I had to reduce the size of several Oyster Bracelets on my Gen, VSF, Noop etc.
The C+ was the best near Gen in regard to everything.
To bounce again on C+. This is the lug profile of CF:
Do you have a gen for reference when comparing the case shape, lugs, crown guards etc?So I've got a C+ with the older insert from @CTime now, and since I don't think that has ever been made, I started to compare it to my CF DD3285 V2 (with V1 insert ofc), and why not sharing the pics after all.
Tl;dr : I like the C+ for pretty much everything EXCEPT the movement and the xtal (yes, C+ xtal is even shittier than CF lol).
> Caseset has a better shape, bezel action is better, hands are better, the bracelet doesn't squeak like a mice ootb (the CF does), and all the details that make the flavor (correct serial font, correct STEELINOX engraving on the clasp)
> What CF does better than C+: movement, xtal
> What they share: rehaut polish is identical, dial is identical, DW seems identical, crown as well
Now, the pics:
First one C+, second one CF:
First one C+, second one CF:
First one C+, second one CF. The tip of the lugs is more rounded in the C+. It's pointier in the CF:
First one C+, second one CF. The Rolex print. For me they look identical in both.
First one C+, second one CF. Minute hand. The C+ tip is rounded; my CF is a bit bended (!!), it's probably my specimen though.
First one C+, second one CF. Minute hand., another angle, you see the tip probably more clearly:
You know the drill. The second hand this time.
You know the drill. The hour hand. The C+ hour hand seem more 3D than the CF. I prefer the C+:
Another angle, same thing here, C+ first, CF last:
Same thing again, C+ first CF second. The CG sideways shape is better in the C+, you can see that the lines are straight rather than oblique. That's more accurate to gen !
No offence but how do you know the case shape is better on the c+ then? Has anyone done a comparison thread on here regarding case shapes compared with the gen 126710?
Because we know CF lugs are a bit wider than gen. You can find that here for example, with comparison pics as well: https://www.reddit.com/r/RepTime/s/PmP7o0uY86
Thanks so much for the detailed pics and review. Any chance you can try swapping the movements to see if one movement fits in the other watch’s case and vice versa?So I've got a C+ with the older insert from @CTime now, and since I don't think that has ever been made, I started to compare it to my CF DD3285 V2 (with V1 insert ofc), and why not sharing the pics after all.
Tl;dr : I like the C+ for pretty much everything EXCEPT the movement and the xtal (yes, C+ xtal is even shittier than CF lol).
> Caseset has a better shape, bezel action is better, hands are better, the bracelet doesn't squeak like a mice ootb (the CF does), and all the details that make the flavor (correct serial font, correct STEELINOX engraving on the clasp)
> What CF does better than C+: movement, xtal
> What they share: rehaut polish is identical, dial is identical, DW seems identical, crown as well
Now, the pics:
First one C+, second one CF:
First one C+, second one CF:
First one C+, second one CF. The tip of the lugs is more rounded in the C+. It's pointier in the CF:
First one C+, second one CF. The Rolex print. For me they look identical in both.
First one C+, second one CF. Minute hand. The C+ tip is rounded; my CF is a bit bended (!!), it's probably my specimen though.
First one C+, second one CF. Minute hand., another angle, you see the tip probably more clearly:
You know the drill. The second hand this time.
You know the drill. The hour hand. The C+ hour hand seem more 3D than the CF. I prefer the C+:
Another angle, same thing here, C+ first, CF last:
Same thing again, C+ first CF second. The CG sideways shape is better in the C+, you can see that the lines are straight rather than oblique. That's more accurate to gen !
Much appreciated I’ll give it a readBecause we know CF lugs are a bit wider than gen. You can find that here for example, with comparison pics as well: https://www.reddit.com/r/RepTime/s/PmP7o0uY86
Crown guard shape: we know that gen lines are straight. CF lines are sloped to the side, it was noted last year in the first CF thread here on RWI.
That’s what I’ll attempt: next step is the frankenization. But I asked I think dogwpod recently and he said that they are a direct swap if that helps
