- 12/3/18
- 35,380
- 69,765
- 113
no problem i tag you
the rep dial is the same as the gen dial
when i have time tomorrow i will take a picture
Any luck with pics of the rep dial bro? Thanks!
no problem i tag you
the rep dial is the same as the gen dial
when i have time tomorrow i will take a picture
Any luck with pics of the rep dial bro? Thanks!
I read that the VSF 126610 does not use a gen-spec dial so that rep VS3235 movement would not need to be shaped that way with the dial stubs sticking out laterally. Unless the stubs are just used in lieu of a movement holder and there are dial foot holes drilled in the movement. I'll have one soon and will take it apart.
yeah speaking about that.. the vsf 126610 is NOT gen spec on the dial+datewheel bridge+crystal. Its much smaller than the gen 3235 parts.
check out the pics
Being honest, I installed a bunch of genuine datewheels/ dials on clone 3235 with 0 issues.
In Subs or DJs?
Same here, wish we had a Gen to compare it with. But even the datewheel bridge is much smaller than the Gen 3235 datewheel bridge. It's hard to confirm anything until we have a Gen. It could very well be that Rolex used a different size for the sub models
I am not sure what the issue here is. Did vsf use different size dial+datewheel bridge+crystal? Did rolex change the sizing of these parts on the gen 3235 in the submariner?
I dont know mate, the movement you see here, is 90% gen. Only 4 parts are not gen, every bridge and gear and even the screws are gen 3235. I remember having a gen datejust 3235 dial in my hands and that was a lot bigger than this submariner dial. its hard to say what exactly the issue is as I dont have a gen 126610 dial to compare it with
Same here, wish we had a Gen to compare it with. But even the datewheel bridge is much smaller than the Gen 3235 datewheel bridge. It's hard to confirm anything until we have a Gen. It could very well be that Rolex used a different size for the sub models