VSF 126610 Submariner with VS3235 Latest Movement 72 Hours Power Reserve

[Pietros]

The left side is easily gen. Yes focal length is a factor, true. However, show me a shot of the VSF that looks like the left hand shot, at whatever focal length you please, that shows those lugs that taper in that manner, sharp and not rounded, and I'll get one immediately. Even the right hand shot of your initial pic has sharper and non-rounded lugs than the VSF you added to the right of it.



Well he did not measure the dial, just the crystal, and is saying he's taking an educated guess based on that information. However he is unfortunately mistaken.

These guys actually measured the dial themselves (7:48 in):

https://youtu.be/DnalC9GMB5g?t=468 I appreciate you discussing it nevertheless.

So we agree that the crystals are identical in size.
Just looking at the still side by side image from the video, how can the dial be larger?
We can see that it extends to the margin of the crystal on both models.
Both models have an identical crystal size. I’m genuinely confused-where is this extra dial size accommodated?



Sent from the RWI App

 

[Pietros]

The dials are the same size as both use the same crystal retainer therefore the rehaut width is the same so we can conclude the dial is also the same. Fact not fiction! It has been measured by someone who owns both. The dimensions of the bezel have been changed to increase the diameter. He didn’t measure the insert though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hallelujah. We got there in the end.


Sent from the RWI App

 

[Duckber]

The dials are the same size as both use the same crystal retainer therefore the rehaut width is the same so we can conclude the dial is also the same. Fact not fiction! It has been measured by someone who owns both. The dimensions of the bezel have been changed to increase the diameter. He didn’t measure the insert though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My video has also shown it having some people measured who owns both though? I can't necessarily see why they'd get that wrong. I'm open to the conversation, if some actual measurements come out for the dial I'm definitely open to hearing about it.

So we agree that the crystals are identical in size.
Just looking at the still side by side image from the video, how can the dial be larger?
We can see that it extends to the margin of the crystal on both models.
Both models have an identical crystal size. I’m genuinely confused-where is this extra dial size accommodated?



Sent from the RWI App

I'm not sure what Rolex did to accommodate the crystal size, as far as I know maybe the person in your video got that wrong too? I can't honestly say I see a difference in outer bezel either, so it's a moot point. I also wouldn't look for a .3mm increase on a video or photo anyway. Do you honestly think the .3 increase on the gen is really down to the outer bezel rim? I doubt it. Again, the idea that crown and caliber got it wrong doesn't sit right.

 

[Pietros]

My video has also shown it having some people measured who owns both though? I can't necessarily see why they'd get that wrong. I'm open to the conversation, if some actual measurements come out for the dial I'm definitely open to hearing about it.



I'm not sure what Rolex did to accomadate the crystal size, as far as I know maybe the person in your video got that wrong too? I can't honestly say I see a difference in outer bezel either, so it's a moot point. Do you honestly think the .3 increase on the gen is really down to the outer bezel rim? I doubt it. Again, the idea that crown and caliber got it wrong doesn't sit right.

I think looking at the evidence and the post from the member that you cited as evidence a couple of days previously, it’s the idea that Duckber got it wrong that doesn’t sit right with you ????


Sent from the RWI App

 

[Duckber]

I think looking at the evidence and the post from the member that you cited as evidence a couple of days previously, it’s the idea that Duckber got it wrong that doesn’t sit right with you ????


Sent from the RWI App

What? I don't think you understand what you just wrote.

I cited him as a source for measurements of the replica. Not the genuine watch made by the factory called Rolex. He does not have the measurements of the genuine Rolex, in fact the post I cited from him stated he doesn't have those measurements of the genuine watch. I hope this helps.

 

[Mille M]

The left side is easily gen. Yes focal length is a factor, true. However, show me a shot of the VSF that looks like the left hand shot, at whatever focal length you please, that shows those lugs that taper in that manner, sharp and not rounded, and I'll get one immediately. Even the right hand shot of your initial pic has sharper and non-rounded lugs than the VSF you added to the right of it.

You can't deny...
These two look the same.

You're just being stubborn now!
I even think my SELs look better than that gen

https://www.watchtradingco.com/shop...id=IwAR1AQ3REmYMCrXXsCLpbzm2ZLH9vMS_yS6qkvSMm 0rdIm1hwdxxrBMtmUxA

The link to that gen I show on the photo.

I don't need you to agree with me.
I'll just posted this to show other users the "closeness" of VSF to the gen counterpart (as they can be mislead by your comments).

Cheers

 

[Duckber]

You can't deny...
These two look the same.

You're just being stubborn now!
I even think my SELs look better than that gen

https://www.watchtradingco.com/shop/...9vMS_yS6qkvSMm 0rdIm1hwdxxrBMtmUxA

The link to that gen I show on the photo.

I don't need you to agree with me.
I'll just posted this to show other users the "closeness" of VSF to the gen counterpart (as they can be mislead by your comments).

Cheers

No, I am not. I have still not seen the lugs to my satisfaction. But we can agree to disagree, I am glad you enjoy the watch.

Now, can you show me a picture of a VSF that looks like the watch on the left per your original photo?

 

[Jayalvin777]

I think looking at the evidence and the post from the member that you cited as evidence a couple of days previously, it’s the idea that Duckber got it wrong that doesn’t sit right with you ????


Sent from the RWI App

Just don't give him more gas. Ignore him, as muiramas perfectly said; He take people's words and twisted them to suit his agenda. He could have got the watch long ago and measure it by himself but no, he has to link lots of videos and then claimed that with his super vision parts are different. Opinions are good but they should be based with some facts. If not, they simply not add anything to the conversation and we have seem this for the last couple of pages on this thread.

 

[Duckber]

Just don't give him more gas. Ignore him, as muiramas perfectly said; He take people's words and twisted them to suit his agenda. He could have got the watch long ago and measure it by himself but no, he has to link lots of videos and then claimed that with his super vision parts are different. Opinions are good but they should be based with some facts. If not, they simply not add anything to the conversation and we have seem this for the last couple of pages on this thread.

I'm sorry but what is my agenda? Can you describe what you think my agenda is?

What words did I twist? What did I take out of context?

You sure do say that I do all these things without what the context is, and how I take it out of context? Feel free to elaborate. I'm waiting. Instead of stating things I do you should go in depth and explain what I'm doing. But you won't now will ya?

Also pretty cool of you to conveniently ignore tribal stating the new bracelet improves the SEL shape and fit and finish, something I pointed out since literally day one of the release? What about that? No apology there? Oh let me guess, that's somehow out of context? :clap_1:

 

[Pietros]

What? I don't think you understand what you just wrote.

I cited him as a source for measurements of the replica. Not the genuine watch made by the factory called Rolex. He does not have the measurements of the genuine Rolex, in fact the post I cited from him stated he doesn't have those measurements of the genuine watch. I hope this helps.

But his evidence is based on the fact that the crystals are identical in size, so...

The gen 116610 and 126610 crystals have been measured at 29.9mm (identical).
We can see that they both extend to meet the rehaut
as do the dials.
So logic dictates...the dials are identical in size. QED.


Sent from the RWI App

 

[Duckber]

But his evidence is based on the fact that the crystals are identical in size, so...

The gen 116610 and 126610 crystals have been measured at 29.9mm (identical).
We can see that they both extend to meet the rehaut
as do the dials.
So logic dictates...the dials are identical in size. QED.


Sent from the RWI App

Except your video does not for some reason override mine, which happens to have many gens over various generations, and measures it at 30.3mm -- so clearly someone is wrong. I am not particularly sure why you're entirely dismissive of the video I posted, except to argue in bad faith to get some fake internet points in an online discussion. Now I can admit if it's wrong, but there is no substantial evidence to dismiss the video I posted.

 

[Pietros]

Except your video does not for some reason override mine, which happens to have many gens over various generations, and measures it at 30.3mm -- so clearly someone is wrong. I am not particularly sure why you're entirely dismissive of the video I posted, except to argue in bad faith to get some fake internet points in an online discussion. Now I can admit if it's wrong, but there is no substantial evidence to dismiss the video I posted.

Fake internet points in an online discussion?
A great window into how your mind works.

It’s been fascinating...


Sent from the RWI App

 

[Duckber]

Fake internet points in an online discussion?
A great window into how your mind works.

It’s been fascinating...


Sent from the RWI App

That's literally what you're doing. Oh but cool, curve the main discussion and change the goalposts of the topic, I'd do the same if I were you.

 

[Replisimio]

Except your video does not for some reason override mine, which happens to have many gens over various generations, and measures it at 30.3mm -- so clearly someone is wrong. I am not particularly sure why you're entirely dismissive of the video I posted, except to argue in bad faith to get some fake internet points in an online discussion. Now I can admit if it's wrong, but there is no substantial evidence to dismiss the video I posted.

The gen crystal has an outer edge of 30.35-30.4mm with an internal of 29.5mm where the gasket sits. The gen insert on a 116610 has an internal diameter of 31.30mm and out edge of 38.10mm. I’ve just measured them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Duckber]

The gen crystal has an outer edge of 30.35-30.4mm with an internal of 29.5mm where the gasket sits. The gen insert on a 116610 has an internal diameter of 31.30mm and out edge of 38.10mm. I’ve just measured them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Okay but we're talking about the 126610 genuine Rolex that you don't have, so what does this accomplish?

 

[rcom440]

Ok guys let’s see some more pics of LN and LV including wrist shots.
I’m actually thinking about adding LV too.

 

[stufuse]

I think Rolex 6 digit watches have a crystal diameter 30.5 some Of the 5 digits are the same hence why b25-295 xtals fit across all the models.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pietros]

Ok guys let’s see some more pics of LN and LV including wrist shots.
I’m actually thinking about adding LV too.

Ok, here's a few of my LN and a shot next to my gen Explorer II for size comparison:

 

[watchgeek41]

So without me even asking (I only asked for more photos of the SEL gap) my TD got me another watch. Unfortunately, now it looks like the date is too high. I’ve seen many photos of these watches and I haven’t seen a date mis-centered like this. For now, I’ve asked for photos of another date to be sure. Can I have everyone’s thoughts? I’m only this picky because of the near $600 cost of the watch all in. Also the amplitude is only 230. I asked for a photo of it fully wound. If it’s 230 fully wound, that’s a clear red light. It’s a bummer because everything else about the watch looks great. Thanks everyone for your input.

 

[saucin]

So without me even asking (I only asked for more photos of the SEL gap) my TD got me another watch. Unfortunately, now it looks like the date is too high. I’ve seen many photos of these watches and I haven’t seen a date mis-centered like this. For now, I’ve asked for photos of another date to be sure. Can I have everyone’s thoughts? I’m only this picky because of the near $600 cost of the watch all in. Also the amplitude is only 230. I asked for a photo of it fully wound. If it’s 230 fully wound, that’s a clear red light. It’s a bummer because everything else about the watch looks great. Thanks everyone for your input.

If you read the posts in this thread, you’d know that it’s not a “clear red light”. Now since I know 80% of these posts are Duckber and other bickering back and forth - and who the hell would want to sort through that stuff to find what you need..... I will gladly inform you that the VSF 3285 movement (and Gen 3285) run at a lower amplitude than the 3185’s. Also the lift angle should not be set to 52 degrees on the timegrapher (should be higher - 58-59 degrees) which would give you a higher amplitude. Your watch is fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk