Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Hello Gang, today my V3 Sub arrived... Thanks BK but I'm a bit dissapointed... I do not post Pics because there are a lot of them.... You are all right nice watch but..... WM9 done a really bad mistake!!!! The Crown sits too far on the Case,that means they shape too much material where the Tube is located... This is much better on the V2!!!! A nice watch for shure but with this flaw you can do nothing to improve it... Maybe a gen Tube and Crown will do the trick,I will try to experiment about this... The Bezelteeth are also not deep enough Also the SEL's on this one are not curved enough in the middle, look a bit off to me too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Verylong Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Pikshers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikellem Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Thanks for the quick review Tribal... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 So after some dissambling of my V3 and V2... I installed the whole Eta 2824 assembly (movement,Dial and movement holder) with no problem in my V2 case Also the same for the tiny 2876 in the V3 Case There you can see how small the the difference in Crownpostion is in real life... It must be under 0,3mm or what ever .... Can't see really much different in Crownposition.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Here are some Pics now There you can see that on the V3 the space between Bezel ans Crown is not good.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I'm having a little problem understanding what you mean Tribal. Is the V3 on the left in the pics? If so, I guess what you're saying is that there is less case material (deeper crown guards and the crown sits closer to the bezel) from the bezel out to the crown seat. It also looks like the case tube isn't countersunk as well- but that may be a result of less case to work with. Is that correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I'm having a little problem understanding what you mean Tribal. Is the V3 on the left in the pics? If so, I guess what you're saying is that there is less case material (deeper crown guards and the crown sits closer to the bezel) from the bezel out to the crown seat. It also looks like the case tube isn't countersunk as well- but that may be a result of less case to work with. Is that correct? Yepp,That is what I mean Sorry for my poor english Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I agree that V2 looks better- and more like my gen 16800 (even tho a 16800 isn't exactly the same as a 16610- but they still use the same bezel assembly). Here's a quick pic of my 16800- the crown is seated in the case at the edge of the bezel With the V3, it looks like the seat may be recessed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Yes thats the problem on the V3 Case... WM9 shaped also the Bezel in a wrong way that the crown don't touch the bezel... Not really an improvement for me.... I keep my V2 instead the V3 for shure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Thanks for the comparison Tribal. You're the Sub guru. I'm happy with my v2 too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Thanks mate, but now tell me how stupid is that? Much work for a new case and they claim they have a gen as sample.. How hard it is to make it 1:1? The Sub is a simple constructed watch !! Can't believe they didn't notice this simple flaws.... BTW the Crown don't fit a gen Tube also... There are aftermarket Tubes around the web and they are way better... I don't say its a bad watch,no its nice but a step back in my opinion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 That's the usual blues with reps. One step forward, two steps back. WM9 has been phenomenal but even he has to make compromises. I assume this has been done to achieve the correct crown position? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Mmm... this kinda sucks. From the pics the bezel looks good. What exactly is wrong with the shape? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 That's the usual blues with reps. One step forward, two steps back. WM9 has been phenomenal but even he has to make compromises. I assume this has been done to achieve the correct crown position? No there is too much material off where the Tube is located thats it.... The Bezel teeth are way to small and they use a other shape at the bottom side as it was done on the SSD V2. Visually the Bezel looks thicker but it is not... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Here's a gen 16800 I borrowed for a reference. the bezel assembly on the 16800/16610 is the same and one of the things that hasn't changed in 30 years. This bezel has sharp well defined teeth. Mine are much more worn and smoother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 BTW also the Crownguards have a other shape thy are more curved on the bottom. This gives the visually illusion that the Crown is more centered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allank Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Can you post some more pics of your V2 bezel and V3 bezel for comparison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 V2 V3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allank Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Thanks, very good information. How's the polishing? Is it of good quality on the v3 rather than on the v2? or vice versa? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickdick Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Another Gen for reference. Compared to the above gen pic posted by Alligoat, gen bezels also seem different. TBH i don't see any difference in crown position between the V2/V3 pics posted by Tribal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allank Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Yes, there is. 0.20 mm difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcher Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I have said this weeks ago about the crown issue! As you say WM9 has removed too much metal in the recess. I have fitted a gen tube and crown to mine and it is a little better from the front but there is a small gap on the underside. I also fitted a gen bezel which was diificult to fit as the crystal retaining ring is bigger on the WM9 so a bit of shaving was required until I find a gen retainer. Im sorry I cannot provide pics guys as my camera is not yet fixed but I will. I have converted my LV back to Black with gen dial, gen bezel, gen crystal anbd gen crown/tube combo. I will post pics soon to show. BTW THe gen bezel has a more rounded top showing a smooth edge where it meets the insert and much bigger teeth than WM9's. Width and height are the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tribal Posted January 28, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 On mine V3 the Gen Insert is loose On my V2 Case the shaved gen Insert snaps in. I also installed a gen Crystal and gen Tube and Crown on it. For this small difference in Crown height it's not worth to Mod the V3. As i told before I installed the 2824 in my V2 with no problem. Will Post some Pics of this one the days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klocklind1 Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Yes, there is. 0.20 mm difference. The difference in height (crown position !) is exactly 0,45 mm between 2836-2 and 2824-2 ! But perhaps George has made the insert and crownguard different so it looks the same ????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacher62 Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I have been looking at the pics, on this board, for the past few days and have to agree with Tribal on one thing...the vertical crown position. There have been several that have posted pics of the V3 implementation of the crown position and I do understand, however, I can't see what the hoopla is about. I have an MBK sub that I frankened and in looking at the pics I have held my sub up to the pics and for the life of me, I can't see enough difference to talk about. Like Tribal said, .3mm...maybe. .3mm is larger than a human hair, but, come on. The only perfect ones are at the AD. And this pic is not laying flat down. MT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.