Fake Rolex, Justified ?
Discussion
I dont think testing to 200m can be all that expensive. After all, the Seiko divers - such as the Orange Monster and SKX007 are only just over a hundred pounds and the retailers have to make a profit from that as well.
To be classified as a divers watch and waterproof to 200m, every individual watch has to be tested, not a random sample.
To be classified as a divers watch and waterproof to 200m, every individual watch has to be tested, not a random sample.
sneijder said:
I thought it was over 200m, that's why G Shocks etc say 200m, when in reality they can take more ?
Your probably right, all pressure vessels, watch SCUBA tank, even a submarine are tested to a SAFE WORKING DEPTH, above that you will reach the crush depth, so reasonable to assume the working depth of a G Shock is quite a bit deeper than 200 msw.
sneijder said:
I thought it was over 200m, that's why G Shocks etc say 200m, when in reality they can take more ?
Taking into account even only a few commercial divers dive to 200 msw, (Oh and a lot of them use G Shocks), why does the average punter bother to buy one? the latest Rolex is outragious depth wise, 3900 metres, thats 2.4 miles in old money. Man can just about manage 300 metres, (984 fsw), still suppose someone will buy it 
but for the price, would be scared to wear it out of the house.
Vipers said:
sneijder said:
I thought it was over 200m, that's why G Shocks etc say 200m, when in reality they can take more ?
Taking into account even only a few commercial divers dive to 200 msw, (Oh and a lot of them use G Shocks), why does the average punter bother to buy one? the latest Rolex is outragious depth wise, 3900 metres, thats 2.4 miles in old money. Man can just about manage 300 metres, (984 fsw), still suppose someone will buy it but for the price, would be scared to wear it out of the house.The only people who care about fake watches, are the people who can afford the real things - and if you're spending over £2000 on a watch, I can understand them getting a little jittery when you come along with a £35 fake.
Yes, I'm sure there are criminal gangs involved in the fake industry...but there are many other industries with shady backgrounds, so really it's just a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things.
Yes, I'm sure there are criminal gangs involved in the fake industry...but there are many other industries with shady backgrounds, so really it's just a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things.
ShadownINja said:
Doesn't that depend on the model? I wouldn't say the Sub is flashy (of course, there may be a diamond encrusted version on a leopard skin strap). What I find funny about Rolexes is the end-pieces of the bracelet look like they were built in China... actually, the whole bracelet feels like it was built in China.
Look at the end-pieces. They have the design finesse of a drunk GCSE design student.
I have to agree, I have always been disappointed with the bracelets of Rolex pieces and for this reason I have not gone down the Rolex route. For some reason they just do not do it for me, but I do not condone the manufacturing of fake watches. Look at the end-pieces. They have the design finesse of a drunk GCSE design student.
toohuge said:
ShadownINja said:
Doesn't that depend on the model? I wouldn't say the Sub is flashy (of course, there may be a diamond encrusted version on a leopard skin strap). What I find funny about Rolexes is the end-pieces of the bracelet look like they were built in China... actually, the whole bracelet feels like it was built in China.
Look at the end-pieces. They have the design finesse of a drunk GCSE design student.
I have to agree, I have always been disappointed with the bracelets of Rolex pieces and for this reason I have not gone down the Rolex route. For some reason they just do not do it for me, but I do not condone the manufacturing of fake watches. Look at the end-pieces. They have the design finesse of a drunk GCSE design student.
Mind you, now days why pay £2.5k+ for a watch which only tells the time, and at a pinch the numerical day of the month, crazy.
Its odd though, when you sit down for lunch offshore on the "Divers" table, you notice all the mature chappies have Rolex's on. But then came along the Seiko G shock, and things changed.
Vipers said:
toohuge said:
ShadownINja said:
Doesn't that depend on the model? I wouldn't say the Sub is flashy (of course, there may be a diamond encrusted version on a leopard skin strap). What I find funny about Rolexes is the end-pieces of the bracelet look like they were built in China... actually, the whole bracelet feels like it was built in China.
Look at the end-pieces. They have the design finesse of a drunk GCSE design student.
I have to agree, I have always been disappointed with the bracelets of Rolex pieces and for this reason I have not gone down the Rolex route. For some reason they just do not do it for me, but I do not condone the manufacturing of fake watches. Look at the end-pieces. They have the design finesse of a drunk GCSE design student.
Mind you, now days why pay £2.5k+ for a watch which only tells the time, and at a pinch the numerical day of the month, crazy.
Its odd though, when you sit down for lunch offshore on the "Divers" table, you notice all the mature chappies have Rolex's on. But then came along the Seiko G shock, and things changed.
are we seriously starting the fake thread AGAIN? it's only been repeated about 500 times in the past year.
SYNOPSIS:
90% of us think that fakes suck
5-10% think spending boatloads of money on expensive real watches suck
5% don't care and think everyone should just buy whatever they want
I think fakes are for fake people. that's all i have to say about that.
SYNOPSIS:
90% of us think that fakes suck
5-10% think spending boatloads of money on expensive real watches suck
5% don't care and think everyone should just buy whatever they want
I think fakes are for fake people. that's all i have to say about that.
deejuic said:
are we seriously starting the fake thread AGAIN? it's only been repeated about 500 times in the past year.
No we weren't, in a nutshell I was asking if a watch is a bit of a one-off, unobtainable, rocking horse poo and worth, say 30k. Would it be OK to buy a replica given that it's so obviously not real, just because it's such an iconic thing ie, James Bond had one and it would be nice to have. No-one would have been missing out on a sale of the 'real thing' as it was made 35 years ago.What I wasn't asking was should I get a fake sub and wear it to work so everyone thinks I'm ace. The thread went off topic and I've since gone off the idea anyway.
andy_s said:
Vipers, get the box Brownie out and give us a flash. Pretty please. With sugar on top.
Righty tighty, first off the No 2A Box Brownie, circa 1926, which my dad always told me he brought from a gypsy for 6d (Thats 6 old pennies for the newer generation on this site)
And the Sea Dweller, circa around 76-77
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff