Inside the GMT2c BLNR

[elcompa]

So, I had the back off my new GMT2c BLNR and thought some of you might like to see the inner workings (3186 movement). So, for what it's worth.....

[apollo11]

Nice pictures, looks purdy inside.

Why did you take the back off?

[KBM]

I get these are tool watches. In fact, that is one of the advantages of the sports models. However, I would surely like to see transparent casebacks and nicer finishing on the movements. Especially for a watch that is "only" rated to 100m, what's stopping Rolex from giving us a nicer looking movt. and a see through back? Tradition alone seems like a cheap explanation to me.

[swils8610]

Very cool. I'm afraid to take the back off mine!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[yld2rob]

Thanks because I'm not opening mine

[paverman]

Robust to be sure, but I can see why they don't bother with a sapphire back.
Love the front view though.

[Hairdude1]

Very nice. I wish Rolex would use a Solid gold rotor and show it off with a transparent case back, especially since their prices are going thru the roof. Just MO

[TAKUYA]

are you gonna put the clear sapphire crystal case back or what?

[codecow]

Hey it has some decoration, I like it!

[Nidal]

Looks exactly the like the black ceramic version launched in 2007 for 5400$. How crazy is that !!!

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by apollo11

Nice pictures, looks purdy inside.

Why did you take the back off?

Cause I loves me some watches and wanted to see the inside. Done at a certified shop.

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by swils8610

Very cool. I'm afraid to take the back off mine!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why be afraid? Parts is parts.... They all come apart, they all go back together. No different than a puzzle, only more expensive and needs to be pressure tested. Not a big deal, really.

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by takuya

are you gonna put the clear sapphire crystal case back or what?

Nope, just wanted to see my own real 3186 movement. Very cool, although I like the idea of a clear back. Perhaps a consideration in the future.

[zacharyrtyler]

I actually prefer the solid caseback- sapphire case backs are gaudy to me, overdone.

[padi56]

Well it looks like any of the 3 series movements basically all the 3 series are all based on the cal 3135 with or without added complications. Just like the car industry many share the same floor pan with different bodies and names make perfect sense in today mass production.IMHO the Rolex movement is quite plain Jane in the looks department, but a pretty looking movement don't make it a great movement.All the Rolex movements since the 10 series have proved to be reliable and accurate. My personal favorites are the 15 series well over engineered and seem to run forever.

[Prism]

Thanks for this, could you also tell me if the serial number of the watch is engraved on the 6 o'clock position of the case or not? My new Exp2 has the engraving only on the 6 o'clock position of the rehaut!
TIA

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Prism

Thanks for this, could you also tell me if the serial number of the watch is engraved on the 6 o'clock position of the case or not? My new Exp2 has the engraving only on the 6 o'clock position of the rehaut!
TIA

All the newer serial watches will have serial just on the rehaut some older watches serial between lugs and rehaut others just between lugs only.

[Racerdj]

Nice picture as I am not capable of taking something apart and getting it all back together complete.

[cokecoke]

nice , thanks

[kilyung]

Did you make your own holder?

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by kilyung

Did you make your own holder?

Oh goodness, no. This was done by a watchmaker. I could/would never attempt this myself.

[sea-dweller]

Very cool!

[padi56]

Originally Posted by elcompa

Oh goodness, no. This was done by a watchmaker. I could/would never attempt this myself.

If you can unscrew a jar you can get the back of a Rolex and with the correct tool its just like unscrewing a lid on a pot of jam.And would expect the Rolex case back would be easier, as today some of these jam-pots are real difficult to open.

[Oyster Al]

Originally Posted by padi56

If you can unscrew a jar you can get the back of a Rolex and with the correct tool its just like unscrewing a lid on a pot of jam.And would expect the Rolex case back would be easier, as today some of these jam-pots are real difficult to open.

[montpyt]

Very cool....I'd never be able to do that

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by padi56

If you can unscrew a jar you can get the back of a Rolex and with the correct tool its just like unscrewing a lid on a pot of jam.And would expect the Rolex case back would be easier, as today some of these jam-pots are real difficult to open.

Let me ask this: How important do you think it is to actually follow through with the water pressure test after the back has been put back on? Is this simply "recommended" or actually necessary? My guy did this, but I was actually thinking...for a watch that will never see more water than a swimming pool, how important is this?

Thought: Given a new watch, pressure tested at the factory, the back comes off and then put back on with no obvious issues. Isn't the trip-lock stem/crown the point where a leak would actually occur? If the stem/crown is not touched, wouldn't it stand too reason that if all one did was take off the back then replace it, that it should be water resistant still? Hence, no real need for the water pressure test?