|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
|
23 August 2015, 12:29 PM
|
#1 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Toronto Canada
Watch: GMT Master ll
Posts: 1,036
|
magnification problem on my GMT Master ll
Here's a picture of my GMT Master ll please give me your opinion of what you think whether or not it needs to be replaced. I believe if its not to the right spec of 2.5 magnification I should replace it it bothers me that it's not too spec
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 12:31 PM
|
#2 |
|
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Far East
Watch: Golden Tuna
Posts: 28,826
|
That looks 100% fine to me.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 12:32 PM
|
#3 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: .
Posts: 17,898
|
Looks 110% fine to me.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 12:32 PM
|
#4 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Tom
Location: In a race car!
Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES
Posts: 24,123
|
If mine would be ok
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 12:51 PM
|
#5 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: GMT -5
Watch: HulkPepsiCoke
Posts: 2,364
|
No worries.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 06:12 PM
|
#6 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NL
Watch: Yachtmaster
Posts: 14,759
|
Looks 2.5 to me
__________________
Day Date 18238, Yachtmaster 16622, Deepsea 116660, Submariner 116619, SkyD 326935, DJ 178271, DJ 69158, Yachtmaster 169622, GMT 116713LN, GMT 126711. |
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 06:35 PM
|
#7 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,926
|
I had the crystal changed on my Sub LVc because the magnification was significantly less than my BLNR. Your GMT II looks fine to me.
__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737 "Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons |
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 12:50 PM
|
#8 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 360
|
it's fine
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 06:45 PM
|
#9 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 12
|
Its difficult to judge this from a picture but it doesnt look "off".
In my opinion a (new) Rolex needs te be spot on so nothing should bother you. Although the amount of magnification is no spec anymore, rolex removed this from the spec-list. Personally I would replace the crystal if it bothered me. Look at my watch so many times a day. |
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 06:53 PM
|
#10 |
|
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: VA
Watch: me flip
Posts: 1,021
|
If it has the ill fated "date magnification" issue you will know it without question. With that said, they both look perfectly fine IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 08:20 PM
|
#11 |
|
"TRF" Life Patron
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 53,062
|
I would say that 95% of these so called magnification issues would not have been noticed by there owners if they did not read about it on internet forums,and to my old eyes magnification looks fine.
__________________
 ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder 
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 09:23 PM
|
#12 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 5,287
|
I'm sure there are small variations barely noticeable and then there are the ones posted on the forum that seem to have virtually no magnification.
Yours looks fine in the picture. |
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 09:31 PM
|
#13 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Real Name: Alberto Garcia
Location: Argentina
Watch: 5513
Posts: 188
|
Looks too big!!! Just joking. Congrats on the superb acquisition sir.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 09:33 PM
|
#14 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Travis
Location: FL / NYC
Watch: Yes..
Posts: 33,493
|
Non issue. Looks good.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 09:47 PM
|
#15 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: london
Posts: 231
|
Perfect
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 10:05 PM
|
#16 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Australia
Watch: 116610LN
Posts: 15,802
|
Looks fine.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 10:08 PM
|
#17 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,097
|
Looks good to me as well. Maybe go back to your local AD and compare another one, or since you're in Toronto, pay a visit to the RSC on Eglinton. They are very friendly and might offer some insight.
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 10:14 PM
|
#18 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Real Name: Wesley
Location: Austin
Watch: 214270
Posts: 630
|
Looks just like the mag on mine, not worth worrying about IMO
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 10:38 PM
|
#19 |
|
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Real Name: Basil
Location: Athens, GR
Watch: BoctokKomandirskie
Posts: 2,881
|
Looks perfectly normal. No worries!
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2015, 10:40 PM
|
#20 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Tom
Location: World Traveler
Watch: GMT Master II BLNR
Posts: 1,583
|
Looks good.
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 12:15 AM
|
#21 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Plano, Texas
Watch: 116500
Posts: 167
|
Looks normal. Ceramic ones have less mag compare with alum bezel ones.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 12:17 AM
|
#22 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 35,047
|
Looks good to me.
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 12:51 AM
|
#23 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,940
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 04:33 AM
|
#24 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: earth
Posts: 794
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 05:36 AM
|
#25 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Houston
Watch: SkyD, SD43, GMT2
Posts: 5,061
|
The SD and SDDS have the same size date window as the GMT but no magnification. look at one of those then compare yours. Like everyone else here I think yours if fine but to confirm yourself go an AD and compare.
I am wearing the exact same watch right now and the magnification looks the same on yours as mine. |
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 06:31 AM
|
#26 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: RI
Watch: blusylvx2blnrsmpbb
Posts: 723
|
Looks good to me as well.
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 06:36 AM
|
#27 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: USA
Watch: All
Posts: 5,316
|
One more
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 08:40 AM
|
#28 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas
Watch: 12800ft = 3900m
Posts: 11,173
|
Magnification looks good,
But the bezel is off center at 12 and the GMT hand is usually greener. 
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 09:32 AM
|
#29 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Real Name: Michael
Location: Canada
Posts: 182
|
I think they are fine.
|
|
|
|
|
24 August 2015, 12:42 PM
|
#30 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: Ron
Location: Arizona, USA
Watch: 116233
Posts: 3,180
|
Looks like mine so we are both good to go.
Just for grins, here's a pic of my GMTII. Look closely and you can see the unmagnified date below the cyclops. This gives you an idea of what it looks like before 2.5X magnification.
__________________
so many Rolexes.....so little time |
|
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Hybrid Mode
