ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

morgman · 21 September 2006, 11:24 AM

Wow they have fine tolerances, looks like the hand is CLOSE to the dial surface!

JJ Irani · 21 September 2006, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morgman

Wow they have fine tolerances, looks like the hand is CLOSE to the dial surface!

And I thought I was the only...SUPERLATIVE NUT, OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED tosser on this forum!!

mailman · 21 September 2006, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

And I thought I was the only...SUPERLATIVE NUT, OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED tosser on this forum!!

You are

colemanitis · 22 September 2006, 03:33 AM

Very close to the dial. I'm suprised it doesn't come in contact with the lettering. Here's a pic I had laying around.

JJ Irani · 22 September 2006, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colemanitis

Very close to the dial. I'm suprised it doesn't come in contact with the lettering. Here's a pic I had laying around.

Now I'm thoroughly confused!!

Who the hell was "laying around"? You, the picture or the hands?

mike · 22 September 2006, 08:59 AM

One of the things I've always found interesting is the difference in the stack of the hands between the 1675 and the 16750.
Compare the position of the hour and 24 hr hand between your 16750 and the 1675
The 16750 has the hr. hand next to the dial while it's the opposite on the 1675

morgman · 22 September 2006, 02:46 PM

Thanks for the pics guys! Yah, they all look like mine, "skating" on the surface practially!!!!!! Yikes!

It is interesting that the hour hand is now closest to the dial. I imagine it's that way because the hour markers are now thick and the 24hr hand would run into them.

I need to get a better camera :-)

Still bonding with the watch hehehe

morgman · 22 September 2006, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

And I thought I was the only...SUPERLATIVE NUT, OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED tosser on this forum!!

just can't stay out of trouble JJ !!!!!

mike · 22 September 2006, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morgman

It is interesting that the hour hand is now closest to the dial. I imagine it's that way because the hour markers are now thick and the 24hr hand would run into them.

My guess is it has more to do with the movement. The 1675 using a 15xx while the 16750 used the 3xxx.
Notice the same stack on the matt 16750

dfn8tly · 23 September 2006, 03:05 AM

Your absolutely right. Those tolerances are almost microscopic for such a rugged watch. But, that's one of the things we expect and pay for.

21 September 2006, 11:24 AM	#1
morgman "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 475	GMT owners, how close is your hour hand to the dial?? Wow they have fine tolerances, looks like the hand is CLOSE to the dial surface!

22 September 2006, 03:33 AM	#4
colemanitis "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Jeff Location: Florida Watch: PAM 1090 Posts: 3,723	Very close to the dial. I'm suprised it doesn't come in contact with the lettering. Here's a pic I had laying around. __________________ Member #471

22 September 2006, 08:59 AM	#6
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	One of the things I've always found interesting is the difference in the stack of the hands between the 1675 and the 16750. Compare the position of the hour and 24 hr hand between your 16750 and the 1675 The 16750 has the hr. hand next to the dial while it's the opposite on the 1675

22 September 2006, 02:46 PM	#7
morgman "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 475	Thanks for the pics guys! Yah, they all look like mine, "skating" on the surface practially!!!!!! Yikes! It is interesting that the hour hand is now closest to the dial. I imagine it's that way because the hour markers are now thick and the 24hr hand would run into them. I need to get a better camera :-) Still bonding with the watch hehehe

23 September 2006, 03:05 AM	#10
dfn8tly Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Richard Location: The Villages, FL Watch: GMT-II Posts: 396	Your absolutely right. Those tolerances are almost microscopic for such a rugged watch. But, that's one of the things we expect and pay for.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)