ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

baradona · 2 October 2009, 06:16 AM

As a proud Milgauss GV owner I get pretty freaked out by the quality of fakes. This is far from the best - so far I've spotted:
* GV face with clear glass
* What appear to be hallmark stamps on rear
* Crown slightly too large?
* Back not circular brushed (if that's the right term)
* Lugs have the wrong profile
* Old style (hologrammed) back without "Rolex Oyster * Milgauss" stamps or brushed edge
* Alarmingly the movement seems smoother than mine!

but even that's only after much research and comparing mine to the one onscreen.

Any more?

edit: fake link removed

baradona · 2 October 2009, 06:46 AM

And more!

edit: fake link removed

Earl · 2 October 2009, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baradona

And more!

http://www.bullshitsiteremoved.comp

You put it in the right place, why must we play find the rotor?

Welshwatchman · 2 October 2009, 08:49 AM

Here's a scenario.

1. Crap site shows pictures of genuine watches.

2. Buyer thinks "bloody nora, these watches are almost identical to the real thing".

3. Buyer spends a few hundred.

4. The watch that turns up looks and feels like a piece of crap and the hands fall off after a couple of weeks..

5. Buyer wishes they didn't waste their cash.

Of course there are no longer any links to the fake sites mentioned but there are lots out there, alas.

baradona · 2 October 2009, 08:24 PM

Sorry guys, these are my first posts but I have read the rules on this forum. The first post contained a link to a video on youtube showing what was expressly a "replica" watch. I pointed out what I could see was wrong with it, which seems to be in keeping with the rules for this section of the forum. It was approved by a moderator before posting, so why has the link now been removed?

2 October 2009, 06:16 AM	#1
baradona "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: London Posts: 16	Spot the difference As a proud Milgauss GV owner I get pretty freaked out by the quality of fakes. This is far from the best - so far I've spotted: * GV face with clear glass * What appear to be hallmark stamps on rear * Crown slightly too large? * Back not circular brushed (if that's the right term) * Lugs have the wrong profile * Old style (hologrammed) back without "Rolex Oyster * Milgauss" stamps or brushed edge * Alarmingly the movement seems smoother than mine! but even that's only after much research and comparing mine to the one onscreen. Any more? edit: fake link removed

2 October 2009, 08:49 AM	#4
Welshwatchman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Paul Location: Wales, UK Posts: 14,578	Here's a scenario. 1. Crap site shows pictures of genuine watches. 2. Buyer thinks "bloody nora, these watches are almost identical to the real thing". 3. Buyer spends a few hundred. 4. The watch that turns up looks and feels like a piece of crap and the hands fall off after a couple of weeks.. 5. Buyer wishes they didn't waste their cash. Of course there are no longer any links to the fake sites mentioned but there are lots out there, alas. __________________ ..33

2 October 2009, 06:46 AM	#2
baradona "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: London Posts: 16	And more! edit: fake link removed

2 October 2009, 08:24 PM	#5
baradona "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: London Posts: 16	Sorry guys, these are my first posts but I have read the rules on this forum. The first post contained a link to a video on youtube showing what was expressly a "replica" watch. I pointed out what I could see was wrong with it, which seems to be in keeping with the rules for this section of the forum. It was approved by a moderator before posting, so why has the link now been removed?

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