Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Come on in and introduce yourself!
General watch talk.
River Rat
DWC Tribal Council
Posts: 12658
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:00 am
Location: Montana

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by River Rat » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:30 am

You buy a micro you get what you get it's a crap shoot and a gamble on the quality like going to Vegas and putting money in a slot machine.

User avatar
Ryeguy
Posts: 5514
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:03 pm
Name: Chris
Location: Rye

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by Ryeguy » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:00 am

I think buying a micro is no different than buying anything else. You should research your potential purchase and decide how well you trust the manufacturer based upon them having done the right thing in the past. If you don't want to bother researching, then yes, absolutely go with the major players such as Seiko who can supply a very decent automatic watch at a variety of price points.

The gamble, as Mike describes, is when the micro has no history. Then you are just trusting them to do the right thing. This is where the brand owner's openness and transparency helps.

What is interesting to me in this case is Unimatic is marketed as "Made in Italy". If we assume they are at least assembled in Italy, this means the decision to ghetto rig the dual spacer was local. CREPAS could at least blame their contract manufacturer for the mess-up with the Anko. Unimatic owns this one completely.

User avatar
Axelay2003
Posts: 5916
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:03 am
Name: Gerard
Location: City of Oranges, FL

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by Axelay2003 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:47 am

mfxr wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:23 am
Well, that sucks......

Plastic spacer = yes

IMG_20181012_201453.jpg


Not attached to anything = yes

IMG_20181012_201905.jpg


Lots of room to move once spacer is removed = yes

IMG_20181012_202052.jpg


Everything moves freely without spacer = yes

IMG_20181012_201938.jpg

I have put the spacer back in and put the case back on again. When using the crown I can notice the dial etc moving slightly (I never noticed this before it was brought to my attention :crybaby: )

What a ballache :banghead:
What does the caseback state with regards to the beats? The one I have has 21,800 bph.
It's a beautiful world! Gerald.
Image

skunkworks
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 6:09 am

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by skunkworks » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:03 am

BacoNoir wrote:Is it possible the owner bought it second hand and that the previous owner did the movement swap after f-ing up the original movement? This seems too fubar to come from someone who’s been in the business that long. This is JV league shit.
Did Jake look at the dial feet? We're they there or was the dial dotted on? Either way the dial seemed too small for the dial opening, weird. I had to fast forward thru parts of that video so might have missed it.

Edit:. That's a dial foot right there I believe. 9015 and Seiko have different feet locations, so they must have made dials for the Seiko mvmt.



Image
Last edited by skunkworks on Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
logan2z
IT Admin
Posts: 11739
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:08 am
Name: Andrew
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by logan2z » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am

JBZ wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:01 am
This is an extreme example, and there are certainly examples of QC issues with the big boys (or outright fraud *cough* Panerai *cough*)
I don't want to open up the 'Brooklyn Bridge' can of worms, but I don't think I'd go as far as calling it fraud. Panerai didn't advertise that the movement was beautifully finished and it wasn't. Of course there was a more-than-reasonable expectation that the movement would be finished to a high standard given the price point and the fact that the watch was an LE, but I don't think there was anything fraudulent about it. FWIW, Panerai did offer to swap in a fully decorated movement free of charge to anyone who wanted it.

Despite not being beautiful on the inside, the PAM 318 was properly engineered and wasn't literally falling apart as users handled it. This Unimatic situation is in a completely different league.

User avatar
Ryeguy
Posts: 5514
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:03 pm
Name: Chris
Location: Rye

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by Ryeguy » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am

skunkworks wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:03 am
BacoNoir wrote:Is it possible the owner bought it second hand and that the previous owner did the movement swap after f-ing up the original movement? This seems too fubar to come from someone who’s been in the business that long. This is JV league shit.
My guess is something along these lines. Did Jake look at the dial feet? We're they there or was the dial dotted on? Either way the dial seemed too small for the dial opening, weird. I had to fast forward thru parts of that video so might have missed it.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Nope - another owner here just posted their example of a different Unimatic model with the same cheap plastic spacer.

The issue which caused the investigation is the spacer in the Jake video example was slightly compressed and deformed, causing interference with the rotor, making it unable to spin and auto wind the watch.

I would hypothesize this issue is endemic to all Unimatic models of similar vintage. Maybe the newest ones have properly machined cases, but I'll not gamble with my money on testing that theory.

User avatar
dnslater
Posts: 6804
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:52 pm
Name: Nick
Location: Indiana, USA

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by dnslater » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:25 am

Seems consistent with my knowledge of Italian engineering. Beautiful exterior. Inside held together with twine and bubblegum.

User avatar
Selym
Posts: 3046
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:16 pm
Name: Myles
Location: Massive Two Shits

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by Selym » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:46 am

That's the kind of jury-rigged mess I'd expect from a far-east vintage Seiko puppy mill, not an established micro.

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:57 am

mfxr wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:23 am
Well, that sucks......

Plastic spacer = yes

IMG_20181012_201453.jpg


Not attached to anything = yes

IMG_20181012_201905.jpg


Lots of room to move once spacer is removed = yes

IMG_20181012_202052.jpg


Everything moves freely without spacer = yes

IMG_20181012_201938.jpg

I have put the spacer back in and put the case back on again. When using the crown I can notice the dial etc moving slightly (I never noticed this before it was brought to my attention :crybaby: )

What a ballache :banghead:
Matt,

All movements have play once the spacer is removed. The spacer is there to make the movement fit the case snugly. Is this what it does when installed? There is a lot of companies who use a movement spacer to fit the watch.

User avatar
BacoNoir
Posts: 6366
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 6:33 pm
Name: Roger
Location: Colorado

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by BacoNoir » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:57 am

Selym wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:46 am
That's the kind of jury-rigged mess I'd expect from a far-east vintage Seiko puppy mill, not an established micro.
Yeah, based on the # of years they've been around, this bush league shit is unacceptable. :tap: :smack:
www.simplynoble.net
Time Magazine Person of the Year - 2006

Image

User avatar
Selym
Posts: 3046
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:16 pm
Name: Myles
Location: Massive Two Shits

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by Selym » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:59 am

toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:57 am
Matt,

All movements have play once the spacer is removed. The spacer is there to make the movement fit the case snugly. Is this what it does when installed? There is a lot of companies who use a movement spacer to fit the watch.
The Seiko movement has an integrated spacer. It's meant to fit snugly in the case as-is, not with another spacer surrounding it.

This is a hot mess.

User avatar
BacoNoir
Posts: 6366
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 6:33 pm
Name: Roger
Location: Colorado

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by BacoNoir » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:00 am

toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:57 am
mfxr wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:23 am
Well, that sucks......

Plastic spacer = yes

IMG_20181012_201453.jpg


Not attached to anything = yes

IMG_20181012_201905.jpg


Lots of room to move once spacer is removed = yes

IMG_20181012_202052.jpg


Everything moves freely without spacer = yes

IMG_20181012_201938.jpg

I have put the spacer back in and put the case back on again. When using the crown I can notice the dial etc moving slightly (I never noticed this before it was brought to my attention :crybaby: )

What a ballache :banghead:
Matt,

All movements have play once the spacer is removed. The spacer is there to make the movement fit the case snugly. Is this what it does when installed? There is a lot of companies who use a movement spacer to fit the watch.
True Terry, but the dial shouldn't move with the crown out (in the video and per Matt's post too) and the spacer shouldn't deform to stop the rotor.
www.simplynoble.net
Time Magazine Person of the Year - 2006

Image

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:00 am

logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am
JBZ wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:01 am
This is an extreme example, and there are certainly examples of QC issues with the big boys (or outright fraud *cough* Panerai *cough*)
I don't want to open up the 'Brooklyn Bridge' can of worms, but I don't think I'd go as far as calling it fraud. Panerai didn't advertise that the movement was beautifully finished and it wasn't. Of course there was a more-than-reasonable expectation that the movement would be finished to a high standard given the price point and the fact that the watch was an LE, but I don't think there was anything fraudulent about it. FWIW, Panerai did offer to swap in a fully decorated movement free of charge to anyone who wanted it.

Despite not being beautiful on the inside, the PAM 318 was properly engineered and wasn't literally falling apart as users handled it. This Unimatic situation is in a completely different league.
Panerai I thought labeled it is one of their own movements. At first they offered to replace the movement free of charge if you paid for the movement. They did not accept fault by any means.

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:08 am

Selym wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:59 am
toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:57 am
Matt,

All movements have play once the spacer is removed. The spacer is there to make the movement fit the case snugly. Is this what it does when installed? There is a lot of companies who use a movement spacer to fit the watch.
The Seiko movement has an integrated spacer. It's meant to fit snugly in the case as-is, not with another spacer surrounding it.

This is a hot mess.
Maybe you are right. I don't know. But I do know a movement holder is common place. And as low down on the movement the Seiko spacer is in that picture I see no way in hell on how it would keep a movement secure in a case unless it had movement holder screws.
BacoNoir wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:00 am
True Terry, but the dial shouldn't move with the crown out (in the video and per Matt's post too) and the spacer shouldn't deform to stop the rotor.
Roger, I have seen a lot of watch dials move slightly when operating the crown. We just had a PO 2500 come through that did that.

I agree about the spacer deforming. Maybe it is squished in assembly? If the movement holder is made for the movement and inserted correctly then with the notches for then there will be no issue. If you look at Matt's pictures it looks like the holder is made for that movement and it does fit into it correctly. :think:

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:11 am

Ryeguy wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am
Nope - another owner here just posted their example of a different Unimatic model with the same cheap plastic spacer.

The issue which caused the investigation is the spacer in the Jake video example was slightly compressed and deformed, causing interference with the rotor, making it unable to spin and auto wind the watch.

I would hypothesize this issue is endemic to all Unimatic models of similar vintage. Maybe the newest ones have properly machined cases, but I'll not gamble with my money on testing that theory.
Chris why couldn't the issue be the movement holder getting crushed in assembling and causing this issue? A ton of companies use plastic movement holders. Because of this one video is now all plastic movement holders inherently faulty? :shrug:

User avatar
tattoo chef
<Will Skull for Food>
Posts: 5663
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:03 pm
Name: Don

Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by tattoo chef » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:16 am

BacoNoir wrote:
Selym wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:46 am
That's the kind of jury-rigged mess I'd expect from a far-east vintage Seiko puppy mill, not an established micro.
Yeah, based on the # of years they've been around, this bush league shit is unacceptable. :tap: :smack:
I believe this brand has only been around for like 2 years.
Edit: 3 years

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by tattoo chef on Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
logan2z
IT Admin
Posts: 11739
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:08 am
Name: Andrew
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by logan2z » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:17 am

toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:00 am
logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am
JBZ wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:01 am
This is an extreme example, and there are certainly examples of QC issues with the big boys (or outright fraud *cough* Panerai *cough*)
I don't want to open up the 'Brooklyn Bridge' can of worms, but I don't think I'd go as far as calling it fraud. Panerai didn't advertise that the movement was beautifully finished and it wasn't. Of course there was a more-than-reasonable expectation that the movement would be finished to a high standard given the price point and the fact that the watch was an LE, but I don't think there was anything fraudulent about it. FWIW, Panerai did offer to swap in a fully decorated movement free of charge to anyone who wanted it.

Despite not being beautiful on the inside, the PAM 318 was properly engineered and wasn't literally falling apart as users handled it. This Unimatic situation is in a completely different league.
Panerai I thought labeled it is one of their own movements. At first they offered to replace the movement free of charge if you paid for the movement. They did not accept fault by any means.
Not true. The movement was specified as the OP XXIX which is a 6497-based movement. In fact if you look at the Watchbase description for the XXIX you'll see it says:

Standard unitas 6497 with no additional finishing

Let's not rehash the 318 story. This thread is talking about Unimatic, a company that shipped an improperly engineered watch that doesn't keep time properly because the rotor hits other internal parts of the watch, the dial becomes damaged from moving around in the case, etc. No comparison IMO.

User avatar
dnslater
Posts: 6804
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:52 pm
Name: Nick
Location: Indiana, USA

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by dnslater » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:19 am

toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:11 am
Ryeguy wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am
Nope - another owner here just posted their example of a different Unimatic model with the same cheap plastic spacer.

The issue which caused the investigation is the spacer in the Jake video example was slightly compressed and deformed, causing interference with the rotor, making it unable to spin and auto wind the watch.

I would hypothesize this issue is endemic to all Unimatic models of similar vintage. Maybe the newest ones have properly machined cases, but I'll not gamble with my money on testing that theory.
Chris why couldn't the issue be the movement holder getting crushed in assembling and causing this issue? A ton of companies use plastic movement holders. Because of this one video is now all plastic movement holders inherently faulty? :shrug:
I see nothing wrong with them inherently, although I might question their use in a watch this expensive? I have opened a number of $200 Seiko's that have metal movement rings.

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:20 am

logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:17 am
toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:00 am
logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am
JBZ wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:01 am
This is an extreme example, and there are certainly examples of QC issues with the big boys (or outright fraud *cough* Panerai *cough*)
I don't want to open up the 'Brooklyn Bridge' can of worms, but I don't think I'd go as far as calling it fraud. Panerai didn't advertise that the movement was beautifully finished and it wasn't. Of course there was a more-than-reasonable expectation that the movement would be finished to a high standard given the price point and the fact that the watch was an LE, but I don't think there was anything fraudulent about it. FWIW, Panerai did offer to swap in a fully decorated movement free of charge to anyone who wanted it.

Despite not being beautiful on the inside, the PAM 318 was properly engineered and wasn't literally falling apart as users handled it. This Unimatic situation is in a completely different league.
Panerai I thought labeled it is one of their own movements. At first they offered to replace the movement free of charge if you paid for the movement. They did not accept fault by any means.
Not true. The movement was specified as the OP XXIX which is a 6497-based movement. In fact if you look at the Watchbase description for the XXIX you'll see it says:

Standard unitas 6497 with no additional finishing
But it was not listed on their advertising as Standard unitas 6497 with no additional finishing it was listed like it was one of their own models.

User avatar
tattoo chef
<Will Skull for Food>
Posts: 5663
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:03 pm
Name: Don

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by tattoo chef » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:21 am

Just a. FYI, I posted asking if they have seen the video posted by dagaz watch on their instagram and they deleted it with no response.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

User avatar
Chocodove
Posts: 8929
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:35 pm
Name: Todd
Location: NJ

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by Chocodove » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:23 am

tattoo chef wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:21 am
Just a. FYI, I posted asking if they have seen the video posted by dagaz watch on their instagram and they deleted it with no response.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Shitty move. Not that I was ever planning to buy one, but this brand is certainly off my list for future purchases.
- Todd

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:24 am

dnslater wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:19 am
I see nothing wrong with them inherently, although I might question their use in a watch this expensive? I have opened a number of $200 Seiko's that have metal movement rings.
I totally understand that. But Seiko is a huge company with multiple resources. I don't even think that is a fair comparison with most watches companies. And since we are on the topic of Seiko we both know their qc isn't the best on lower end models.
:mrgreen: So they could have a metal movement ring but misaligned bezel/chapter ring. :crybaby:

User avatar
logan2z
IT Admin
Posts: 11739
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:08 am
Name: Andrew
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by logan2z » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:28 am

toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:20 am
logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:17 am
toxicavenger wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:00 am
logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:10 am
JBZ wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:01 am
This is an extreme example, and there are certainly examples of QC issues with the big boys (or outright fraud *cough* Panerai *cough*)
I don't want to open up the 'Brooklyn Bridge' can of worms, but I don't think I'd go as far as calling it fraud. Panerai didn't advertise that the movement was beautifully finished and it wasn't. Of course there was a more-than-reasonable expectation that the movement would be finished to a high standard given the price point and the fact that the watch was an LE, but I don't think there was anything fraudulent about it. FWIW, Panerai did offer to swap in a fully decorated movement free of charge to anyone who wanted it.

Despite not being beautiful on the inside, the PAM 318 was properly engineered and wasn't literally falling apart as users handled it. This Unimatic situation is in a completely different league.
Panerai I thought labeled it is one of their own movements. At first they offered to replace the movement free of charge if you paid for the movement. They did not accept fault by any means.
Not true. The movement was specified as the OP XXIX which is a 6497-based movement. In fact if you look at the Watchbase description for the XXIX you'll see it says:

Standard unitas 6497 with no additional finishing
But it was not listed on their advertising as Standard unitas 6497 with no additional finishing it was listed like it was one of their own models.
Right, and IWC doesn't call the movement in many of it's pilot chronographs "bog standard 7750 with nothing special added", they use an internal IWC movement number. Like IWC and many other manufacturers, Panerai uses their own internal movement numbers for basic Unitas/ETA movements. Nothing new or particularly unusual there.

Again, the PAM 318 thing has been discussed to death and is completely different from the Unimatic situation.

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:35 am

logan2z wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:28 am
is completely different from the Unimatic situation.
It is a totally different situation. I was just using a comparison of dumb shit because people like to slam micro brands but they don't want to see faults in the big brands that happen all the time. Hell Rolex is still putting the wrong cyclops on their BLNR's :mrgreen:

All I see wrong in this situation is a movement spacer was deformed somehow, so it affect the watch. Oh and the labeling of the beats on the caseback. That shit happens and is very minor imo. This is the only case of this happening so far and the torches were lit right away.

I don't think we saw this many people come out of the woodwork when the Polaris failed. :shrug: And that is one expensive turd :puke:

User avatar
toxicavenger
President Tranny
Posts: 48071
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:25 am
Name: HeadDIK
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: Wrong Movements Installed in Unimatic U1?

Post by toxicavenger » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:39 am

Ryeguy wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:21 am
First, yes, from everything I've read and talked about with Dan from OWC, watch cases are machined to accept specific movements. It is challenging to swap movements for exactly the reasons Jake demonstrates in that video. The other issue is the stem height. I haven't checked of the difference between the 9015 and the 6r15, but I'd be concerned about stress on the keyless works and even water resistance if they are not identical.

Seeing how loose that movement was in the case as Jake fiddled with the crown makes me wonder about the 300m water resistance. You'd think the seals in the stem tube would've been a bit more snug on the stem.

I do think the 6r movement could have possibly been used if a proper / custom spacer had been manufactured (again, assuming stem height was the same).

Where they went sideways was using that cheap nylon spacer from some random quartz movement. It didn't provide the necessary rigidity.

Someone with a 3D printer could probably make a spacer pretty quickly, but as previously stated, you shouldn't need to do any of this with a new watch.
Chris you are correct. I was not exactly translating what I meant to say. What I was trying to say that is when a case is made it can be machined to fit multiple movements. The movements are not notched into the case. Then you use a movement spacer/movement screws to fit that movement to the case. Correct? As long as the stem height, stem location, movement thickness, etc are all the same.

So basically this watch was upgraded to a better movement then what the caseback implied?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AZpops, Google [Bot], Marjak and 525 guests