Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, rehajm said:

You’ve been duped by a bot!

That's what I'm hoping and believe, and why I wanted to discuss it with you.

2 hours ago, rehajm said:

OMG men I thought you were kidding

No, I'm being dead serious! What made you think I was kidding? It's a sincere question.

2 hours ago, rehajm said:

Rolex used those blue screws on the automatic movement to distinguish them from the plate screws.

What puzzles me is that only the top of the screw head is blued (see image in my previous post or below). Not even the screw slot is blued! In my opinion, it looks "Chinese-cheap" and not what I would associate with Rolex. Hence, it awakened my suspicion that something might be wrong.

1 hour ago, Kalanag said:

I‘ver never seen a fake Rolex with a free sprung balance and micro stella regulation.

Neither have I! I never paid much attention to all of those videos on YouTube explaining how to tell a fake and genuine Rolex movement apart, as I thought the escapement would be a dead giveaway. After all, who would be willing to pay for a fake free sprung balance with a Breguet hairspring and micro stella regulation, and having the insane precision that a genuine Rolex 3135 has? Looking at the timing machine results (my first post), I had no doubt whatsoever that I was dealing with the real McCoy.

FakeRolexEscapement.thumb.jpg.b8485a63172a5ef85edabe0612fb5df3.jpg

So @rehajm, are you telling us we're looking at a fake Rolex free sprung balance with a Breguet hairspring, micro stella regulation and KIF shock protection? If so, we were wrong to assume that we would never see that in a Chinese clone. Ay caramba! 😱 So, what's the giveaway?

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

But it would seem odd that you would make a generic screw blue if they were blue in the first place?

I get your point, John. It makes zero sense! But did you notice how both the original eBay screws and the generic screws are completely blued. The ones I found to hold the date indicator seating in place were only partly blued? Let me show you the picture again:

TF18.thumb.jpg.7d930cb8bb1d19a6bcd4f3352659b6f8.jpg

Makes you wonder if the Rolex screwmaker had a bad day or didn't understand the specification, as it was not written in Mandarin.

So, what's the verdict? Am I dealing with a genuine Rolex 3135 or a Chinese super clone? If you don't know or you're not sure, please feel free to take a guess! Here is a link to the first 100 pictures I've taken during the disassembly: https://1drv.ms/f/c/5643825a9f286b75/EpbF5n_qRCREvohfgbcZ4l4B0eUcw2h62xqmPYtdPzQ-QA?e=QIwcN0

Edited by VWatchie
Posted
4 hours ago, VWatchie said:

So, what's the verdict? Am I dealing with a genuine Rolex 3135 or a Chinese super clone?

That is a legit Rolex. That is no clone.

I've got a friend who primarily services  the super clone Rolexes, so I'll get him to take some pics and post them

  • Thanks 1
Posted

Thanks for the links @Kalanag!

If we assume the two examples you show are truly genuine, then we now know that sometimes Rolex use nice looking blued screws and sometimes screws where only the top of the screw head is blued and looks very cheap and not what I believe most would associate with such a prestigious brand. I guess I could have accepted it if the screw slot had been blued too. To be quite honest, I think they look horrible, but if they are genuine, I can live with them.

RolexBluedScrews.thumb.jpg.dc084210d136766a0002f29bac07e257.jpg

This is what the screws look like in the previous 3135 I took apart (my first Rolex). They look pretty, and so never sparked any suspicion in me. I guess I just have to try to deal with it. Had I found screws with only the top of the screw head blued in a Chinese or Russian movement I would have replaced them. Did I mention I don't like the partly blued Rolex screws? 😉

1 minute ago, Jon said:

That is a legit Rolex. That is no clone.

Big, big sigh of relief, Jon! 😃👍 It's not my watch, but I care deeply not only for the watch but for its owner!

2 minutes ago, Jon said:

I've got a friend who primarily services  the super clone Rolexes, so I'll get him to take some pics and post them

The would be super interesting to see!

I must say, I'm so grateful we have you on WRT Jon!

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, RichardHarris123 said:

The blue looks like some sort of coating not heat.

I agree! It's ugly, and I wish Rolex would scrap them!

Just for the fun of it. I asked ChatGpt to read this thread and then ask if it affected its previous assessment. ChatGpt then lowered its "Confidence Level".

It's pretty clear that AI is still a lousy watchmaker. Looking at its generated images of watch movements can be pretty hilarious. It will be interesting to see where it is a year or so from now. When it comes to programming, solving complex programming tasks, and explaining and arguing for various types of software architecture patterns, it is mind-blowingly competent. I guess I made the mistake of believing it would be similarly competent in horology.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

I asked ChatGPT if there did exist any Rolex clones with free sprung balance wheels and micro stella regulation. The KI said YES using reasoning! The provided internet links however showed nowhere any free sprung clones except one clone which (just for fun) was equipped with a genuine Rolex balance and balance bridge.

Don‘t trust KI… 🤨

Edited by Kalanag
  • Like 3
Posted

@VWatchie

im going to throw my tuppence in, might not help but hopefully gets you back down to earth.

current AI (LLM) are essentially web scraping and aggregator bots, they work across for those of us who have spent most of their working life’s building the internet think as the most untrustworthy source of anything. Look at Wikipedia as a prime example. Our issue here is as a society we have been conditioned over years to trust everything that the computer tells us. Garbage in, garbage out as I am sure you know is as valid here as it has always been.

AI could be useful in specific contexts, say we had watchgpt and it got its data by scraping the watch manufacturer data and only that then it’s erroneous output would be much reduced however if it referenced two tech docs from the same manufacturer and the same movement it would still depend on whether it’s algorithm could make a decision on which is best.

now out here in the real world the AI bot will scrape all and sundry data based on your request and it cannot validate any of that information at all but does seem to be able to present whatever it finds in a way that is fairly convincing at times.

i think that we are starting to see AI referencing AI generated output to validate what it’s put out. Not 100 % sure about the veracity but there is apparently a paper out in the wild that AI was used as an aid to compile, more papers have appeared citing the first in support of there thesis. The problem with these papers is they referenced a material from the first paper that doesn’t exist but was bits of words mashed together to sound good.

 

it can have its place and uses but should be treated with extreme caution.

sorry for the rant it’s hard enough on this planet to find Actual Intelligence as it is without introduction of Artificial Intelligence which is even more stupid.

 

Tom

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Kalanag said:

I‘ver never seen a fake Rolex with a free sprung balance and micro stella regulation.

I believe they are out there (at least the free sprung balance):
 


 

Edited by GuyMontag
  • Thanks 1
Posted
6 hours ago, VWatchie said:

Makes you wonder if the Rolex screwmaker

I was thinking what makes you think that Rolex made the screws in their watch?

Here's an interesting link talks about the balance wheel and the  Parachrom Blue hairpspring. So a very clear indication of a counterfeit Rolex is the lack of this blue hairspring. Except watch was made for 34 years wonder if they ever changed anything or did every single watch be made to an exact specification all those years? Oh and the nifty blue hairspring came into existence around 2011 they actually have two types of materials for hairsprings so they blue hairspring just indicates it's the newer hairspring.

https://seikoparts.wordpress.com/2023/07/03/rolex-3130-3135-balance/

Here's an interesting site

https://calibercorner.com/rolex-caliber-3135/

Watchmaking has such an interesting definition doesn't it? Like for instance your company making movements do you make 100% of all the parts or could you outsource things like screws for instance? Then conceivably if you made a movement over a long time span as I mentioned before can things change? Or in the case of Rolex I always find this story interesting.

https://timefiles.ch/post/how-it-took-rolex-a-century-to-own-its-movement-manufacture/

 

 

  • Like 3
Posted
15 hours ago, VWatchie said:

Just for the fun of it. I asked ChatGpt to read this thread

I asked ChatGPT's deep research mode about blue screws in Rolex without pointing to any particular source. After thinking for 10 minutes (deep research mode), it quoted your earlier conversation with ChatGPT:

Quote

You're absolutely right that Rolex does not use blued screws in the 3135 movement or any modern movement.

We are slowly breaking the Internet, post by post. Forums, populated with real people, are crucial!

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)

Sorry if anyone feels I reacted incorrectly, thinking is a timely, healthy discussion about the limitations of AI but less so about Rolex real vs fake. There’s good information on that, too…thank you…

Edited by rehajm
Posted

The more “niche” a topic is, the less likely the accuracy of an AI output. You can do a reality check before sending your prompt by doing a quick Google search. If relevant info is scant and you are already familiar with the sources, skip the AI. But if you get pages and pages of results, give it a try but verify what you can. Skilled users sometimes feed the responses from one AI model to another on an unrelated platform for fact-checking, and ask for specific sources when available.

  • Like 2
Posted
3 hours ago, fellerts said:

After thinking for 10 minutes (deep research mode), it quoted your earlier conversation with ChatGPT

…that happens to me quite often on a variety of topics. I think the AI bots tend to prioritize recent contributions…

  • Like 1
Posted

ChatGPT and others use search engines just like we do. I can peek under the hood of what happened in my case: ChatGPT searched for "Rolex 3135 blued screw clone" and this thread is the 4th result in Google at the moment. In a couple years we might get a different response. Search engines definitely do prioritize recent content.

32 minutes ago, Geotex said:

If relevant info is scant and you are already familiar with the sources, skip the AI

This is very good advice. AI models are very useful for wading through and organizing vast amounts of information, but tend to "wing it" when information is scarce. "I don't know" isn't really in their vocabulary. I'm sure that'll improve with newer models though.

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, fellerts said:

AI models are very useful for wading through and organizing vast amounts of information, but tend to "wing it" when information is scarce.

And unfortunately, very convincingly so!

It reminds me of travelling in Asia. When asking for directions, everyone points you in a specific direction, whether they have any real idea or not. It's not about trying to deceive you, but rather about avoiding the risk of disappointing you or creating an awkward atmosphere. In other words, the social interaction is prioritised over presenting the facts, which, in my example, would simply be the honest answer: "I have no idea, ask someone else."

Either way, it's easy to be misled because AI is extremely competent in certain areas, which builds a strong sense of trust. That, in turn, leads to the mistaken assumption that its expertise is equally strong across all fields — which, as we can clearly see, it is not!

@rehajm

You never responded to the question I asked in this post. It would be very interesting and greatly appreciated if you could answer it or share your thoughts on it. Thank you!

On 5/4/2025 at 3:16 PM, VWatchie said:

So @rehajm, are you telling us we're looking at a fake Rolex free sprung balance with a Breguet hairspring, micro stella regulation and KIF shock protection? If so, we were wrong to assume that we would never see that in a Chinese clone. Ay caramba! 😱 So, what's the giveaway?

 

19 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

I was thinking what makes you think that Rolex made the screws in their watch?

I'm not sure I do. Perhaps I should have written: "Makes you wonder if the screwmaker for Rolex..."  I mean, we have to assume that Rolex stands behind every component in their movements, no matter who actually makes them, right? If I were responsible at Rolex and management forced me to accept screws that looked like they came from a bargain-bin watch, I’d probably quit on the spot. At the end of the day, you’ve got to be able to live with yourself and sleep at night.

Anyway, isn't Rolex known to manufacture every single part of their watch, including producing the various alloys for them, in-house, at least since 2004?!

Looking at the serial number, the Sea-Dweller I'm working on was manufactured in 1997, so good point, who knows who manufactured the screws!? That's also consistent with the colour of the hairspring, which in my case is not blue.

So, reading the article you linked to "Rolex 3130 / 3135 MicroStella balance July 3, 2023", until recently, the super clones used a genuine balance assembly, and I would guess likely still do. Makes you wonder how they get hold of them?!

Then again, we have the new super clones with free-sprung Breguet balances. Soon, it might be nearly impossible to tell the difference between a genuine Rolex and a fake one, huh?

Couldn't the Swiss Air Force just bomb the Chinese super clone factories?! Problem solved!

 

Edited by VWatchie
Posted (edited)

Here's pics from a friend of mine who services Super clone Rolex watches.

This is from a 3235.

He told me non of the clones use overcoils and the blued screws are completely blue.

Rolex make their own screws by the way. They don't outsource them

WIN_20250505_18_14_54_Pro.thumb.jpg.89b0017a38c99984194a767747af4f2c.jpg

WIN_20250505_18_10_22_Pro.thumb.jpg.b0224a05cb37fffaf5d23b2ce342927c.jpgWIN_20250505_18_14_20_Pro.thumb.jpg.4db6e626a9072aff20b4c8e6a032970f.jpg

WIN_20250505_18_08_42_Pro.thumb.jpg.a3e6ca62231ae520bb1496e282c3cbfe.jpg

WIN_20250505_18_10_47_Pro.thumb.jpg.27a92a125c927c76276ed0b6fec22c30.jpg

Edited by Jon
  • Thanks 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, RichardHarris123 said:

I have neither worked on Rolex, nor a super clone, but I have read that even experts struggle to tell them apart.  Wouldn't the lack of an over coil be obvious ?

To be honest, as soon as you get the back off the case and have a good look it is pretty obvious if it is fake or not. I think wherever this myth that experts find it hard to tell if it is real or not is an old wives tale. Some fakes are pretty hard to tell without opening them.

I had a couple of Rolex Daytona's in last week to tell if they were fake or not. One was so obviously real and I didn't need to open it up. The other looked like a five year old had been at it. The hands were badly scratched. The bridges were scratched and every screw was mullered. The crystal on the damaged Daytona was after market as it didn't have a Rolex lasered crown that they introduced in 2002. It also didn't have the Rolex inner bezel, so some parts were not genuine, but it was a genuine Daytona, albeit badly serviced and scratched. I was surprised of the damage as this was an 18 carat 50 grand watch given to an idiot who serviced it (I use the word serviced in the loosest possible sense).

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Jon said:

Here's pics from a friend of mine who services Super clone Rolex watches.

Thanks, Jon! Very obviously fake!

Even with my limited experience, I would have noticed it—even if I were badly hungover (which I very rarely am) and woken up at four in the morning in dim light. I’m probably overly afraid of being fooled. But once you actually start working on the movement, you can both see and feel whether everything is as it should be or not. You should never say never, but after this experience and discussion, I'd be surprised if I ever will be fooled by a clone (or perhaps that's just what I'm hoping).

Again, sharing your expertise and experience is super appreciated!

Edited by VWatchie
Posted

I remember asking chatGPT to figure out the beat rate for a train of wheels. It confidently told me it was 18,000 bph, but I knew it was 28,800. It laid out all the math, and incorrectly calculated the pinion count on the escape wheel. So I told it the pinion count was off, it agreed with me, and then came back with the same beat rate of 18,000, after I corrected it and it acknowledged its error. It seems like it's mostly trying to appease the user. You could tell it it is wrong, even if its right, and it would agree with you.

  • Like 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, SwissSeiko said:

It seems like it's mostly trying to appease the user. You could tell it it is wrong, even if its right, and it would agree with you.

Yeah, I share the experience! 🤣

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It looks like after rolex someone serviced the barrel with P-125.  Clean it up and you’ll be good to go…
    • Haven't handled a Rolex in a long time but that's not natural. If the barrel is still useable then just grease as normal.
    • Do you have the service manual for 3135 as it would explain the procedure then in the absence of that the current procedure for modern mainsprings would be breaking grease on the outer wall as it's an automatic watch. The mainsprings are considered prelubricated no lubrication is required. Then the arbor is lubricated with a suitable lubrication. Typically the only time you see well I haven't ever seen anything quite like that Rolex but Seiko watches often the barrel is filled with some sort of I believe graphite-based lubricant. Or if too much breaking grease was applied in it leaks out but that would be a heck of a lot of breaking grease. I wonder if the black would be molybdenum disulfide? There is a variation of 8200 Quite remember the number were a little bit of molybdenum disulfide Which is a really nice high-pressure powder is mixed in with the eighth 200 and maybe they applied a heaping quantity of that?
    • The watch is from 1990 and was serviced just once around 20 years ago. No idea if the mainspring barrel was ever opened or changed before now.
    • Interesting but I think we have a problem here? We probably need to split hairs on a definition problem. For instance take a real Rolex movement put it in a real Rolex case but not the one it came in take a real dial real hands and make up a watch that is 100% real and what exactly is this? If you send your Rolex in for servicing and anything's been changed at all from what it was when it left the factory Rolex will be unhappy and remove all offending components. This does become a problem of people changing things because they think it's their watch and they want to have a different dial Lord diamonds the bezel or whatever words Rolex sees all of this as evil and bad as far as a Intel Rolex only things the watch is legit if everything is exactly what it was when it left the factory and nothing's been changed including the stem everything asked me Rolex original or their very unhappy about its existence. Then you think about a fake watch what is its real purpose? Well its real purpose is to make money for somebody and fool the customer. So all the watch has to do is look pleasant on the outside and inside can be anything. Typically nobody's going to see inside. So typically anything that's not legit counterfeit movement etc. why would someone spend so much time and effort making it look just like a real Rolex when there's no need to? Unless of course you have one or two movements to impress somebody with this is what's inside your watch but even that is problematic Now we don't end up with I've interesting problem that troubles me where I work. The owner will offend a cage your watch by looking at it carefully with a microscope the timing machine etc. and he will point out all the things that he feels are not appropriate correct or whatever for your watch. But in my example above of mixing and matching legitimate Rolex parts he wouldn't necessarily be able to tell. The problem I have with this is it often times things like his claim to telling a counterfeit is look at the second hand the quality of the secondhand is not as nice as a legitimate one. But maybe somebody replaced a second hand on a real Rolex. Or the other day at work I don't know what it was in before but there was a really pretty movement transparent back and they decided it was fake because of? Now I didn't think it was fake I took one look was beautifully manufactured but they had a reason What bothers me with counterfeit Rolex is or anything counterfeit watch related it is reminding me of a witchhunt. The early days of witch hunting how can we tell a which Manon which? That makes me wonder how many super fakes are really fake at all it's basically somebody deciding it's a fake based upon inappropriate assumptions. Like the secondhand is been changed or the watch was worked on the screws are perfect or other things. Other minor problems with super fakes for instance I have a long story the not going to tell the short version is I found the website once where they claim to be counterfeiting Rolex watches. They even had a picture to prove their counterfeit watch the problem with pictures online how do we know it's really a counterfeit watch and not a real Rolex watch that you're telling us is counterfeit. Oh and they had testimonials from all kinds of people who bought their watches and were very happy with the service of course the problem with the watch is you don't know what's inside it unless you take the back off and just because somebody shows a picture online and says this is their super fake maybe it really isn't a super fake they be there just trying to say that. We end up with a interesting problem of manufacturing a watch. Does Rolex actually make every single part found in their watch? Then the year 2004's basically irrelevant. This is because initially Rolex buys stock in the company and they manufacture Rolex watches. I'm assuming over time Rolex will acquire more stock and only in 2004 do they get the whole company. But the company itself hasn't really changed other than the name on the front of the building. The real question is did they really make every single component found in the Rolex watch from the beginning of time until end of the time? A lot of the components found in a watch would be extremely specialized did they make their own jewels or their own mainsprings for instance? But that is looking at the article they employ a heck of a lot of people now I would guess now that Rolex probably does make everything in-house. Especially when they have nifty CNC equipment like for making screws were he could make a huge batch of one type it instantly switch to another type where before he needed specialized machines for one machine for one screw now manufacturing all kinds of stuff in-house becomes very simple. But still is possible that in the early days they might have outsourced something may be perhaps. But conceivably we do have minor changes in thing is due to how things have been made over time which can lead to confusions over whether this is legit or not when it may be as a change of manufacturing methods oh and regarding the screws found in your Rolex watch? In about mid-80s I went to a school reunion in Switzerland. One of things we could do was visit a factory and I picked Rolex because I wanted to see the mass production making of Rolex watches. Which is very disappointed I did not get the sea at all because didn't see them making Rolex watches in their Geneva headquarters even though the building is really fake? So what did we get to see well after sales service because after all were watchmakers we should see that. Did learn something interesting about Rolex screws if your watch was sent to Rolex the screws that come back are not the ones that went there. As they are using powered screwdrivers they don't want to risk breaking heads off and they will replace the screws of every single watch. The other one of interest was suppose there's a scratch and you can see the brass? No problem they have a solution that basically electoral plates without electricity so the scratch goes away. The research Department was quite boring and didn't look like anyone was ever there. Then it was too long ago to remember all the details other than I was disappointed I want to see manufacturing.   Yes the joys of artificial intelligence that is more like a trained monkey that's there to please you.
×
×
  • Create New...