A lot of people think that the “sweeping” second-hand is a surefire way to tell if a Rolex is fake or not.
It’s my understanding though that ALL mechanical watches “sweep” so a fake mechanical would probably fool quite a few people.
I bought a fake Rolex in Pisa for 30 Euros. It looks exactly like a real Rolex (even has a sweep second hand) but it is not as heavy as one.
Three hundred bucks for a FAKE Rolex? But the real ones are so TACKY!
(snort)Time for a new battery for the Tissot.
Dunno if I can agree with the the durability statement. I’ve had my Rolex since 1976 and have worn it continuously. It has been swimming in the Caspian Sea, the Med, the Sea of Galilea, the Dead Sea, Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of California, Lake Powell, Lake Havasu, and many other lakes and rivers. I’ve broken and replaced the cyrstal 4 or 5 times, but it is still ticking. It’s an Oyster Perpetual DateJust and I paid $470.00 for it. I don’t know anyone who has had a watch, that they wear everyday, last that long.
A matter of opinion. I like the looks of a stainless steel Submariner, GMT II, Air King or older model Explorer.
Many, many fake Rolexes are made with mechanical movements these days, complete with “sweeping” second hand. And, as Cisco posits, they fool quite a few people!
The most recent issue of “TimeZone” magazine has an article on the difference between high-end fakes and the real deal. The upshot is, with the best fakes it can be very tough to tell without opening the case and looking at the movement.
Johnny, there’s a technique for photographing watches and jewelry that involves a gallon milk jug. I forget the details, but I’m sure that it would only take a few minutes of experimentation to get the details worked out.
[snooty tone]
No, a matter of TASTE.
[/snooty tone]
