<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Opinions on RWC 1938A?

January 22 2006 at 4:14 AM
Daniel  (Login expwmbat)

 
Looks like an interesting watch to me. I like that it is an homage to the old Rolex/Panerai model, and not merely a Panerai copy/wannabe. I also really like the case shape.

I have a hard time thinking that Panerai are worth the $$$ they are going for these days, and the 1938A seems like a nice way to get a watch in that tradition for a fairer price.

What do those of you who have experience with the watch think of it? Is it a decent buy?

Cheers,
Daniel

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

(Login chris5264)

My thoughts also

January 22 2006, 7:16 AM 

I have the same thoughts on that watch, in fact, I'm seriously thinking of buying one this week. The only thing that gets me is that it is only 50 m water resistant. What kind of tribute is that to a dive watch?

 
 Respond to this message   
Chris
(Login chrisinohio)

I seriously doubt any WWII italian frogman went below 50m. Seriously.

January 22 2006, 8:53 AM 

And as far as being a good hommage, I'd say the quality is as good as the Panerai Blackseal and I've owned both.

The watches are excellent. And the "new" panerai has never made this watch, only RWC. It's a wonder Panerai hasn't sued RWC as they did RXW.

Chris

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login expwmbat)

Interesting

January 22 2006, 9:23 AM 

You really think it's as good as the Panerai Black Seal? Besides the movement finishing, right? The case, dial, crystal were all as good?

That's a pretty good endorsement in my book, not least because I'd be willing to wear the RWC in a lot rougher of circumstances than the Panerai.

Sounds like it might be on my list.

Thanks,
Daniel

 
 Respond to this message   
Chris
(Login chrisinohio)

Absolutely. And the RWCs lugs screw together while the Panerai's just

January 22 2006, 10:16 AM 

slip in and out. I think the RWCs system is better. Of course it uses a plain 6497 but it has a solid back so you don't notice it.

Dial, crystal and case are as good as the blackseal. Actually the crystal on the RWC is better as it's domed and chamfered. Very, very nice.

Chris

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login JohnSim)

I've owned both... I wouldn't put it in the Panerai category...

January 22 2006, 11:59 PM 

... but indeed a watch worthy of the $900 category.

My problems with it and why I sold it:

1) Luminosity was poor.
2) Didn't care for the domed crystal...
3) The dial is actually smaller than on a black seal.. makes the watch seem smaller.

Things I liked:
1) the price
2) the price
3) the price
4) pull crown.. I agree, for daily winding, it makes more sense.

I see them pop on the forums for <$700 so keep an eye out for one.

 
 Respond to this message   
Chris
(Login chrisinohio)

True, the luminosity is not as good but that's about it in my book. I like the domed

January 23 2006, 2:21 AM 

crystal better. Case finishing was just as good.

Is the Blackseal a $4k watch? Not to me. But the RWC is certainly a $900 watch.

Chris

 
 Respond to this message   
chris
(Login chris5264)

If 50 m really meant 50 m that would be a different story

January 22 2006, 11:45 AM 

But we know that 30 m basically means you can wear it in the rain, 50 means that you might be able to wear it swiming.

 
 Respond to this message   
Archie
(Login archie66)

Ha Ha! Good point!

January 22 2006, 9:10 PM 

And 1000 meters means that it was tested with a 50 meter device! No one would ever know better!

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login Slacker32)

Re: I seriously doubt any WWII italian frogman went below 50m. Seriously.

January 22 2006, 8:20 PM 

>And as far as being a good hommage, I'd say the quality is as good
>as the Panerai Blackseal and I've owned both.

Hmm, you can argue if it's so convenient with a screw down crown
for a watch which needs manual winding every or every second day.

>And the "new" panerai has never made this watch, only RWC. It's a wonder
>Panerai hasn't sued RWC as they did RXW.

I seriously doubt they hold any TM's which is infringed in this case.

 
 Respond to this message   
Chris
(Login chrisinohio)

Hey, if you don't like it don't buy it. As for the screw down crown the original didn't

January 22 2006, 9:57 PM 

have one so should an hommage? As for WR how many blackseal wearers will ever (and I mean ever) take their watches in the water? How about a big fat "o"?

Chris

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login kingsrd64)

1938

January 23 2006, 4:32 AM 

I have had both blackseal and 1938. I like the domed glass, most seem to like it on the 1950! So why not on the 1938. If you run your fingers over the 1938 the case edges are softer than a blackseal, I prefer this.I love the CA dial,so it is not a 300m dive watch that is not the point.If Porsche remade an exact replica 356 it would be slow,but who would care it would still sell and sell.I love my 1938 It is not ment to be a Panerai rip off it is just a good replica off a very old watch that no one cared much about until very recently.

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login chris5264)

all this has pushed me over the threshold

January 23 2006, 6:07 AM 

Ok, I've been into this watch for a while. As long as another deal works, I'll be buying it this week. I'll let you know my reactions.

 
 Respond to this message   
Daniel
(Login expwmbat)

Thanks for the opinions

January 23 2006, 9:57 PM 

I look forward to more experiences. I can't make any moves on watches for a little while, but once I get back I may try to move my Omega Dynamic chrono and pick up the 1938. I love the design of the case and dial, but just can't justify the price of the Radiomir.

Cheers,
Daniel

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login italiandiver)

1938

January 23 2006, 11:38 PM 

cool looking watch...its all in the pocket and the eye of the beholder...those who can afford the Panerai which btw is a copy of the originals like the RXWs and 1938s..can by one those of us who don't or won't can still enjoy these beauties....the 1938 looks a little like the German frogman issue watch to me...

 
 Respond to this message   
Archie
(Login archie66)

RWC 1938A vs. Vollmer U5

January 24 2006, 2:58 AM 

Any difference between the two watches? Here's a pic of the Vollmer. It sells for about the same price as RWC 1938.



    
This message has been edited by archie66 on Jan 24, 2006 2:59 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
roger
(Login kingsrd64)

yes

January 24 2006, 4:25 AM 

This is not at all the same as a1938. No CA dia, wrong hands,no wire lugs.AUTO!!!! With date. I think not.

 
 Respond to this message   
Chris
(Login chrisinohio)

Plus the Vollmer has a mineral Crystal, the RWC's is Sapphire.

January 24 2006, 4:47 AM 

I've seen the Vollmer and in my opinion (FWIW) the RWC is head and shoulders above it.

Chris

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login italiandiver)

vOLLMER VS rWC 1938

January 24 2006, 7:25 AM 

the Vollmer is $490 the 1938 is $900+ I am not sure which is more important the saphire or mineral crystal...you can remove the second hand if that makes a difference for about $25...are these supposed to copy the Italian or German frogman watches?

 
 Respond to this message   
Michael
(Login cheea)

The other major difference , visually

January 25 2006, 1:10 AM 

is the lug width on the Vollmer is 22 mm as compared to the 1938 which is 26mm.

 
 Respond to this message   

(Login chris5264)

Lug width can make or break a watch IMO

January 25 2006, 2:16 AM 

I agree and couldn't buy another 22 mm watch. For example, take Zeno, great watches but even their huge ones only have a 22mm lug. I don't get it. I would guess the Luminor wouldn't be half as pleasing to the eye with a 22 mm band.

 
 Respond to this message   
Chris
(Login chrisinohio)

Ed- I respectfully disagree. I've seen both and the Vollmer isn't even in the same league

January 25 2006, 6:14 AM 

as the RWC.

Chris

 
 Respond to this message   
Current Topic - Opinions on RWC 1938A?
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement