normal differences between reps and gen watches

[Ethan]

never got a rep before, but thinking about it lately... tbh, my expectations are high, since I intend to spend a high price for the rep watch I want. so, ideally, the watch should be as high quality as possible... I wouldn't want the rep to have flaws in functionality and precision, nor to look different from the authentic watch... otherwise, why would i pay for it?! I don't know if there is any dealer who can offer me the luxury of a perfect imitation, still searching for it... but either way, I think that a replica means minimum flaws and differences from a real watch, right?!

 

[cheetomargheritto]

plenty of differences don't even know which is considered normal and which is not

what bothers me the most is when the replica watch doesn't work properly. or it ticks too much, or it stops ticking, or its functions don't work properly... This is what I consider the most critical and unacceptable. But when it comes to aesthetic and design differences, I don't like it, but in the end I accept them. i mean, it's a rep, after all and you can't have high expectations if you have high expectations, get a preowned one, or better yet- A GEN

 

[diaboliquerye]

there shouldn't be any differences, actually))) a reply means identical to the authentic. Starting from this definition, I think that consumers should not accept differences, at least visible ones

I mean, I understand that a fake also has a face movement and lower quality materials. But in terms of design, there should be no differences. We pay for watches that are produced in illegal factories. That's what we pay for the lower price. If a fake watch is cheaper, that does not mean that we, as customers, have to accept flaws in it. otherwise, sellers should not sell "best replica watches 100% similar to gens" as they claim, but rather "fake watches with many similarities wiht the gen ones"... hope u got the sarcasm...

if a rep watch doesn't correspond at least aesthetically to the original, I consider it trash

 

[Eugene]

why should there be "normal differences"?! look around at the dealers' selling prepositions: they all shout about "identical, 100% exactly looking, not a single difference with the gen watch". So, they should provide what they promise to the customers! We, as customers, pay for the reps based on these unique selling preps. So why should we accept flaws?!

no way! if the watch doesn't match what i was promised, i have every right to give it back and claim for a refund

 

[StevenOhio]

unlikely that you will find the recipe for a perfect replica watch. here' 's a thing: replica factories always release new, updated, improved models, etc... if in the previous release, they might have screwed with the date window, the next release will probably have the issue solved, but there might be another issue , like incorrect hands, for instance. and the pattern goes on constantly.....

ideally, a replica watch should look identical to a genuine one. in theory, only the mechanism can differ because it is difficult to bring a mechanism close to the genuine truth. otherwise, everything must look identical, only from more accessible materials... but, this theory is not always valid in reality) so, you can expect errors from small to huge

 

[MiracuLuis]

"NORMAL" DIFFERENCES? is there even such a thing as Normal and Abnormal Differences? the "replicA" term means no difference at all. The only thing that differs should be the materials, because luxury brands use their own patents. Otherwise, the construction, architecture, color, design should be identical. that's what a replica watch should be. So, from this perspective, any deviation from the genuine is ABNORMAL and not worth the money

the more differences, the less the fake watch is worth.