Before reading on, make sure you've read the main guide for QC posting, otherwise this won't make much sense to you. Done? Let's go.
This specific guide is intended to be a visual supplement: showing you exactly what to look for when you complete your QC templates. For obvious reasons, this guide will skip parts that aren't visual.
I've used pictures that mostly come from this subreddit. If anyone is uncomfortable, DM me and I'll replace the picture.
With that in mind, let's begin.
Index Alignment
Here, you are expected to assess how well the index markers on your watch are aligned. You can use the index alignment tool to assist you in this regard. An example of good index alignment is this:
The indices themselves are straight. They are also perfectly aligned with the minute markers.
Index misalignment, on the other hand, looks like this:
Look at 7. It is rotated clockwise and does not sit properly in its slot.
Or this:
Look carefully at 6. You will see that the bottom of the index is rotated slightly towards the left.
Now that you have an idea of what to look out for, what should you be writing in the template?
You need to describe any misalignment you see in detail. Statements like "6 is off" or "3 is kinda wonky" or "not sure about 1, help please" arenot acceptable. This is because unless the misalignment is immediately obvious (and in most cases, it is not), users will not know what you are talking about. You may not get the help you want as a result. Be specific, like the following examples:
"The 7 marker does not seem to fit into the slot nicely. It is rotated towards the right and looks like it is dancing around."
"The 6 marker does not seem to line up straight with the crown in between swiss made. Based on what I can see, it appears to be slightly tilted to the left."
A caveat here: Just because there may be some misalignment does not necessarily mean you should definitely RL the watch. As the main guide points out, all reps are subject to a level of inaccuracy. It would be entirely unrealistic to expect gen standards for index alignment. Further, different reps are subject to different standards: a XF Pelagos, for instance, is known for having problematic indices - so much so that even if you RL, you are unlikely to get anything better. Conversely, CF Explorers are now getting so good that even slight misalignment would not be par for the course.
A good guide would be to assess your watch based on proportion. One slightly misaligned index is not a problem. But one majorly misaligned index or many misaligned indices on a single dial could justify RL.
Just for illustration, this is misalignment that I would RL for:
There are too many mistakes on this watch for me to accept. The 9 index is too near to the minute marker. 4, 5 and 7 are not aligned with their respective minute marks - they are all off to the left. 6 is rotated counterclockwise. Taken on their own, each error might not be enough for RL. But taken together, this is unacceptable.
That deals with index alignment. Let's move on.
Date Wheel Alignment
This applies to watches which display the date. If your watch does not display a date, there is no need to consider this. You will look silly if you say that the date wheel alignment is good when your watch is a no-date Sub, for example.
Here, you are tasked to consider if the date is properly displayed in the date window. Often times, this is a question of how well-centered the date is. A good example of date wheel alignment is this:
Take a look at the 21 at the right side of the watch. It is situated exactly in the center of the date window.
An example of misalignment is this:
Look at the 27 on the right. You can see that the date is misaligned towards the left, with the 2 touching the rim of the window.
Sometimes, the misalignment can also be as to the date numbers themselves:
This is harder to see, but if you look carefully at 25, you will notice that the 5 is higher than the 2.
Uncommonly and in the alternative, the issue may be with the Cyclops itself (the magnifier that covers the date window):
Here we see a Cyclops which is rotated slightly anti-clockwise. You can observe this by looking at the bottom rim of the date window. The Cyclops is obviously lower at the left corner of the date window when compared to the right. The requisite deviation is repeated at the top of the date window, with the right side being higher than the left.
Now that you know what to look for, let's discuss what to write.
As with index alignment, unless the issues are immediately obvious (and most of the time, they are not), you need to be very specific. Comments like "the date seems off", "2 in 25 is kinda off", "date looks weird" are not acceptable. They do not tell readers what you are looking for. You'll get faster and better results if you identify the issues for your reader. For example:
"The date seems misaligned towards the left. Part of it is touching the left border of the date window."
"The 5 in the date appears to be slightly higher than the 2 next to it."
"The Cyclops does not seem to be straight. It looks like it is slanted towards the left?"
As with index alignment, please note that not all misalignment will justify RL, especially for date wheels. All rep date wheels come with varying degrees of misalignment. A few misaligned dates are usually not enough for RL, unless the date is clearly cropped out of the date window or touching the rim. A little misalignment towards either side of the date window is also generally more than okay; a good way to gauge is to zoom out to the actual size of the watch and see if the misalignment is still immediately visible. If not, you're likely to be good to go.
Here is an example of misalignment I would nevertheless GL:
You will see that the date is situated slightly towards the right. However, the date is well within the date window and the misalignment is too slight to be seen on wrist at actual size.
On to the next topic.
Bezel
There are two main things to look out for: First, whether the "pip" (usually a lumed marker at the 12 position) is centered. Second, the quality of any engraving.
This section would also cover any possible damage to the bezel or anything else unusual, including any misalignment.
Example of a good bezel:
Nothing out of the ordinary. Engravings are sharp and nicely filled in. By and large, the colour transition is also acceptable. No alignment issues either.
An example of misalignment:
Pip at 12 on the bezel appears to be misaligned towards the right. While the reflection may be making things look worse than they are, this is something that would deserve a second look at.
Generally speaking, most problems that surface nowadays have to do with the pip - even then, these are not entirely common. Engravings and alignment are usually not an issue with higher level reps. With this in mind, what do we write?
As with the other sections, you are going to need to be specific. "Bezel looks off", "pip looks kinda off", "I don't know about the bezel, seems weird to me" are phrases that we see everyday in this subreddit. But none of these phrases are acceptable; they do not direct the reader to what OP is seeing. Details are king - and if you are going to pluck the crown, you're going to have to write like this:
"The pip at 12 is not centered. It seems to touch the right side of the triangle."
"The printing on the bezel at 3 seems to be angled down. It does not match the index on the dial."
The key is to visually direct your reader to the exact point that you say is a problem. The word "off" on its own says nothing to that effect.
On to the next point.
Solid End Links (SELs)
Possibly the least understood of all sections as a lot of newbies do not really know what they are looking for.
The ultimate guide to this is here. But for convenience, I'm going to summarise several key points about SELs.
SELs refer to the final links between the watch case and the bracelet. I've highlighted it below:
Look carefully at the portion highlighted in green.
Not all watches have SELs. Only watches which have that portion as highlighted above - and for QC purposes, the SEL section really only applies to Rolex reps. Tudors have SELs (which can also be QC-ed to some extent), but SELs on a Tudor are not held to the same standard as SELs on a Rolex.
Now, what are we looking for when we assess SELs? We are looking for gaps between the lugs and the SELs themselves. I've indicated this below:
The black line in the center of the red box is where the SEL meets the lug. This is where you are supposed to look for gaps.
An SEL gap appears when there is separation between the SEL and the lug. But what is a gap?
A gap appears when you can see through the space between the SEL and the lug. There is no gap when all you can see is a black line. There may be some variation in how thick the black line is, but for QC purposes there is nothing to be worried about until and unless you can actually see what's behind the watch.
This is generally not a problem on higher level reps (and by now, pretty rare). I will, however, show you an example of something that may be an actionable gap:
You will see that there is no black line. Instead, light shines through the space between the SEL and the lug.
What does this mean? If all you see is a black line, even if it is slightly thicker than another SEL on the same watch, there should be no actionable gap. I am going to highlight the last few QC templates submitted where the user said there was a gap - but there really wasn't (to me, at least):
Top right SEL was an issue for OP. However, as no light is shining through, this is not considered an SEL gap to me. OP opined that there was a gap at the top right SEL. I don't see it at all. OP said that there was a slight gap at the bottom left SEL. Again, all I can see is a black line. I would not classify this as a gap.
If, after going through all the examples above, you still feel that there is a gap, highlight it in the template by identifying which part of the watch you are looking at; there are really only four options: top left, top right, bottom left, bottom right. Doing so helps users zoom in directly on your issue and saves time.
To the last segment.
Dial Printing
Here, you are tasked to check if the printing on the dial has been poorly done. By this, we mean defects in the workmanship of the printing; printing which differs from gen (such as the infamous "floating r") would not be a QC defect per se.
An example of dial printing with no issues:
All the words are clearly printed. There is no bleeding on any part of the print, with edges sharp and defined.
And now for examples of dial printing with issues:
Some bleeding can be observed at the top parts of VI and VII. Notice how the black ink protrudes.
Sometimes, the print can be misapplied across the entire dial:
If you look closely, you will see that the dial print is rotated clockwise across the entire dial. Observe how XI is closer to the top of the watch while I is further away.
With the above in mind, let's turn to what you should write. Again and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, do not simply write things like: "Dial seems off" or "Print seems off. letters kind of wonky?" If anything, dial printing is usually very, very small - unless you point a reader to the exact part which has an issue, chances are it won't be seen. Make certain that you provide the reader with specific directions:
"Appears to be some bleeding at the top of VI. Thoughts?"
"R in Submariner looks like only half of it was printed. Am I seeing things?"
Important note: again, just because the dial printing on your watch may have some issues, this does not necessarily equate to RL. As stated, dial print is almost microscopic - no human being is going to be able to see slight bleeding on any print when you have the watch on wrist. Feel free to point out issues that you see, but remain realistic about your expectations.
And with that, I come to the end of this guide.
Conclusion
QC-ing reps is a difficult task - which everyone in this subreddit does for free. You can help out immensely by simply being precise and detailed in your observations. The more effort you put into your template, the easier it is for members to help you - they can zoom in directly to the things that concern you.
I hope this helps you. I've tried to detail some common factors, but it would be impossible for me to catch them all. The rest is up to you - and your diligence.
If your template uses a NEW "yupoo" or a "mega" type of link, please note that, at the time of this typing, the automod here removes them immediately from view i.e. no QC help. We are addressing it, but....
So, what to do?
Although somewhat cumbersome for the OP, you can upload the QC packet to an Imgur account. Our automod 'likes' Imgur...and the post will show promptly. Just do NOT do it from a mobile because the mobile app loses resolution and crappy pics don't provide any benefit to anyone. Yea, yea...I know, the file compression software isn't supposed to lose quality, but it certainly does.
To add, post your complete QC album inclusive of the timing info. Do not, for the sake of your convenience, omit items. If you're bright enough to determine what is needed and what can be removed, that's great! Then, it's reasonable to conclude that you really don't need help. Simply, post it all.
If you have to wait for substantive additional info from the Seller e.g. timing data, then delay posting until you have a complete QC packet. Incomplete packages will trigger a removal of the post. Plus, it will require a return visit of anyone that commented on the incomplete post which shouldn't be required. One visit is all that it should take to QC most watches. Most won't return to a post anyway. They'll just go to the next one. The members are quite busy here. Yea, it can get crazy.
Finally, since you're a newbie, as a vote of appreciation for those members that help you, please upvote their comments. It's a nice gesture from you to them for the assist...and, it's free.
One final note, we've updated the main rules for posting. Refer to this link for info QC Must Read for New Members
Welcome to the hobby and the sub. Best wishes
Edit addition: March 2nd, 2024 - ReptimeQC member, u/EveningVariation8236 , has provided an updated version of the original QC alignment verification tool. https://watchqc.github.io/ . Thank you.
Edit addition: Jan 9th, 2024 - ReptimeQC member, u/Ro1hype has provided this for tool for alignment verification. https://qcwatch.com/ Thank you.
Edit addition: 8/8/2025 - Reptime QC member, u/jrverdes . has provided this version of the alignment tool to assist those that need additional help verifying the dial/bezel alignments on their watch. https://jrverdes.github.io/watch-qc-jr/ The adjustment resolutions are much finer in this app comparative to the other available apps which can be a benefit to some that need such. Check it out...Thank you.
Fairly happy with this one overall, but would appreciate a second pair of eyes before I GL.
1. Dealer name: Ethan
2. Factory name: VSF
3. Model name (& version number): Rolex GMT-Master II 126710GRNR “Bruce Wayne” – VSF, latest 3285 batch
4. Price (potentially) paid: $620 USD including delivery to the UK.
5. Index alignment:
Looks good overall to me. 12, 3, 6 and 9 all look nicely positioned, and nothing obvious is jumping out elsewhere on the dial. A second set of eyes across all the markers would be appreciated.
6. Dial printing:
Looks clean and sharp to me. Printing, coronet and the green GMT-MASTER II text all look good.
7. Date wheel alignment / printing:
Pending further photos showing a few different dates to properly judge the alignment, Looks central’Ish… and ok from this photos.
Printing looks good.
8. Hand alignment:
Looks good to me. Nothing obvious jumping out.
9. Bezel:
Looks good overall. Grey/black transition looks clean, numerals look well finished and the alignment looks good to my eye.
10. Solid End Links (SELs):
Can’t see any noticeable gaps. Looks nice and tight to the case.
11. Timegrapher numbers:
Rate: +2 s/day
Amplitude: 266°
Beat Error: 0.1 ms
Lift Angle: 52°
All look good to me.
12. Anything else you notice:
Overall, I’m very happy.
Nothing obvious is jumping out at me across the dial, hands, bezel, case, bracelet or SELs.
The only thing I’m waiting on before giving the final GL is the additional date photos. Once I’ve seen a few different dates and they’re looking good, I’ll be happy to go ahead.
Index alignment:I think the 9 index is misaligned or slightly tilted
Dial Printing: the up in superlative is too close?
Date Wheel alignment/printing:
Hand Alignment:
Bezel:
Solid End Links (SELs):
Timegrapher numbers:
Anything else you notice: do vsf watches come with the Rolex symbol laser engraving on the crystal? And is this something you’re meant to see in qc photos?
Model name (& version number): Rolex Submariner 126610LV “Starbucks”
Price Paid: $470
Index alignment: Markers look straight and evenly positioned to me, not sure if I did a good job with the index ruler though.
Dial Printing: I think its sharp.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Good in my opinion
Hand Alignment: Looks good. No obvious issues.
Bezel: Pip and 12 o’clock alignment look correct
Solid End Links (SELs): Top left SEL looks slightly weird with a small gap? Would this be noticeable on the wrist?
Timegrapher numbers: +1 s/day, 256°, 0.1 ms. Very good.
Anything else you notice: Overall looks very good. My only concerns are the subtle circular appearance around the hand stack in some angled photos and whether it looks like a noticeable dial dimple, and the slightly recessed top left SEL.
Index alignment: 12 triangle looks slightly rotated to the right. 6 looks like it is slightly off to the left.
Dial Printing: I dont see any issues.
Date Wheel alignment/printing:
Hand Alignment: Minute and hour look good.
Bezel: Pip is centered. Engraving at the bottom of then bezel seems thick compared to the rest of the engravings but it may be that way for this model
Solid End Links (SELs): Top left SEL seems to push a bit far. Visible gap can be seen. Light shining through.
Timegrapher numbers:
Rate: +10s/day
Amp: 270
Err: 0.2 ms
Anything else you notice: I was sent this QC same day as placing an order. I believe that someone already RL’d this and he is trying to sell it to me. I even requested that he ordered me a new one from the factory, he said OK but then sent me this same day. Dirt specs can be seen to the left of the submariner print. I cant tell if this is on top of the watch or below the surface but it can be seen in multiple images.
a. Index alignment: looks good across the board, though the line through 3 and 9 makes it seem as if one of them is sitting too high/low. I can't make any calls on the logo and have naturally asked for better pictures with the hands out of the way.
b. date wheel seems fine
c. bezel looks fine although the bezel bolt to the right of 12 close to 1 seems a bit crooked, as does the one above 9, dont think you could really fix that either...
d. Sel's unnapplicable
e. hands and their centering seem fine on all, including subdials
f. dont see any obvious dial defects, advice appreciated
g. No timegrapher details as seller supposedly doesnt own one
I certainly lean GL but debating on how much the crooked bezel bolts will affect me and/or how easy or not itll be to correct them (likely by purchasing new or gen bolts).
Date Wheel alignment/printing: think its a few ticks to the right?
Hand Alignment: good
Bezel: finish looks ok
Solid End Links (SELs): bottom left has a gap which might be a deal breaker for me
Timegrapher numbers: +2s/d 272 amp
Anything else you notice: so steve told me ARF was going to be a while and sent me these qc pics the next day. i noticed it doesn't say ARF but says "one" looking at other recent ARF qcs i do see them also come with the "one" tag but other ARF pieces does say ARF. Just feel like the timing is a bit suspect. Im leaning towards a RL on this one tbh because its got 3 separate issues i noticed. What do you guys think?
Dial Printing:I have concerns over the spacing in the “Certified” print where there is a gap between the F and I but looks like Gen is similar. The spacing in TER in Oyster looks off too.
Date Wheel alignment/printing:some of the pics show the Date Wheel alignment is off but could be the angle. Something seems off with the date wheel as I am noticing two circles in a lot of the pics, unsure it’s reflections.
Hand Alignment: no issues
Bezel:it looks like the gray and black bezel coloring is inconsistent but could be lighting.
Anything else you notice: I’m a total amateur and this is my second rep , but I have concerns over this piece as the pictures aren’t crisp and clear and would appreciate help. The error rate of 3.1ms is concerning. Overall, this looks like a RL to me.
Index alignment: 9 looks a tad canted, watch is held at a slight angle (down and to the left) in QC photos which causes the tool to look a little off on the left indexes
Dial Printing: text looks good
Date Wheel alignment/printing: na
Hand Alignment: can’t see anything
Bezel: no defects that I can see
Solid End Links (SELs): slight spacing on bottom right, but not enough to RL
Index alignment: The 3 looks really crooked, 6 and 12 looks a bit misaligned too (I would appreciate some help here if this is acceptable or should I ask for another watch?)
Dial Printing: SWISS MADE is a bit cut off at the bottom, everything else seems ok
Model name (& version number): Dark Side of the Moon
Price Paid: $528
Album Links: n/a
Index alignment:
Dial Printing: looks ok?
Date Wheel alignment/printing: looks ok
Hand Alignment: 👍🏽
Bezel: numbers look way too thick and not consistent
Solid End Links (SELs): n/a
Timegrapher numbers: n/a
Anything else you notice: apart from the numbers on the bezel being super thick, the stitching on the strap looks atrocious. Some stitches are short while others are long and there’s fuzz coming out of some of the stitch holes.
6. Index alignment: Looks good to me. 12, 3, 6 and 9 all appear aligned. I don’t see any obviously crooked indices, but would appreciate another set of eyes on this.
7. Dial printing: Looks clean and crisp to me. Nothing obviously wrong that I can spot.
8. Date wheel alignment/printing: The 31 shown in the QC looks well centered to me and the printing looks good. Cyclops also appears properly positioned.
9. Hand alignment: Looks good from what I can see in the photos/video.
10. Bezel: Looks aligned to my eye. Pip appears centered and I don’t see anything concerning with the insert or engraving.
11. Solid End Links (SELs): Look tight to me with no obvious gaps.
12. Timegrapher numbers: Approximately 0 to +1 s/d, 273–277° amplitude, 0.0 ms beat error, 28,800 bph. Looks excellent to me.
13. Anything else you notice: This is the Rich Factory version with the newer JH3235 free-sprung movement. I’ve been waiting a while for this one and this is my first QC for this particular factory/movement, so I’d really appreciate experienced eyes on it before I GL. Rehaut alignment looks okay to me from the available angles, but I’d particularly appreciate opinions on the rehaut, bezel/index alignment, SELs and anything else I may have missed. Thanks!
Index alignment: Looks good overall. All hour markers appear properly mostly correct although some of them look slightly crooked. A tiny apparent deviation around 1–2 or 10–11 possible?
Dial Printing: Well centered. Nothing obviously crooked or poorly spaced.
Date Wheel: Looks centered and clean. I don't notice anything that is off centered
Hand Alignment: Looks solid. Nothing appears bent, improperly seated, or obviously misaligned. Hands clear each other and the indices normally.
Bezel: Looks good. Fluting appears even and consistent all the way around. No visible damage or major finishing issue.
SELs: Very good. Both end links look tight against the case with no concerning gaps. .
Timegrapher: +5 s/d, 289°, 0.1 ms – I think that this is within acceptable tolerance?
Anything else: Don't love the color Gradiant on the dial as it does appear to be the weak point on the Green Ombre. The biggest thing that concerns me are wether or not the marker alignment is acceptable. I am new to this so any and all input is appreciated. This was my first watch so I am mostly using this as education
Index alignment: 8 o’clock on the alignment photo with the pink lines looks slightly off to me
Dial Printing: Looks good
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Looks slightly left
Hand Alignment: Looks good
Bezel: Aligned from what I can see, perhaps slight off on the 8?
Solid End Links (SELs): Compared to other photos I have seen this looks ok to me
Timegrapher numbers: I honestly don’t understand this part but +6 s/day, 245 amplitude, 0.0 ms beat error according to chat gpt this result is good
Anything else you notice: I compared photos from another post that had the same watch from the same seller where everyone said GL..but I am a first timer and welcome all feedback.. thank you
Index alignment: This is my first QC so I’m not very confident. But nothing immediately jumps out to me?, but I’m not sure if any of the markers are slightly rotated or off relative to the minute track. The 12/6 axis seems okay to me, but I’d really appreciate experienced eyes here.
Dial Printing: Seems clean to me. I don’t notice obvious bleeding or crooked printing on the OMEGA/Seamaster or CO-AXIAL / MASTER CHRONOMETER text, but please let me know if I’m missing anything.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: The “12” looks roughly centered to me, although I’m not sure if it sits very slightly off in the window. Both digits seem level. Only one date is clearly shown, so I can’t really judge the rest of the date wheel.
Hand Alignment: Looks okay to me from the photos, but I’m not experienced enough to spot very small alignment/finishing problems.
Bezel: Smooth polished bezel, so no pip or engraving to check. I don’t notice obvious damage or unevenness.
Solid End Links (SELs): N/A for this Aqua Terra. Bracelet-to-case fit looks okay to me.
Timegrapher numbers:0 s/d, 293°, 0.0 ms. Can’t fully be confident, would appreciate confirmation that everything here is okay. (video in album link)
Anything else you notice: This is my first QC and I’d really appreciate a proper second look from people who have more experience with Aqua Terras/VSF. There is a very small white speck just below the “Seamaster” text in a couple of the straight-on photos. It doesn’t seem to appear consistently from other angles, so I’m not sure if it’s dust/reflection on the crystal or something underneath. I also tried looking for scratches or finishing issues on the case and bracelet, but with the protective film and reflections I’m not confident judging those. Please let me know if you notice anything else I should be concerned about. 💖🙏
Hi everyone, this is my first rep purchase and I’d really appreciate some experienced eyes on this QC. 1. Dealer name: Steve / TheOneWatches 2. Factory name: QF 3. Model name (& version number): Rolex Explorer II 226570 Polar / White Dial 4. Price paid: $718 shipped 5. Album links: Photos attached to post 6. Index alignment: Looks good to me. I don’t see any obviously crooked or misplaced markers, but would appreciate another set of eyes. 7. Dial printing: Looks clean and centered to my eye. 8. Date wheel alignment/printing: Date appears centered and clear. 9. Hand alignment: Looks good from what I can see. 10. Bezel: Appears aligned. I’m aware there are known differences between rep and gen bezel/font on the 226570, so I’m mainly looking for any QC-specific issues with this particular watch. 11. Solid end links (SELs): Look good to me with no obvious excessive gaps. 12. Timegrapher numbers: +6 s/d, 286° amplitude, 0.0 ms beat error, 28,800 bph. Looks healthy to me.
13. Anything else you notice: Steve provided additional straight-on and case/bracelet photos at my request. Overall this looks like a strong example to my inexperienced eye, but since this is my first rep I’d appreciate feedback before I GL it. Main question: Do you see anything on this specific watch that would warrant an RL, or would you GL it?
Thanks in advance — I’ve already learned a ton from this community.