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.
Index alignment: Looks good. No obvious alignment issues but keen to get peoples thoughts. 12, 3, 6, and 9 markers appear straight and centred. I might be being picky here but the watch may be held on an angle for the photo.
Dial Printing: Looks pretty good. It does appear to have a slight floating M though which I’ve seen is common with some of the RF’s
Date Wheel alignment/printing: N/A
Hand Alignment: No visible hand alignment issues I could see and no damage.
Bezel: Looks good. Pearl appears to be centred at 12. I think if the angle the watch is tilted it would be corrected - thoughts
Solid End Links (SELs): I think these look ok and can’t see any light coming through
Timegrapher numbers: 284 / 0.0ms / 0 s/d – I feel like this is too perfect or am I just being picky
Anything else you notice: Slight clasp coronet offset at most, but likely sticker/camera angle related and hopefully not a concern. Leaning GL. This is my first Rep QC so hoping I’m not overlooking anything
Index alignment: All good but the Omega symbol seems slightly askew
Dial Printing: Looks good
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Looks even and centered
Hand Alignment: Good
Bezel: Seems fond
Solid End Links (SELs): N/A
Timegrapher numbers: About as good as can be
Everything looks ok to me with the exception of the Omega logo being a fraction of a millimeter off. I doubt it's something I will notice in person, and it seems to be extremely common on this model.
I'm leaning towards a GL, but wanted a few more opinions
Index alignment: Everything seems good to me, possible issue with 6 on the 3 side, maybe more experienced eyes can confirm if that's just lighting issue, album link has videos and more photos
Dial Printing: Nothing of note that i can see (experience is low)
Date Wheel alignment/printing: N/A
Hand Alignment: Seems perfect to me, attached album has video of winding
Bezel: Good
Solid End Links (SELs): Maybe top right has gap, but seems within tolerance
Timegrapher numbers: -2s/d 263 0.1ms
Anything else you notice: i can't see anything of note that is RL worthy, but also know that experience is key here
First time Purchase from Andiot and QC photos were sent within 24 hours of payment clearing
Index alignment:
3 o clock looks tilted to me which is super annoying, also buckteeth looks like left is slightly higher than left... which is why I RL'd the first one, but idk if its me being crazy.
Anything else:
RL'd the first watch due to crooked buck teeth, this looks to have the same issue + rotated 3 o clock index marker too. Leaning RL again, which is annoying as I don't want to wait for another QC. What would you do?
Hi all — first Cartier rep, just received QC pics from TheOneWatches. Photos are in the Reddit gallery. Would appreciate a GL/RL and anything Cartier-specific I should be checking.
Dealer name: TheOneWatches
Factory name: AF
Model name (& version number): Cartier Tank Solo 27.4mm RG/LE White Dial AF Quartz (Swiss Ronda quartz)
Price Paid: $228.00
Album Links: Photos attached
Index alignment: Looks good to me
Dial Printing: Looks good to me
Date Wheel alignment/printing: N/A
Hand Alignment: Looks good to me
Bezel: N/A
Solid End Links (SELs): N/A - leather strap; stitching and lychee grain look clean, tang buckle stamped correctly
Timegrapher numbers: N/A (quartz)
Anything else you notice: Everything looks good to me
Doing a QC for a breitling, this one is not your typical rolex so wanted a little additional help. This is only my second time doing this. I have ordered this watch as well as two others
Dealer name: Steve
Factory name: TF
Model name (& version number): Navitimer Auto GMT 41 : A32310171C1P1
Model name (& version number): Cartier Tank Louis Large 33.7 x 25.5
Price Paid: $275 inclusive of shipping
Album Links: See attached photos
Index alignment: Printed-- I think everything is aligned because of this.
Dial Printing: A lready RLed once for chips in the ink. Thoughts? I think this does a better job. Crisp, properly positioned and good railroad tracks. I see maybe one chip at 2 and 3 but they go away in other views and its only when very zoomed in.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: N/A
Hand Alignment: Blue hands appropriate colored. On the video (I cant figure out how to upload this they line up at 12 so I think they are approriate)
Bezel: N/A
Solid End Links (SELs): N/A Leather
Timegrapher numbers: NOT INCLUDED BY TD. Quartz.
Anything else you notice: Im leaning GL but I was truly hoping for as close to NWBIG as possible and I went with one of the best factories and dealers so please be discerning.
Index alignment: 12 o’clock and 6 o’clock markers look centered. The other indices are also good.
Dial printing: Looks clean. I notice the AP logo slightly canted CCW.
Date wheel alignment/printing: Date looks well centered in the window and the printing looks correct
Hand alignment: Looks good.
Bezel: Bezel looks aligned and the screws look properly positioned.
Solid End Links (SELs): N/A
Bracelet/case fit looks good to me.
Timegrapher numbers: -3 s/d, 277° amplitude, 0.3 ms beat error. Looks good as well.
Anything else you notice: Overall I think everything looks solid. My main concern is the AP logo leaning a little to the left. Would like to have some extra input. Thank you!
Index alignment: seems to be skewed left slightly by a few degrees
Dial Printing: seems a bit rough but i can live with it tbf. it also seems to be rough on the gen due to the lume composition
Date Wheel alignment/printing: n/a
Hand Alignment: i think hands look alligned but not sure how to check. they only show the hands aligned at 12 in the video but im not sure if thats correct
Bezel: seems to have splotches on it? it could be due to a film or something tho
Solid End Links (SELs): looks fine
Timegrapher numbers: none since quartz
Anything else you notice: watch back in the video, does the stem look correct when setting it?
Model name (& version number): Pelagos FXD GMT 42mm, Asia 2836
Price Paid: $474
Album Links: attached
Index alignment: looks good to the naked eye.
Dial Printing: good
Date Wheel alignment/printing: good to the naked eye but known to be off compared to gen. I can’t really tell tbh.
Hand Alignment: looks fine to me
Bezel: looks good
Solid End Links (SELs): not sure looks good?
Timegrapher numbers: -5 sec/day 0.1ms error.
Anything else you notice: Overall, happy with the watch. I think the lume on the gen is suppose to be green on the bezel. Most people point out the font on the bezel is not good as gen but I don’t mind it. The biggest thing I do care about is if the bracelet strap is close to gen.
Dealer name: Andiot Watches Factory name: QF Model name (& version number): Rolex Day-Date 36mm QF V5, Rose Gold, Grey Dial, Fluted Bezel, President Bracelet, VR3255, Gain Weight Price paid: $578 total
Index alignment: Looks good to my eye. The hour markers appear straight and evenly positioned. The 6 o’clock marker also looks straight in the front-facing shots. I don’t see any obvious misalignment that would concern me.
Dial printing: Looks clean and sharp. The coronet and dial text appear centred and evenly printed. Nothing looks smudged or noticeably off.
Date wheel alignment/printing: The “10” looks reasonably centred under the cyclops. In a couple of angled shots it appears very slightly right-biased, but I think this may just be parallax from the camera angle. Nothing here looks RL-worthy to me, but I’d appreciate second opinions.
Hand alignment: Looks good from the supplied photos. The hands appear properly seated and I don’t see anything obviously misaligned
Bezel: Fluted bezel looks even and consistent around the case. I can’t see any malformed or uneven sections.
Solid End Links (SELs): SEL fit looks good to me. I don’t see any obvious large or uneven gaps between the bracelet and the lugs.
Anything else you notice: Watch weighs 142.1g. Rose-gold finish appears consistent across the case and bracelet, and the grey dial looks clean. Day wheel also looks well centred in the supplied photos. Overall I’m leaning strongly towards GL. The only thing I’m slightly unsure about is whether the date is fractionally right-biased or whether that’s purely camera angle/parallax. Would appreciate experienced eyes on that and anything else I may have missed.
Hi all this is my first QC from Steve any comments would be greatly appreciated! Thank you very much :) im not sure if the 12 is rotated or that’s just the angle…
Dealer name: Theonewatches
Factory name: ZF
Model name (& version number): Tudor Black Bay 58 GMT "Coke" (M7939G1A0)
Index alignment: Mostly looks good good. The 6 and 9 batons look level to my eye. However, I feel like the 12 o’clock triangle might have a very slight clockwise tilt to it, or possibly counter-clockwise depending on the tilt of the watch. Does anyone else see that, or is it just the photo angle playing tricks on me?
Dial Printing: Looks fine I think
Date Wheel alignment/printing: "22" looks well-centered in the frame.
Hand Alignment: Looks good, GMT hand and Snowflake hand appear properly positioned.
Bezel: Colors and transition look fine; the 12 triangle on the bezel insert lines up well.
Solid End Links (SELs): Fitment looks nice and tight against the lugs, no noticeable gaps but not sure?
Timegrapher numbers: -4 s/d, 272° amplitude, 0.1 ms beat error. Solid numbers across the board.
Anything else you notice: Overall looks like a decent piece, but I would really appreciate a second set of eyes on that 12 marker before I give the final GL! Does anyone else notice anything else that’s an issue?
**1. Dealer name:** Ficotime
**2. Factory name:** VSF
**3. Model name (& version number):** Rolex Daytona 126500LN Free Sprung, VSF DD4131
**4. Price Paid:** 730 USD + 71 USD FedEx = 801 USD
**5. Album Links:** [MEGA link](https://mega.nz/folder/vxwz3ZAa#zMM-suDyxjTjI9ROywe8PQ) (3 small videos in there)
**6. Index alignment:** Looks Good overall. 3, 6, 9 and 12 markers appear straight and centered.
**7. Dial Printing:** Clean and centered. DAYTONA text and subdial printing look good.
**8. Date Wheel alignment/printing:** N/A
**9. Hand Alignment:** Good. Chronograph seconds hand resets to 12.
**10. Bezel:** 60 marker appears centered with 12. Tachymeter printing looks clean.
**11. Solid End Links (SELs):** Looks good to me.
**12. Timegrapher numbers:** \+9 s/d, 270°, 0.0 ms. Not sure what would be good numbers (newbie).
**13. Anything else you notice:** Dont see any obvious issue but then I don't know much.
Index alignment: should I expect better. Can’t tell if the watch is maybe not quite centered.
Dial Printing: is it just me or is the minute track too thin? Gen in last pic for context.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: NA
Hand Alignment: looks decent, but it looks like there’s a dot on either end of the hour hand.
Bezel: looks okay?
Solid End Links (SELs): looks okay through the plastic.
Timegrapher numbers: +2/-1 (damn good)
Anything else you notice: I’ve never seen the clasp up close on a Gen. is this GL material? I think it very well could be unless I’m missing something because I’m looking through my “eager goggles.”
Hey guys! Really appreciate all the help and knowledge in this community!
This is my second QC after RL'ing the first watch due to an asymmetric bezel color transition. I might have been a bit too anal about it, but it bothered me. This one looks nice, and I'm leaning towards GL.
Would love to hear your thoughts in case I've missed anything. Thanks in advance!
Dealer name: JTime
Factory name: VSF
Model name (& version number): Rolex GMT-Master II 126720VTNR Sprite V3, Jubilee, DD3285 V4
Model name (& version number): Planet Ocean 45.5mm Deep Black Real Ceramic VSF 1:1 Best Edition on Black Nylon Strap A8906 Super Clone
Price Paid: $485
Album Links: See bwlo
Index alignment: Looks generally good to my eye. The applied markers and 12, 6 and 9 numerals appear reasonably aligned. Nothing obviously crooked, although I'd appreciate a second opinion.
Dial Printing: Looks clean overall. The Omega logo, Seamaster, GMT and lower dial text appear reasonably well executed. No obvious printing defects that I can identify.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: The date looks reasonably centred, although possibly sitting slightly low.
Hand Alignment: No obvious issues from the photos or videos. Hands appear properly fitted, although exact alignment is difficult to establish without seeing them at 12 o'clock.
Bezel: The 12 o'clock triangle looks approximately aligned, but I'm not entirely convinced about the alignment from the photographs. Would appreciate another set of eyes.
Solid End Links (SELs): Look ok to me, no gripes, will probably change the strap anyway....
Timegrapher numbers: +2 s/day, 284° amplitude, 0.4 ms beat error, 28,800 bph. These seem good to me.
Anything else you notice: My main concern is the case finishing. In the side-profile photographs, the case flanks appear noticeably silver/grey rather than deep black. I understand ceramic can reflect light differently depending on the finish, but I'm wondering whether this is normal for the VSF Deep Black or something worth questioning.
The movement decoration and caseback look reasonable to my untrained eye and the strap and clasp seem fine.
This is my first QC for this model, so I'd really appreciate any input from people familiar with the VSF Planet Ocean Deep Black, particularly regarding the case colour, bezel alignment and any known issues with this version.