or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 2123  

post #31831 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post

^ so sexy!  I was thinking date as it is more "rolex iconic" than a no date, but that is just my opinion.  I am going to compare the two models today at a local reseller, Bernard Watch Co, so I hope to get a better idea as to what not only fits better, but the changes that were made for the 116610 model.   A used 16610 is a few thousand dollars less than a new/like new 116610 so it might be best to start out with a 16610 and save for other watches/shoes smile.gif

I'm obviously a huge fan of the 16610, and you can't go wrong with this timeless, iconic piece. However, I must say, I handled a newer sub recently and the ceramic bezel is a very nice upgrade.
post #31832 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post

Thanks for the heads up!  I tried on a new 116610 at an AD this past weekend and loved the weight.  Are you talking about the SEL vs non SEL models?  Or is the bracelet, other than the end links, different when comparing vintages?  If the entire bracelet is different/heavier in the 116610, can the bracelet of the 116610 be put on a 16610?
You can not in any way compare the bracelet of the 116610 to the 16610! The new bracelet is phenomenal and I miss mine everyday!

The bracelets between the 16610 and 14060M (both pre-ceramic) are different.
post #31833 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post
 

Thanks for the heads up!  I tried on a new 116610 at an AD this past weekend and loved the weight.  Are you talking about the SEL vs non SEL models?  Or is the bracelet, other than the end links, different when comparing vintages?  If the entire bracelet is different/heavier in the 116610, can the bracelet of the 116610 be put on a 16610?

The 14060M did not have SELs on its bracelet, while the 16610 from about the year 2000/2001 does have and SEL bracelet.  I grew up with Rolex watches not having SELs, so I'm not offended by the non-SEL bracelets, although I do prefer the cleaner more solid feel of the SEL even on the old style hollow bracelets.  The new bracelets are completely different in terms of all center links are now solid (on the old 16610 and 14060M all center links were hollow.  In addition, the adjustment in the clasps and diver's extension is different too.  

 

There is a tremendous jump in the quality of the current bracelets vs. the old, but then again the newer ones (unless you go vintage collectible) cost significantly more.  Obviously, there are other differences such as the case, bezel, and and lum/markings on the current Subs vs the previous models.  Good luck with whatever you decide.  

post #31834 of 48312

Well, just got back from Bernard's.  First of all PJ was very helpful in explaining the differences, the pros and cons, and putting up with any "noob Rolex" questions I might have had.  I highly recommend them for any new or preowned watch needs.  He even brought out a new Planet Ocean for me to inspect.  I liked it, but I have small wrists and am not a big guy, and the PO was just too tall for my taste.  The Sub fit much better.

 

Anyways, back to the goods.  The differences in the bracelets is what really sets the 116610 apart from the older 16610.  The bracelet on the 116610 is far superior and is in a different league, imho.  I compared the 116610 to a SEL and non-SEL 16610 and both were inferior to the newer bracelet.  The finish, feel, and weight were all positive marks.  Now I just need to decide do the positive aspects of the bracelet/ceramic bezel make up for the $2,500 in price....

post #31835 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post

Now I just need to decide do the positive aspects of the bracelet/ceramic bezel make up for the $2,500 in price....
They do. At least to me.
post #31836 of 48312

If (when) I get a sub or an Explorer 1, I intend to put them on nato straps. Is there a market for "head only" type pieces? Seems like I could find some pretty steep discounts by going non-bracelet.

post #31837 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TradThrifter View Post

If (when) I get a sub or an Explorer 1, I intend to put them on nato straps. If there a market for "head only" type pieces? Seems like I could find some pretty steep discount by going non-bracelet.
There are some out there. Discount is not as steep as you would like, though.
post #31838 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post


They do. At least to me.

 

+1.  You've picked the model, now it is picking the small details that make it the perfect one for you.  Most people won't be able to tell a difference but once you move into that TWAT / WIS mindset, you will be able to tell the difference and will you be kicking yourself for not going that next step?

post #31839 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

 

There is a tremendous jump in the quality of the current bracelets vs. the old, but then again the newer ones (unless you go vintage collectible) cost significantly more.  Obviously, there are other differences such as the case, bezel, and and lum/markings on the current Subs vs the previous models.  Good luck with whatever you decide.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post

 

Anyways, back to the goods.  The differences in the bracelets is what really sets the 116610 apart from the older 16610.  The bracelet on the 116610 is far superior and is in a different league, imho.  I compared the 116610 to a SEL and non-SEL 16610 and both were inferior to the newer bracelet.  The finish, feel, and weight were all positive marks.  Now I just need to decide do the positive aspects of the bracelet/ceramic bezel make up for the $2,500 in price....

 

+1... for me the differences were worth the price. I still bargained the hell out of my dealer to get a good price for my BNIB SubC ND and SubC LV, but I love 'em.  The solid links in the bracelet that addresses the issue of loosening over time; the superbly awesome glidelock clasp that can be adjusted 2mm at a time on the fly; the cerachrom bezel insert that is virtually scratch proof (this is a minus for some old school die-hards who prefer the aluminum insert that acquires a "patina" over time), etc, etc. 

 

LOVE. EM.


Even the chunky lugs grew on me once I actually wore them.  I have more than enough sleek, dressy pieces with my other watches.  My SubC ND is for a much different purpose. 

 

The wife loves her SubC LV so much (got it for her for Mother's Day) that it's been on her wrist constantly for the last two and a half weeks!  And she just wears the heck out of them.  It's insane.  Every single evening she comes back from work with the BEZEL ROTATED A QUARTER TO HALF OF THE WAY.  What does she do on her senior management day job that does that to the bezel?  How many times, and at what angle and point of contact, does she need to scratch that watch against her desk to turn the bezel that much? 

 

But you know what - zero scratches so far on the brushed finish bracelet and links.  And zero scratches on the cerachrom bezel insert.  BOOM! 

 

LOVE. IT.

 

I understand why others might prefer the older Sub models.  Really, I do.  But that doesn't mean the current models in production are necessarily uglier aesthetically or technically inferior.  Get 'em all if that floats your boat IMHO!

post #31840 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post
 


Even the chunky lugs grew on me once I actually wore them.  I have more than enough sleek, dressy pieces with my other watches.  My SubC ND is for a much different purpose. 

I'm still surprised that they grew on you given our discussion when I was last up in NYC, but I'm glad you are enjoying it.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post
Now I just need to decide do the positive aspects of the bracelet/ceramic bezel make up for the $2,500 in price....

I definitely think the bracelet alone is worth the price jump. To me the key question isn't the price difference, it's the maxi dial/case/lug shape of the newer version vs the older version. Personally, the new design really isn't for me, which is really frustrating because I really do love the bracelet/glide lock. I may give in at some point down the road and let it grow on me like Frills did, but given my budget for watches my tolerance to let things grow on me is likely significantly less.

post #31841 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post
 


Even the chunky lugs grew on me once I actually wore them.  I have more than enough sleek, dressy pieces with my other watches.  My SubC ND is for a much different purpose. 

I'm still surprised that they grew on you given our discussion when I was last up in NYC, but I'm glad you are enjoying it.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by golfinz View Post
Now I just need to decide do the positive aspects of the bracelet/ceramic bezel make up for the $2,500 in price....

I definitely think the bracelet alone is worth the price jump. To me the key question isn't the price difference, it's the maxi dial/case/lug shape of the newer version vs the older version. Personally, the new design really isn't for me, which is really frustrating because I really do love the bracelet/glide lock. I may give in at some point down the road and let it grow on me like Frills did, but given my budget for watches my tolerance to let things grow on me is likely significantly less.


Then for you the SD4000 probably works much better. Pic from a friend of mine who picked up his SD4000 in Hong Kong the other day:

y6uvapeq.jpg

Lugs really are sleeker than the SubC ND:

a9atyta3.jpg

If the lugs bother you so much, there is always the case of a friend of mine who took his GMTc to a local watchmaker in the Philippines AND HAD THE LUGS TRIMMED DOWN. Boom. Liposuction for chunky lugs. Here is his GMTc beside the SD4000:

vu4ybapy.jpg

Rolex might not be happy with this aftermarket modification, but I guess stranger things have been done...
post #31842 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post


If the lugs bother you so much, there is always the case of a friend of mine who took his GMTc to a local watchmaker in the Philippines AND HAD THE LUGS TRIMMED DOWN. Boom. Liposuction for chunky lugs. Here is his GMTc beside the SD4000:

vu4ybapy.jpg
 

As someone who has not yet owned a Rolex with the chuckier newer lugs, I am used to narrow lugs of the older Subs, GMTS, SDs.  However, seeing a GMTC with narrow lugs looks very strange to me.  Its lugs actually look narrower than those of the SD 4000 next to it.  Oh well, as long as he is happy with it that is what matters.

post #31843 of 48312

Yeah, i won't be modifying it. I will be trying the SD at some point though. If I don't like it, I know what my move is from there and it's still pretty good if not better, so it's no big deal. Plus, who knows, maybe over the years Rolex moves back to something between this gen and the previous gen of the Sub.

post #31844 of 48312
A strange thing with watches, I have lost thousands of pounds on watches that I have bought and sold over the years but on this one I have been offered three times the amount I bought it for but still do not want to part with it!

photo 0BE25084-A748-4810-B9B8-3D06EA01F83B_zpskjmdxiu8.jpg
post #31845 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
The 14060M did not have SELs on its bracelet, while the 16610 from about the year 2000/2001 does have and SEL bracelet.  I grew up with Rolex watches not having SELs, so I'm not offended by the non-SEL bracelets, although I do prefer the cleaner more solid feel of the SEL even on the old style hollow bracelets.  The new bracelets are completely different in terms of all center links are now solid (on the old 16610 and 14060M all center links were hollow.  In addition, the adjustment in the clasps and diver's extension is different too.  
There is a tremendous jump in the quality of the current bracelets vs. the old, but then again the newer ones (unless you go vintage collectible) cost significantly more.[...]
It's more of a design than a quality difference to me.

The current Submariner's sliding adjustment in 2 mm increments kicks ass all over the place, but I have no preference between the old and new bracelets as far as actually wearing goes. Aside from the closure system, the main difference is just a bit of weight. The hollow- and solid-link versions are equally strong, equally durable, and they look exactly the same other than the clasp. I wouldn't say that anything has changed when it comes to the quality of manufacture. Compare a brand-new example of each, and they're both perfectly machined. I have the original 35-year-old bracelet for one of my GMTs; the clasp is still fine and closes with a nice positive snap, so it's tough to complain about the quality of that bit, either.

If kept clean (to clear out grit that vastly accelerates wear) and not worn loose, either type of bracelet can easily outlast the owner.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)