Question for all 5-digit submariner owners

[Andad]

The 16610 is a classic and the LV model takes it to a new level.

[mquarter]

Yes! Definitely go for the NOS experience to wear. There's only a finite amount of them out there in the world.

[Nads786]

I completely understand your pov on the coin edge bezel vs. the the teeth on the sub. It reflects light in a completely different way. It was one of the first things I noticed when I got my sub and did a side by side with the black bay.

In addition, the aluminum on the sub's bezel was much more reflective (in a good way) compared to the BB58.

[Epanerai12]

Not to resurrect or hijack an older thread. Curious to what the outcome was here. But I myself just took the NOS plunge.

My 1st ever rolex was a brand new from the case 14060M in 2009 at the tender age of 23. Of course, I traded it somewhere along the line and have always regretted it.

I've had a few dozen rolexes since then, mostly 6 digit new sports pieces, but could never really capture that original 14060M magic and while the new stuff is almost clinical in its perfection, it takes away that hard-to-describe charm and character that the 5 digit stuff had.

So this week, I traded my SD4k which I acquired pre-owned for a NOS v serial 2009 16610ln, and so happy I did.

I realize taking the stickers off cost me an immediate 5-7k but this is the way it has to be since i bought it to wear and enjoy. So happy I did it and while nothing can recapture fully that original experience, this is as close as I'll likely ever get again to that.

After all the batmans, sub c's, etc, nothing beats the feel of a 5 digit. Just so balanced and much more enjoyable to wear. Plus the 16610ln was the one that started it for me and back in 2009 had I had a few more bux I'd have gotten the date over the 14060M.

Now I have time traveled and couldn't be happier.

[offrdmania]

I had the best of both worlds. It was a 2-line 14060M which I added a glide lock clasp and half link from a modern 97200 bracelet and once I found the sweet spot, it was the most comfortable watch I had ever owned. Thin lugs and micro adjustable clasp. You cant get any better than that. Sold it during Covid unfortunately.

[Dom9]

The micro-adjustment clasp on a 5-digit does intrigued me, I'm finding my 16610 sometimes feels like it needs a little adjustment.

[Snowballs]

Great thread.

I am a 5 digit fan and love the 40 MM size.

Kermit 16610LV has a special place in my collection followed by 14060M.

Enjoy

[Heater3000]

I owned an LV and wanted to love it.. but soon i realized that while the green bezel insert is appealing, it’s NOT an everyday watch ..for me..sold it and stayed 5 digit with and LN

[TuRo]

All this 5 versus 6 stuff is great....but have to say for me 4 digit is really the only ones I really love....hence I hardly ever wear a 16660 over say a 1665, or a 16550 over 1655, or a 14060 over a 5513, 14270 over a 1016...etc..etc...

[LugholeChris]

Having owned a few LVs and quite a lot of 16610LNs, I would absolutely suggest a LN for everyday use. Something about how it just seemlessly blends with all types of clothes and goes with all situations. It is one of the most well-sitting watches, imho, and even though I am now in a 5513 myself, the 16610 always brought a smile to my face every morning, and is perhaps rhe most iconic Rolex in newer times.

I would as many others suggest lugholes - just gives a more classic look and changing straps is so much easier.


Good luck on the hunt.

Sendt fra min SM-G781B med Tapatalk

[Curated]

5 digits were peak Rolex, durable, perfect size, sleek and lightweight. 16610, 14060 or 16600….can’t go wrong with any one those.

[skribble5]

+1 for 16600. Was my grail before I got a 2001 model last year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by TuRo

I had a 16610 LV but didn't bond with it at all, just felt much more modern even than a 16610 90s tritium - I think it was the big plots, non lug holes, solid end links etc etc...If you like the 79090 feel I suspect your smitten with low centre of gravity of a plexi (over say a 79190 sapphire which feel slightly chunkier/different). Similar Rolex that have that low c.o.g. would be 16750, 5513 and 1680.

Agree w OP, good points. I am especially fond of Lugholes and SELs. I can see the plots as polarizing yet sought after because of the transition significance.

I also previously owned one , While I think the Kermit is an excellent choice and expect it would wear to your liking. I wound up with a 4 line 14060m. I can’t speak to the annual numbers of production for each but both were produced for nearly the same amount of time. In the end the deciding factor was the no date option.

[SOG DIVER]

Started with a tough red 1680 almost 49 years ago and that balance has colored my
view of Submariners: lugs drilled and well-balanced. Anyone curious about the 14060M
reference should read Paul Altieri's "Last of the Best".
My current top-of-the line is an excellent 1960 ref. 5512 gilt-dialed and PCG with
chapter ring. First of the crown guard models - complete with no nickname, luckily.

[opawlows]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I found myself in a similar predicament as the OP and ended up moving all of my 6 digit ceramic models (except for my 116610LV, which my wife will wear every now and then to match my Kermit) and have since acquired their 5 digit replacements. My favorite to wear has been the 16600 which I switch between the bracelet and various straps. I find they sit on my wrist better and I enjoy the wear marks on the aluminum inserts which when wanted can be exchanged with like new versions to give the watch a whole new appearance again!

[espanol]

Hey everyone, thanks for keeping this going. Apologies for not keeping tabs. I'm sure there's a way to receive notifications on threads but I have yet to figure it out...

Still have the 126710 BLRO. Not by choice, but merely inertia. I've been outside of the US for the last year, so selling it hasn't really been a possibility in the part of the world I've been in.

I still very much intend on selling. Since creating this thread (and even prior) it's just been collecting dust. I've put it on occasionally in the house, tried swapping between jubilee and oyster, and it just does absolutely nothing for me. Too shiny, too big, too loud, and just doesn't represent what I liked in the brand. Seeing people 'flex' modern Rolex is hard to watch.

Thanks to the advice here, I've narrowed it down to the following (I think):
-16610LV- frontrunner. I like the fact that it was an anniversary model, and has what little I actually enjoy about modern subs- maxi plots.

-16710 or 16700- still love a good GMT, but ceramic just isn't for me

-14060m or no m- To me this was peak no-date submariner.

Condition will be key. To the great advice here, I don't really care anymore if it is NOS. In fact, if I can get close to NOS for significantly less, then why bother with NOS?

Note, this watch will likely keep me content for quite some time. It'll make my immediate collection a total of four watches, two of which are actual daily wearers:
1. 124270 Explorer (daily)- Boring to most, but my favorite watch of all time
2. TBD (daily)
3. Tudor BB41 Smiley- it's just cool, man. Take it out occasionally just because it's an awesome watch
4. Cartier Tank- Big fan of the history, wear sparingly but marvel at the design

[jamesbondOO7]

I have had an 16610 LV which I did not keep long. No real point having a green bezel and not a fan of the maxi dial. I have had a 16610 also, a 16600 (probably the one to have if one likes steel watches). I am now very much into two-tones or yellow gold and have now my second 16613 (the first one I converted to a Sultan dial but I no longer have it).

[spellmanski]

The 5 digit LV does nothing for me - the green (which sometimes looks lime) is a little unsightly for my liking. The 14060 though - that's simplicity at its best!

[Davidt]

I’ve recently wandered into 5 digit and am completely smitten. In the last few months I’ve bought a 16710 Pepsi, 16570 polar (tritium) and 14060 (tritium).
The size and wrist presence is perfect and I’ve pretty much worn nothing else since I bought the first of them.
I also think concerns over the ‘flimsiness’ of the bracelets are unfounded. Modern solid bracelets are over engineered imo using weights/heft to give the impression of durability when the 90’s bracelets are perfectly up to the job.

[spellmanski]

Originally Posted by Davidt

I’ve recently wandered into 5 digit and am completely smitten. In the last few months I’ve bought a 16710 Pepsi, 16570 polar (tritium) and 14060 (tritium).
The size and wrist presence is perfect and I’ve pretty much worn nothing else since I bought the first of them.
I also think concerns over the ‘flimsiness’ of the bracelets are unfounded. Modern solid bracelets are over engineered imo using weights/heft to give the impression of durability when the 90’s bracelets are perfectly up to the job.

Photos?

[Davidt]

I still haven’t figured out how to upload photos from my phone. Every time I try they’re always too large. Is there an easy way of uploading that I’m missing?

[Davidt]

Here’s the 16710 and 14060.
The 16570 is currently away for service.

On my 7.5-7.75” wrist the sizing is perfect. I find 6 digit refs slightly too large even on my relatively large wrist.

[espanol]

Originally Posted by Davidt

Here’s the 16710 and 14060.
The 16570 is currently away for service.

On my 7.5-7.75” wrist the sizing is perfect. I find 6 digit refs slightly too large even on my relatively large wrist.

Peak Rolex. Awesome watches David.

[spellmanski]

Amazing David - congrats - they look fantastic. Where in the UK did you pick them up from?

[Davidt]

Originally Posted by spellmanski

Amazing David - congrats - they look fantastic. Where in the UK did you pick them up from?

Various sources. Often eBay, but occasionally US dealers as the prices can be quite attractive compared to the UK.

My 16570 was bought non running from eBay and it a bit of a state but I’ve just had some pictures back post case refinish and pre service and it looks amazing.

[Jay (Eire)]

My 2 cents.

I own 4, 5 and 6 digit Rolex including a Kermit which you are looking at. It’s not just the cases that I prefer on the 5 versus 6 digit, it’s the bracelets too. As much as I appreciate the modern bracelets I prefer the “flimsy” (as some call them) older ones.

Overall these watches with the (some would say) slight differences in cases just look better on my wrist.

For me the only draw of the modern watches is the ceramic bezels, these I do love on the Subs and GMTs (no so much on the steel Daytonas).

Good luck with your choice.