ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Sean F · 4 January 2009, 02:27 AM

apart from the bezels and the polished links are they basically the same watch ??? size on wrist etc etc

i have only ever worn a sub

yannis · 4 January 2009, 02:49 AM

3135 movement on Sub whereas 3185 on the GMT which has an extra hand, i.e. for the second timezone. Case is the same, dials are the same (except for the LV Sub which has maxi-dial and thicker hands).

SPORTSFAN · 4 January 2009, 03:27 AM

Hi Sean
The GMT IIC "wears" quite a lot bigger to me.
I wear my watches a bit loose so I really feel the extra weight in the head.
So out of my 3
GMT II great but a little light.
GMT IIC superb but a tiny bit heavy
SS Sub.............Just PERFECT.................

Regards Mike.

PS The polished center links are great on the IIC..

sheldonsmith · 4 January 2009, 03:34 AM

I have a review between the Sub and the 16710 posted at http://www.minus4plus6.com/sub.htm

-Sheldon

yannis · 4 January 2009, 03:59 AM

Mike you got the perfect collection there man!!

dkpw · 4 January 2009, 05:12 AM

I've worn my colleague's GMT and although of a similar size to look at when on the wrist it feels a lot lighter than my Sub. It also wears lower due to the profile of the caseback.

I prefer the Sub's weight and presence. I'd love to try a GMT IIc on for size.

Good luck!

spogehead · 4 January 2009, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPORTSFAN

Hi Sean
The GMT IIC "wears" quite a lot bigger to me.
I wear my watches a bit loose so I really feel the extra weight in the head.
So out of my 3
GMT II great but a little light.
GMT IIC superb but a tiny bit heavy
SS Sub.............Just PERFECT.................

Regards Mike.

PS The polished center links are great on the IIC..

Spot on, the GMT IIc made me buy a Rolex because of the points listed above. Sub clasp is way to tinny and wears small compared to the GMT with 'super case' and Maxi dial, IMO the GMT IIc is the perfect Rolex to date.

Nica64 · 4 January 2009, 05:22 AM

Both are great watches, but "I" prefer the Sub!!

rpryan55 · 4 January 2009, 06:06 AM

Tried on the GMT IIC and fell in love. What a handsome watch! But the Sub ND continues to haunt me and I, in turn, continue to haunt my wife for permission to buy one. Why I don't have either of these watches already in my collection completely baffles me.

Tools · 4 January 2009, 06:22 AM

TShe 16710 GMTS and the 16610 Sub are very similar in looks and feel. The Sub has a bit bulkier breacelet clasp unless you have the 93150 bracelet on your GMT as I have on one of mine... Then you can't really tell the difference except in function, although the Sub is a couple of grams heavier.

The 116710 (GMT IIc) is a different look altogether and I suspect will be similar to the Sub ceramics that are coming out..

Duncan1 · 4 January 2009, 10:08 AM

I'm lucky enough to have both, wear one then the other, the GMT is a bit bigger, modern, a little more 'bling"....the Sub is CLASSIC, comfortable and about perfect....really can't pick one over the other....put 'em both on and decide!

JimC · 4 January 2009, 10:44 AM

I have the 16610 and 16710. Both are very similar, with the exception of the bracelet clasp and, of course, the fourth hand on the GMT. Both "fit" on my wrist and wear well. While I tend to lean toward the GMT, I believe the Sub might be a touch more comfortable for me.

CPCC · 4 January 2009, 01:54 PM

GMT is more comfy

Katie Belpedio · 4 January 2009, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yannis7777

3135 movement on Sub whereas 3185 on the GMT which has an extra hand, i.e. for the second timezone. Case is the same, dials are the same (except for the LV Sub which has maxi-dial and thicker hands).

*** third time zone.......

Katie Belpedio · 4 January 2009, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spogehead

Spot on, the GMT IIc made me buy a Rolex because of the points listed above. Sub clasp is way to tinny and wears small compared to the GMT with 'super case' and Maxi dial, IMO the GMT IIc is the perfect Rolex to date.

would you purchase an LV after owning/wearing your GMT-C? (speaking only of clasp differences......)

spogehead · 4 January 2009, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katie Belpedio

would you purchase an LV after owning/wearing your GMT-C? (speaking only of clasp differences......)

No, I tried on the LV at the same time as I bought the GMT, took it straight off my wrist it felt lightweight and the green bezel did absolutely nothing for me.

4 January 2009, 02:27 AM	#1
Sean F "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: UK Posts: 26	sub - gmt differences apart from the bezels and the polished links are they basically the same watch ??? size on wrist etc etc i have only ever worn a sub

4 January 2009, 02:49 AM	#2
yannis "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Real Name: Yannis Location: Europe Watch: maniac Posts: 9,070	3135 movement on Sub whereas 3185 on the GMT which has an extra hand, i.e. for the second timezone. Case is the same, dials are the same (except for the LV Sub which has maxi-dial and thicker hands). __________________ Rolex Submariner 116610LV \| Tudor 79220N DSSD MEMBERS - OWNERS CLUB

4 January 2009, 03:34 AM	#4
sheldonsmith 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Member 202♛ Posts: 1,811	This review might help... I have a review between the Sub and the 16710 posted at http://www.minus4plus6.com/sub.htm -Sheldon __________________

4 January 2009, 03:59 AM	#5
yannis "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Real Name: Yannis Location: Europe Watch: maniac Posts: 9,070	Mike you got the perfect collection there man!! __________________ Rolex Submariner 116610LV \| Tudor 79220N DSSD MEMBERS - OWNERS CLUB

4 January 2009, 05:12 AM	#6
dkpw "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: David Location: Scotland Watch: 16610 & 214270 Posts: 1,294	I've worn my colleague's GMT and although of a similar size to look at when on the wrist it feels a lot lighter than my Sub. It also wears lower due to the profile of the caseback. I prefer the Sub's weight and presence. I'd love to try a GMT IIc on for size. Good luck! __________________ Sub 16610, Explorer 214270, Ω Speedy Pro & many others. David

4 January 2009, 03:27 AM	#3
SPORTSFAN "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Mike Location: NW England Posts: 791	Hi Sean The GMT IIC "wears" quite a lot bigger to me. I wear my watches a bit loose so I really feel the extra weight in the head. So out of my 3 GMT II great but a little light. GMT IIC superb but a tiny bit heavy SS Sub.............Just PERFECT................. Regards Mike. PS The polished center links are great on the IIC..

4 January 2009, 05:22 AM	#8
Nica64 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: USA Posts: 2,596	Both are great watches, but "I" prefer the Sub!! __________________ ______________________________ You can't turn back the clock. But you can wind it up again.

4 January 2009, 06:06 AM	#9
rpryan55 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Dick Location: USA Watch: SubND,DD,SSDaytona Posts: 2,257	Tried on the GMT IIC and fell in love. What a handsome watch! But the Sub ND continues to haunt me and I, in turn, continue to haunt my wife for permission to buy one. Why I don't have either of these watches already in my collection completely baffles me. __________________ “The only reason for time ....................... is so that everything doesn't happen at once." Albert Einstein

4 January 2009, 06:22 AM	#10
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,129	TShe 16710 GMTS and the 16610 Sub are very similar in looks and feel. The Sub has a bit bulkier breacelet clasp unless you have the 93150 bracelet on your GMT as I have on one of mine... Then you can't really tell the difference except in function, although the Sub is a couple of grams heavier. The 116710 (GMT IIc) is a different look altogether and I suspect will be similar to the Sub ceramics that are coming out.. __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

4 January 2009, 10:08 AM	#11
Duncan1 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Lkwd NY SRQ FL Watch: GMT Ceramic Posts: 28	I'm lucky enough to have both, wear one then the other, the GMT is a bit bigger, modern, a little more 'bling"....the Sub is CLASSIC, comfortable and about perfect....really can't pick one over the other....put 'em both on and decide!

4 January 2009, 10:44 AM	#12
JimC "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Jim Location: Anchorage, Alaska Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,188	I have the 16610 and 16710. Both are very similar, with the exception of the bracelet clasp and, of course, the fourth hand on the GMT. Both "fit" on my wrist and wear well. While I tend to lean toward the GMT, I believe the Sub might be a touch more comfortable for me.

4 January 2009, 01:54 PM	#13
CPCC "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Bill Location: USA Posts: 1,857	GMT is more comfy __________________

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)