ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

SubMarine · 19 May 2018, 08:35 AM

I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to keep the original bracelet or sell it and replace it with a new 97200 glidelock.

Fabrice M · 19 May 2018, 08:43 AM

no, more of a classic, a breed between vintage and modern.

SubMarine · 19 May 2018, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fabrice M

no, more of a classic, a breed between vintage and modern.

Nice! Would it be advisable to swap in the 97200? Or would that make it a "Franken?"

jb335 · 19 May 2018, 08:47 AM

Def not vintage...yet. I personally would not swap the bracelet. I think in the future we will consider the main divide between tool pieces and more jewelry pieces as 5 digit to 6 digit. I think 5 digit complete sets will be good to have.

SubMarine · 19 May 2018, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jb335

Def not vintage...yet. I personally would not swap the bracelet. I think in the future we will consider the main divide between tool pieces and more jewelry poieces as 5 digit to 6 digit. I think 5 digit complete sets will be good to have.

Nice, thanks. In that case, I might source the 97200 separately to keep my watch set intact.

Fabrice M · 19 May 2018, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jb335

Def not vintage...yet. I personally would not swap the bracelet. I think in the future we will consider the main divide between tool pieces and more jewelry pieces as 5 digit to 6 digit. I think 5 digit complete sets will be good to have.

Would not swap the bracelet either.

SubMarine · 19 May 2018, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fabrice M

Would not swap the bracelet either.

Why not? Are you a fan of the older bracelet? Do you think it's more comfortable?

Fabrice M · 19 May 2018, 12:19 PM

Both are comfortable, older bracelet tend to be a little lighter, I personaly prefer it. But what I find more comfortable may not be to you...

Tools · 19 May 2018, 01:06 PM

Bracelets and straps have always been considered expendables; they simply do not last forever.

Change it out for the much better Glidelock if you can find one, you will have a very nice watch for many years to come. I would rather have a Glidelock bracelet on a newer 16610 than have a ceramic block case Sub.

Of course, you need to be careful as the cost of a Glidelock can be almost the price of the value of the watch.

albaserver · 19 May 2018, 03:34 PM

I wouldn't do that. Not a vintage... Yet!!! I'd keep it as Rolex produced it years ago...

cpefy3 · 19 May 2018, 03:47 PM

I think the most recent date Sub I would consider vintage is 16800.

CPRWATCH · 19 May 2018, 05:50 PM

16610 is definately not vintage ,& I think it's a long time from being considered vintage if ever . But it is a classic in the same way 16700 & 16710s are , I would definately try & source a glide lock if you can though as I think they are a big improvement over the older bracelets, & easily adjusted if you need to adjust while on the go. Don't sell your old bracelet though ,as original ones will only become more expensive to replace as time goes by .

stevedssd · 19 May 2018, 06:08 PM

Not vintage but I do like the term classic for the five digits. I personally prefer the old lighter bracelets over the glidelocks so wouldn't change it but this is all about personal preference

sillo · 20 May 2018, 04:13 AM

The older bracelet is more comfortable to me being that it's a good bit lighter.

The newer bracelet is definitely a step up in build quality though. I'd say source a new bracelet and just keep the old one somewhere safe if you really like the new style.

gt0279a · 20 May 2018, 07:44 AM

I usually only wear my 16610LV on a nato, but I did try it on a six digit bracelet.

A few things I recall:

- The newer 6 digit oysters taper from the end link to the removable links in three links vs four which looks nicer with the slimmer case.

- The glidelock is much longer and IMO is too long / heavy to balance out the watch head.

SubMarine · 20 May 2018, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gt0279a

I usually only wear my 16610LV on a nato, but I did try it on a six digit bracelet.

A few things I recall:

- The newer 6 digit oysters taper from the end link to the removable links in three links vs four which looks nicer with the slimmer case.

- The glidelock is much longer and IMO is too long / heavy to balance out the watch head.

Thanks, this was insightful. Overall, would you recommend this combination? Do you think the glidelock should only be used on 6 digit references?

Viv Savage · 20 May 2018, 08:45 AM

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/7ed7553...5-8a6d88c9e89f

05carbondrz · 20 May 2018, 10:18 AM

Anything with WG surrounds is not vintage for me.

19 May 2018, 08:35 AM	#1
SubMarine Banned Join Date: Aug 2014 Real Name: Douglas Location: London, UK & USA Watch: Submariner 16610 Posts: 723	Is the 16610 considered "vintage?" I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to keep the original bracelet or sell it and replace it with a new 97200 glidelock.

19 May 2018, 01:06 PM	#9
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,049	Bracelets and straps have always been considered expendables; they simply do not last forever. Change it out for the much better Glidelock if you can find one, you will have a very nice watch for many years to come. I would rather have a Glidelock bracelet on a newer 16610 than have a ceramic block case Sub. Of course, you need to be careful as the cost of a Glidelock can be almost the price of the value of the watch. __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

19 May 2018, 03:34 PM	#10
albaserver "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Milan Posts: 170	I wouldn't do that. Not a vintage... Yet!!! I'd keep it as Rolex produced it years ago... __________________ Ro! Instagram: @albaserver

20 May 2018, 04:13 AM	#14
sillo "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Real Name: Sean Location: NY Watch: 5 Digit Posts: 2,840	The older bracelet is more comfortable to me being that it's a good bit lighter. The newer bracelet is definitely a step up in build quality though. I'd say source a new bracelet and just keep the old one somewhere safe if you really like the new style. __________________ 14060 \| 16570 \| 16600 \| 16700 \| 16800 \| 79260 @TheGMTHand

20 May 2018, 07:44 AM	#15
gt0279a "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: Steve Location: Georgia Watch: All of them Posts: 569	I usually only wear my 16610LV on a nato, but I did try it on a six digit bracelet. A few things I recall: - The newer 6 digit oysters taper from the end link to the removable links in three links vs four which looks nicer with the slimmer case. - The glidelock is much longer and IMO is too long / heavy to balance out the watch head. __________________ Current: Rolex Daytona 116500 \| Rolex Submariner 116610 \| Zenith El Primero 03.2150.400/69 Past: Rolex Sea Dweller 126600 \| Rolex Sea Dweller 116600 \| Rolex Sea Dweller 16600 \| Rolex Submariner 16610 \| Rolex Submariner 1680

19 May 2018, 08:43 AM	#2
Fabrice M 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Denver Watch: This and that... Posts: 1,640	no, more of a classic, a breed between vintage and modern.

19 May 2018, 08:47 AM	#4
jb335 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: The States Watch: Cosmograph Daytona Posts: 6,830	Def not vintage...yet. I personally would not swap the bracelet. I think in the future we will consider the main divide between tool pieces and more jewelry pieces as 5 digit to 6 digit. I think 5 digit complete sets will be good to have.

19 May 2018, 12:19 PM	#8
Fabrice M 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Denver Watch: This and that... Posts: 1,640	Both are comfortable, older bracelet tend to be a little lighter, I personaly prefer it. But what I find more comfortable may not be to you...

19 May 2018, 03:47 PM	#11
cpefy3 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2016 Real Name: Collin Location: Raleigh, NC Watch: 16014, 16600 Posts: 344	I think the most recent date Sub I would consider vintage is 16800.

19 May 2018, 05:50 PM	#12
CPRWATCH "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2016 Real Name: Paul Location: Chester UK Watch: Rolex GMT Master Posts: 4,592	16610 is definately not vintage ,& I think it's a long time from being considered vintage if ever . But it is a classic in the same way 16700 & 16710s are , I would definately try & source a glide lock if you can though as I think they are a big improvement over the older bracelets, & easily adjusted if you need to adjust while on the go. Don't sell your old bracelet though ,as original ones will only become more expensive to replace as time goes by .

19 May 2018, 06:08 PM	#13
stevedssd "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: UK Posts: 2,205	Not vintage but I do like the term classic for the five digits. I personally prefer the old lighter bracelets over the glidelocks so wouldn't change it but this is all about personal preference

20 May 2018, 08:45 AM	#17
Viv Savage "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Ed Location: Australia Watch: Rolex, PP, AP, JLC Posts: 612	https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/7ed7553...5-8a6d88c9e89f __________________ Have...a good..time...all the time. That's my philosphy!

20 May 2018, 10:18 AM	#18
05carbondrz Banned Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: USA Posts: 2,030	Anything with WG surrounds is not vintage for me.

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