ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

azguy · 29 August 2013, 09:21 AM

16800 with a matte dial is the perfect daily wear watch IMHO, if you can find one with matching hands and pearl they should be scooped up

jfmiii · 29 August 2013, 09:43 AM

my vote goes to the 16800. love the 1680 but always preferred the 16800. perfect for daily wear. i feel i can wear this thing anywhere and not worry about babying it. if i were to buy an acrylic sub, it would be a late 70s 5513.

scottb2 · 29 August 2013, 11:22 AM

1680 all the way - not even a question for me - was my first rolex and still have it

Jason71 · 29 August 2013, 01:58 PM

My tastes have changed since the birth of this thread. I prefer a plexiglass crystal >95% of the time. My vote would now go to a 1680/5513 unless you can afford something older.

Ken and John have been a bad influence on me.

Juggernaut · 29 August 2013, 03:09 PM

It's a tough call whether I should flip my matte 16800 for a 1680.
As much as I love my Sub, my daily wearer is a more comfortable and flatter Seamaster 2254. The quickset date makes it easy to wear it on those special days because of the quickset. I also prefer the fast beat/smooth movement of the second hand of the 16800.
I landed a nice 16800 with a gorgeous matte dial and I think I'll hold on to it and some day add the 1680 and perhaps a 5513 to the collection...
I say that now.....?....we'll see, right?

Juggernaut · 29 August 2013, 03:11 PM

Can anyone give me the measurement of the total thickness of the 1680 vs that of the 16800???
The 1680 has a slimmer case and thinner case back, but the super thick crystal.
The 16800 has the thicker case back and mid-case, but the flat sapphire crystal.
Which is thinner overall???

Vincent65 · 29 August 2013, 03:37 PM

1680 - no question!

Nycturbovr6 · 29 August 2013, 04:12 PM

1680 for me

jfmiii · 31 August 2013, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juggernaut

Can anyone give me the measurement of the total thickness of the 1680 vs that of the 16800???
The 1680 has a slimmer case and thinner case back, but the super thick crystal.
The 16800 has the thicker case back and mid-case, but the flat sapphire crystal.
Which is thinner overall???

id be curious as well. im also curious as to how vintage SDs (1665, 16660)thickness compare with 1680, 16800, 16610 Subs.

stevedssd · 31 August 2013, 07:09 AM

Top Hat on the 1680 wins it for me :)

Juggernaut · 31 August 2013, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfmiii

id be curious as well. im also curious as to how vintage SDs (1665, 16660)thickness compare with 1680, 16800, 16610 Subs.

Me too!

s2kev · 31 August 2013, 05:12 PM

You can't really go wrong with either. I guess it just depends on what you prefer. It's nice to have the modern features of the 16800, primarily the sapphire crystal so it holds up against abuse a little better but there's just something about that thick plastic crystal on the 1680 that you just gotta love. I wouldn't hesitate to wear either of them daily. Here's both that I had

explorer42 · 31 August 2013, 07:28 PM

Red 1680...

'White' 1680...

16800 (that's seen some action!)...

colpol · 31 August 2013, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by explorer42

Red 1680...

'White' 1680...

16800 (that's seen some action!)...

Nice to see all 3 together !! great looking sub collection

strafer_kid · 1 September 2013, 08:10 AM

Both beautiful watches but 1680 for me by an edge!

Juggernaut · 2 September 2013, 02:36 AM

OK, can we please get some comparative measurements of the total case thickness between a 1680 and a 16800?

Here's my 16800 in mm's and inches...

I don't unfortunately have a 1680, can someone please give us some comparable
measurements?
I think the case back is also thicker on the 16800 adding to the water resistance rating, not just the addition of the sapphire crystal.

ESE 2A · 2 September 2013, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by audicruisn

...I am thinking I should go with the 16800, but do you guys think there are any reasons to go with the 1680 instead?

...

Take both!

https://www.rolexforums.com/attachme...1&d=1378109936

Juggernaut · 3 September 2013, 07:25 AM

Thanks for all the opinions....but can someone with a 1680 and some calipers or a micrometer take some measurements of the thickness of the watch body please??

landroverking · 3 September 2013, 07:53 AM

Well it comes down to one being truly vintage and one being very collectable.
Hard choice to make. I favor vintage.

wehttaM · 3 September 2013, 03:21 PM

You can't go wrong with a 1680! However both are perfectly great watches!

Jimmypet · 4 September 2013, 02:04 AM

I have always considered myself a GMT guy, never really wanted a Submariner, but this thread has single handedly made me want a 1680 or 16800.
I think I'm leaning to the 16800.

29 August 2013, 01:58 PM	#34
Jason71 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Jason Location: USA Watch: Rolex/Tudor Divers Posts: 7,973	My tastes have changed since the birth of this thread. I prefer a plexiglass crystal >95% of the time. My vote would now go to a 1680/5513 unless you can afford something older. Ken and John have been a bad influence on me. __________________ Best Regards, Jason Just Say "NO" to Polishing Card-Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch Curmudgeons LIfe is too short to wear inexpensive watches PLEXI IS SEXY

29 August 2013, 09:21 AM	#31
azguy Banned Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: ------- Location: ------- Watch: --------- Posts: 12,609	16800 with a matte dial is the perfect daily wear watch IMHO, if you can find one with matching hands and pearl they should be scooped up

29 August 2013, 11:22 AM	#33
scottb2 Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: USA Posts: 651	1680 all the way - not even a question for me - was my first rolex and still have it

29 August 2013, 03:09 PM	#35
Juggernaut "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 901	It's a tough call whether I should flip my matte 16800 for a 1680. As much as I love my Sub, my daily wearer is a more comfortable and flatter Seamaster 2254. The quickset date makes it easy to wear it on those special days because of the quickset. I also prefer the fast beat/smooth movement of the second hand of the 16800. I landed a nice 16800 with a gorgeous matte dial and I think I'll hold on to it and some day add the 1680 and perhaps a 5513 to the collection... I say that now.....?....we'll see, right?

29 August 2013, 03:11 PM	#36
Juggernaut "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 901	Can anyone give me the measurement of the total thickness of the 1680 vs that of the 16800??? The 1680 has a slimmer case and thinner case back, but the super thick crystal. The 16800 has the thicker case back and mid-case, but the flat sapphire crystal. Which is thinner overall???

29 August 2013, 03:37 PM	#37
Vincent65 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Switzerland Posts: 14,293	1680 - no question!

29 August 2013, 04:12 PM	#38
Nycturbovr6 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: New York Posts: 7,630	1680 for me

31 August 2013, 07:09 AM	#40
stevedssd "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: UK Posts: 2,205	Top Hat on the 1680 wins it for me :)

31 August 2013, 05:12 PM	#42
s2kev 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Kevin Location: Los Angeles, CA Watch: Vintage Posts: 2,850	You can't really go wrong with either. I guess it just depends on what you prefer. It's nice to have the modern features of the 16800, primarily the sapphire crystal so it holds up against abuse a little better but there's just something about that thick plastic crystal on the 1680 that you just gotta love. I wouldn't hesitate to wear either of them daily. Here's both that I had

31 August 2013, 07:28 PM	#43
explorer42 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: UK Posts: 88	Red 1680... 'White' 1680... 16800 (that's seen some action!)...

1 September 2013, 08:10 AM	#45
strafer_kid "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Kenny Location: northern ireland Watch: SDs, Subs & GMTs Posts: 5,127	Both beautiful watches but 1680 for me by an edge!

2 September 2013, 02:36 AM	#46
Juggernaut "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 901	OK, can we please get some comparative measurements of the total case thickness between a 1680 and a 16800? Here's my 16800 in mm's and inches... I don't unfortunately have a 1680, can someone please give us some comparable measurements? I think the case back is also thicker on the 16800 adding to the water resistance rating, not just the addition of the sapphire crystal.

3 September 2013, 07:25 AM	#48
Juggernaut "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 901	Thanks for all the opinions....but can someone with a 1680 and some calipers or a micrometer take some measurements of the thickness of the watch body please??

3 September 2013, 07:53 AM	#49
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	Well it comes down to one being truly vintage and one being very collectable. Hard choice to make. I favor vintage.

3 September 2013, 03:21 PM	#50
wehttaM "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: USA Posts: 557	You can't go wrong with a 1680! However both are perfectly great watches!

4 September 2013, 02:04 AM	#51
Jimmypet "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Real Name: Jim Location: Northeast PA Watch: Rolex GMT Posts: 6	I have always considered myself a GMT guy, never really wanted a Submariner, but this thread has single handedly made me want a 1680 or 16800. I think I'm leaning to the 16800.

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