The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 17 August 2017, 09:56 AM   #1
KAHN
"TRF" Member
 
KAHN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 32
Rolex Submariner Date Merits

Brief review of Rolex Submariner Date watches.

Classic 16610 (Classic Sub) & Ceramic Bezel 116610 (Sub C)

Sorry My Pics Are Not Great

Sub C is on the bottom of this image



Most of the folks here are very familiar with both of these versions and each
has it's very own positive merits:


Sub C is the newest version with Rolexes current updates.
  • Much improved flip lock band
  • Ceramic bezel insert
  • Very Swol head size
  • thicker hands
  • Blue Lume with larger dots
  • (techie members can advise of differences in actual movements and proposed accuracy)

Classic Sub pictured is a transitional model having a SEL band, no holes case and engraved rehault on inside of sapphire crystal.

I like both of these models very much.

The Classic Sub is just much more comfortable to wear, yet the
major flaw is the ultra crappy flip lock clasp that was never upgraded for years and years.

Sub C feels much more robust yet the swol head is just never as comfortable
as the Classic Sub which seems to meld with your wrist when being worn.





Sub C band is the one on top of both of the above images - only gripe would be the way the Rolex coronet seems glued on the newer style fliplock band (obviously it's tack welded or another way of being applied) but the coronet could have been better placed .

The fliplock band revision was well overdue and the transition from
thin folded what seemed like sheet metal has been eliminated along the full
line of Rolex Oyster models.

The integrity of the classic style Submariner dial I feel was also lost on the
new Sub C, the new Sub C dial is nice clear and crisp but the Classic Sub just
was more aesthetically pleasing to my eye.


The lume with the classic green glow just seemed more inviting that the current blue type glow the newer Sub C offers.

Again this all may be a matter of personal preference but in summation
the Classic Sub is a much more majestic watch


KAHN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 August 2017, 11:53 AM   #2
watchmework
"TRF" Member
 
watchmework's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: DC
Watch: 126710BLRO, 116600
Posts: 7,869
Rolex Submariner Date Merits

Interesting review...

My SubC is so swol from my watch gainz.
watchmework is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 August 2017, 12:02 PM   #3
Etschell
"TRF" Member
 
Etschell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: FL
Watch: platinum sub
Posts: 15,861
Thanks for the review. The SubC is just better built imo.

That said both are great.
__________________
If you wind it, they will run.

25 or 6 to 4.
Etschell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 August 2017, 12:03 PM   #4
SpeakWithMichael
"TRF" Member
 
SpeakWithMichael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: South FL
Watch: Superocean 44not42
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by watchmework View Post
Interesting review...

My SubC is so swol from my watch gainz.
Yea, but too much gainz and you're not within COSC. Don't want to have to regulate for not being all-natty.
SpeakWithMichael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 August 2017, 12:15 PM   #5
watchmework
"TRF" Member
 
watchmework's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: DC
Watch: 126710BLRO, 116600
Posts: 7,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeakWithMichael View Post
Yea, but too much gainz and you're not within COSC. Don't want to have to regulate for not being all-natty.


Everyone always talks about my fat lugs but I think my swol case is just perfect. I even wear it everyday to stay within COSC.
watchmework is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 August 2017, 04:58 AM   #6
Swiss Mad!
"TRF" Member
 
Swiss Mad!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Real Name: Max
Location: UK
Watch: Various
Posts: 3,722
Nice review - my only comment would be regarding the position of the coronet.

You state you think it could have been better placed, however I actually think it is perfect and was actually a stroke of genius by Rolex to let the bottom of the coronet overhang a little to act as a finger grip to open the glide lock clasp.

Just my 2c
Swiss Mad! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 August 2017, 08:26 AM   #7
KAHN
"TRF" Member
 
KAHN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swiss Mad! View Post
Nice review - my only comment would be regarding the position of the coronet.

You state you think it could have been better placed, however I actually think it is perfect and was actually a stroke of genius by Rolex to let the bottom of the coronet overhang a little to act as a finger grip to open the glide lock clasp.

Just my 2c
You make a valid point.

I'm also wrong about it being attached as it seems from the back of the smaller fliplock clasp it is actually a single piece of steel that must be formed in a high quality casting or some more modern process like MIM (metal injection molding) that can reproduce the fine details associated with this part.

Surely other members know how these clasp parts are being manufactured?
KAHN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 August 2017, 09:05 PM   #8
Beowulf
"TRF" Member
 
Beowulf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: European Union
Posts: 244
Very interesting review @KAHN, at least for me, I wasn't aware of the little details and differences between the versions.
Beowulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2017, 03:59 PM   #9
uansari1
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Doha, Qatar
Watch: Polar 16570
Posts: 535
How can the flip lock be considered "ultra crappy" if it's tried and true, and just works?
__________________
Explorer II 16570 Polar (3186)
GMT Master II 116710LN
GMT Master II 126710BLRO (jubilee)
Explorer 124270
Omega Seamaster GMT 50th Anniversary
uansari1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2017, 11:48 AM   #10
KAHN
"TRF" Member
 
KAHN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by uansari1 View Post
How can the flip lock be considered "ultra crappy" if it's tried and true, and just works?

Here is a hint: look at the updated version.


Basically Rolex got away for years putting a subpar clasp on the market because of their name and history.

If you have worn the older style band hard, you'll know and remember the need to bend the sheet metal parts to hear the 'click' when locking mechanism was once again needed.

I've literally bent the whole older style clasp when pulling my hand thru a Subway door, Rolex back then was gracious enough to replace the clasp parts for free at the NYC service center.
KAHN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 August 2017, 09:08 PM   #11
uansari1
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Doha, Qatar
Watch: Polar 16570
Posts: 535
Quote:
Originally Posted by KAHN View Post
Here is a hint: look at the updated version.


Basically Rolex got away for years putting a subpar clasp on the market because of their name and history.

If you have worn the older style band hard, you'll know and remember the need to bend the sheet metal parts to hear the 'click' when locking mechanism was once again needed.

I've literally bent the whole older style clasp when pulling my hand thru a Subway door, Rolex back then was gracious enough to replace the clasp parts for free at the NYC service center.
I'd wager you're in the extreme minority. I agree the newer clasp is solid and definitely a step forward, but I have three pieces with the old clasp and have never had an issue regardless of wearing them in the water, hiking, or snowboarding.
__________________
Explorer II 16570 Polar (3186)
GMT Master II 116710LN
GMT Master II 126710BLRO (jubilee)
Explorer 124270
Omega Seamaster GMT 50th Anniversary
uansari1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.