The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 25 November 2021, 01:51 AM   #1
jesulaiman
"TRF" Member
 
jesulaiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 42
AP RO 14790ST or Rolex Daytona 16520

A simple question: would you choose AP RO 14790ST or Rolex ‘Zenith’ Daytona 16520?

Here’s a bit of description:

14790ST:
- Year 2003, white dial.
- Case diameter 36mm
- Thickness 7.5 mm
- Water resistant 50m
- Caliber: 2225 (28,800 bph, 4 Hz, 40 h power reserve)

16520:
- T series, Year around 1996, white dial
- Case diameter 40mm
- Thickness 12.5 mm
- Water resistant 100m
- Caliber: 4030 Zenith El Primero (28,800 bph, 40 h power reserve)


Here are photos of the two:



jesulaiman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 02:02 AM   #2
TunaTuna
"TRF" Member
 
TunaTuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Merica
Posts: 473
Since the AP is a ladies piece, I'd go with the Daytona. If you have a smaller wrist, the Daytona wears small and can fit most wrists. Going to a small AP because you have a smaller wrist just isn't that cool tbh
TunaTuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 03:19 AM   #3
brucethemanlee
"TRF" Member
 
brucethemanlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: NYC
Posts: 7,506
16520
brucethemanlee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 04:01 AM   #4
Pw92676
"TRF" Member
 
Pw92676's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by TunaTuna View Post
Since the AP is a ladies piece, I'd go with the Daytona. If you have a smaller wrist, the Daytona wears small and can fit most wrists. Going to a small AP because you have a smaller wrist just isn't that cool tbh
I don’t know if this was truly ever considered a lady’s piece.

I disagree about the going small isn’t cool. It’s all a matter of opinion. I frankly think wearing a “manly mans” watch that is too big is more uncool.
Pw92676 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 04:10 AM   #5
ts3
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pw92676 View Post
I don’t know if this was truly ever considered a lady’s piece.

I disagree about the going small isn’t cool. It’s all a matter of opinion. I frankly think wearing a “manly mans” watch that is too big is more uncool.
Agree, in its day the 14790 was no lady's piece.

I'd still pick the 16520 among the two in the pictures though as I don't like the late 14790 variants with short hour markers which make the watch smaller than it is. I'd definitely go for an earlier model with long hour markers if 14790 or any other small RO.
ts3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 05:58 AM   #6
dh1
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by ts3 View Post
I don't like the late 14790 variants with short hour markers which make the watch smaller than it is. I'd definitely go for an earlier model with long hour markers if 14790 or any small RO.
FWIW, I have the same preference for the "long index" 14790 MK1 or MK2 dial over the MK3. But it's not primarily about the short markers making the watch look smaller.

For me the 2000s era jumbo 15202ST 0944 dial variant and the MK3 14790 dial variant aesthetics are completely changed by the larger tapisserie squares and the arabic numeral 5 second labels along the outer edge. To me there's something that feels like it was supposed to be a "high tech 21st century refresh" by departing more substantially from the 70s classic aesthetic... but now post 2012 (with the 1240 15202) they went back closer to the 70s look, making the mid-2000s aesthetic llook somehow more dated than older watches.
dh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 06:05 AM   #7
huncho
"TRF" Member
 
huncho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: nyc
Posts: 3,674
16520 between the 2, but if you look at the 15450 instead then that would be my pick. i feel like the bracelet on the 14790 isn't as nice as the more modern APs
huncho is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 03:37 PM   #8
Neom
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: .
Posts: 67
I would pick the daytona between these 2
Neom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 08:24 PM   #9
deuxani
"TRF" Member
 
deuxani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by ts3 View Post
Agree, in its day the 14790 was no lady's piece.

I'd still pick the 16520 among the two in the pictures though as I don't like the late 14790 variants with short hour markers which make the watch smaller than it is. I'd definitely go for an earlier model with long hour markers if 14790 or any other small RO.
Yeah I totally agree with this. Normally I would always choose the Royal Oak over a Daytona, but the MK3 dial of the 14790 just always feels off for me. If it was the MK1 or 2 I would’ve said the Royal Oak.

Regarding size, this was a mens model and it all depends on your wrist size and if you like large or smaller watches. The 36mm 14790 wears pretty large, obviously due to the integrated bracelet. It feels like a 38mm, so close enough to the Daytona in size. My wrists are 18.5cm and for me the 36mm didn’t feel small.
deuxani is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 November 2021, 10:17 PM   #10
cascavel
2021 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Santa Fe
Posts: 1,469
Forgetting size, for the moment, based on one picture of each the Daytona appears to be in better condition, less polished. But either way the 16520 is my choice even if it costs twice as much.
cascavel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 November 2021, 07:34 AM   #11
KBM
2021 Pledge Member
 
KBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: K.
Location: 780
Posts: 9,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascavel View Post
Forgetting size, for the moment, based on one picture of each the Daytona appears to be in better condition, less polished.
My thoughts as well.
KBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 02:19 PM   #12
Animo Felonico
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 17
Comments about 36 or 37mm Royal Oaks being "ladies watches" make me laugh (there were many such comments when the 15450 was released).

Anyone who has worn a watch with an integrated bracelet knows very well that their numbers don't reflect the experience of wearing them. I have watches ranging from 34mm to 44mm and a 7 inch wrist. A 14790 or an Oysterquartz do not feel meaningfully smaller than a Seiko Turtle, which is 10mm larger. Frankly, a 15202 or 5402 wear enormous, and way larger than their 39mm size would suggest. Of the people posting their 39mm ROs on instagram, etc, I think a great number of them would better suit a 36mm RO, as the lugs can overhang their wrists by quite a bit.

My final comment is that the elegance and thinness of the midsize jumbos are very special qualities. In good, original condition, the little facets of the connecting links really play with the light, but it's actually a very under the radar watch (even the all gold versions) due to its satin finish on the flat surfaces.

I prefer the series 1 or 2 dial as well, and I think the example you posted may have been overpolished, so some of that exquisite link edge treatment may not be as visible.
Animo Felonico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 03:18 AM   #13
Jsol
2021 Pledge Member
 
Jsol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Real Name: Joyce
Location: SF and NYC
Watch: GMT, AP, DD,
Posts: 458
The 14790 is a wonderful reference due to it's thinness and overall elegant proportions. But agree that the MK1 or MK2 or the Yves Klein examples are the best. The MK3 w the short indexes is the least pleasing design of the series. You can't ever go wrong w the Daytona so in this case that would be my choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
IG @crownthewatch
Jsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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

DavidSW Watches

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





Copyright ©2004-2021, 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.