The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 26 June 2022, 11:39 PM   #61
karleone
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dayona
Posts: 1,845
I have 4 5 and 6 digits. The 4 digits have a very pure design and some nice vintage touches (plexiglass, matt dial). The 5 digits add a more qualitative bracelet (for the ones with solid endlinks) and the saphir glass is definitely an improvement especially for an everyday watch. Glossy dials are shinier than matt dials and feels more luxurious. The 6 digits are the king of finish and quality build with the full link bracelet and modern clasp. In the other hand the bracelets are heavier. The ceramic bezels are beautiful but imho on the coloured ones they don’t look as good as the aluminium ones in terms of colour brightness. The 6 digits (for Sub/ SD/ GMT/ Explo 2) lose as well the V brushing on lugs and chamfers / bevels that are such a nice finish.



karleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 June 2022, 02:53 AM   #62
Roddypeepa
"TRF" Member
 
Roddypeepa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,435
Thought about going from a 114060 to a 50th anniversary lv. Couldn’t do it. Bracelet (yes I know it’s not weak, just feels very last century) so I changed to a date version instead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Roddypeepa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 June 2022, 03:06 AM   #63
rolexpatek363
"TRF" Member
 
rolexpatek363's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: up a hill
Posts: 1,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by subtona View Post
I never left the 5 digit because of lugholes.




And this.
+1.

Rolex haven't made a watch which I like for many years - apart from the Oyster Perpetual models. So I make do with a 16610, a 5513, and a 114300.
rolexpatek363 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 June 2022, 03:13 AM   #64
WatchGuy1966
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Location Location
Posts: 1,743
I like the Bluesy but settled on the 16613LB vs the 116613LB and the 126613LB

I prefer the bezel and case of the 5 digit. The Aluminum IMO has more depth and character than the ceramic (looks like a lego to me). I am surprised at how much I like the comfort of the bracelet. I picked up a LNIB from DavidSW at his ^ price. It was a 2009 model (the final) with engraved rehaut, SELs, and gold through the clasp. There was one small snafu with the deal, but in true DavidSW style, he righted it immediately.

For the 116613 and 126613 I like the bracelets. A lot. I might try and source a bracelet for the 116613 and retrofit it.

I like the sunburst dials of the 16613LB and 116613LB, but not the white lettering on the 126613LB.

Bottom line, no regrets.
WatchGuy1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 June 2022, 02:45 AM   #65
RFC
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Puerto Rico
Watch: 1968 5513 Sub
Posts: 450
Went from a 114060 to a 124060 at retail. The newer Sub model is just as heavy on the wrist and although it’s roughly 1mm wider in circumference it looks smaller because of the smaller tapered lugs and wider bracelet. I couldn’t leave good alone so I added a 14060M and a 16700 Pepsi. Both 5 digits are my favorites but I give the Pepsi a slight edge for practicality. You can’t go wrong with any of these.
RFC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 June 2022, 03:07 AM   #66
GONZO2LR
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Real Name: Luis
Location: Texas
Watch: SS Submariner Date
Posts: 1,371
i got the 5 digit with rehaut, i tried on the 6 digit over a dozen times, this was pre-pandemic days. i could not get use to the weight. I tried and tried. i ever told the SA, i wanted to hang around the store with it on for 30 minutes before i decided. (they know me there so there was no problem). The SA knew i was having an issue with the weight, he never hassled me about it.
i never regretted or looked back. But i did want the rehaut and finally found one.
GONZO2LR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 June 2022, 03:23 AM   #67
LFFL
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Submarine
Posts: 376
current owner of a 5-digit sub, i do like the new 12 series but unfortunately it is just too massive for small wristed folks like myself. My only hope is that Rolex would release a smaller (mm) reference in the future.
LFFL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 June 2022, 03:37 AM   #68
BankAnden
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Sweden
Posts: 27
Started with 114060, but when I purchased 14060M and 16710 I instantly knew that a 5-digit is my kind of watch
BankAnden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 June 2022, 05:36 AM   #69
Finslayer83
"TRF" Member
 
Finslayer83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tennessee
Watch: DW-5600
Posts: 1,584
once I got a 97200 bracelet for my 16610, I sold everything else. (114060 / 124060)

perfection.
Finslayer83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 June 2022, 10:01 AM   #70
mountainjogger
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: H
Location: North Carolina
Watch: M99230B-0008
Posts: 5,671
Thanks everyone.

A lot of great responses. And still mulling this over.

If my AD does not come through on a six digit, I will prob et get a five digit.
__________________
The King of Cool.
mountainjogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 July 2022, 01:12 AM   #71
Finslayer83
"TRF" Member
 
Finslayer83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tennessee
Watch: DW-5600
Posts: 1,584
Lug holes make them the last proper tool watch - got one of the last of the "holes" cases, sought it out actually.

SEL and holes.

She lives on a strap



No 6/6.5 digit can compare if you like NATO's.
Finslayer83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 July 2022, 01:27 AM   #72
dmash
"TRF" Member
 
dmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: USA <> BKK
Posts: 5,912
6 digit sub > 5 digit sub
5 digit sea dweller > 6 digit sea dweller
dmash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 July 2022, 01:36 AM   #73
Agamemnon
"TRF" Member
 
Agamemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Real Name: Giuliano
Location: Italy
Watch: Rolex - Panerai
Posts: 1,942
Why do you have to change a new thing for an old one?
Agamemnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 July 2022, 08:36 AM   #74
GMT Aviator
2024 Pledge Member
 
GMT Aviator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Real Name: Mike
Location: London
Posts: 3,269
The 5 digits will always retain a classic charm to their design which the 6 digits will not.

Whilst the 5 digits will take a beating and still last multiple lifetimes, the 6 digits will do it better.
GMT Aviator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 July 2022, 12:11 AM   #75
karleone
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dayona
Posts: 1,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
Why do you have to change a new thing for an old one?
Because the new one has a very fat and not appealing case. The older Subs have perfect proportions.
karleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 July 2022, 12:16 AM   #76
Agamemnon
"TRF" Member
 
Agamemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Real Name: Giuliano
Location: Italy
Watch: Rolex - Panerai
Posts: 1,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by karleone View Post
Because the new one has a very fat and not appealing case. The older Subs have perfect proportions.
Ma il 126610 anche no
Agamemnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 July 2022, 12:21 AM   #77
karleone
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dayona
Posts: 1,845
I mean compare the 16610 to the 116610 or 126610 and you’ll see. On one side a beautifully designed and elegant case. On the other side the Big Mac version. Fat and not proportionate.
karleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 July 2022, 12:59 AM   #78
Agamemnon
"TRF" Member
 
Agamemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Real Name: Giuliano
Location: Italy
Watch: Rolex - Panerai
Posts: 1,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by karleone View Post
I mean compare the 16610 to the 116610 or 126610 and you’ll see. On one side a beautifully designed and elegant case. On the other side the Big Mac version. Fat and not proportionate.
I can understand! But in 30 years there may have been some technical improvements.
On the aesthetic side, however, I prefer the 126610 to 16610.
Agamemnon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 September 2022, 04:54 AM   #79
PepsiBezel
"TRF" Member
 
PepsiBezel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: USA
Watch: Neo-Vintage
Posts: 1,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainjogger View Post
Agree. But one heck of a lot of charm.
Well, I guess there is no charm in $$$…

Because in the last month went out and got a 16710 and 16570, so I’m back in the five-digit world!

CE9DAB9A-1315-4BAB-8483-C473F0700D93.jpeg

E4B064A3-3A44-43FC-B96E-12C63CECAE77.jpeg

04916155-04B5-4F17-943D-609C674F851B.jpeg

683A18C1-1143-48EF-B276-1B5E49343BE3.jpeg

D8818444-AA4C-43C9-A200-88CF55E67140.jpeg

They are not “better” than my six-digits, but they fit my 6.5 inch wrist extremely well, and are very light — just like they were for my first 15 years of collecting.

This time I tried to hunt down five-digits that were “A” quality, with B&P, and all that other stuff, which helps. They look so great, and have such clean and elegant lines.
PepsiBezel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 September 2022, 08:10 AM   #80
Oytun
"TRF" Member
 
Oytun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Real Name: Oytun
Location: Here and there
Watch: 5712,116500 & Rest
Posts: 254
I'd stick with 6 digit if i'm getting it from AD. But if not, 5 digit is the best choice.

I love my 5 digit subs. Very comfortable and light compared to newer ones, i don't even feel i'm wearing a watch. Also looks way more elegant and settled to me.

Only issue is bracelet. They are stretching over time.

Oytun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 September 2022, 08:25 AM   #81
Brian Page
"TRF" Member
 
Brian Page's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 6,522
I'm all five and 4 digit now except for my sd4000 and deep sea

Sent from my SM-F936U1 using Tapatalk
Brian Page is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 September 2022, 12:05 PM   #82
NachoNeal
"TRF" Member
 
NachoNeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Neal
Location: Point Loma
Watch: ing the river flow
Posts: 2,815
[IMG]rolex by Nacho Neal, on Flickr[/IMG]
.

Five digit for me. I have a friend that loaned me a six digit sub, that I wore for weeks, wanting to love it, but I just couldn't get into it. It felt like a grenade launcher on my wrist.
__________________
.
Sub No Date (14060); Hamilton field; Explorer (124270); Day Date (18238) stolen by wife; CasiOak.
NachoNeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 September 2022, 01:32 PM   #83
Filipão
"TRF" Member
 
Filipão's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Real Name: Filipe
Location: Lisbon & Wadesdah
Watch: Never too many
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwilson13 View Post
Once you go from a 6 to a 5, you will start looking at 4s.

Save yourself some time, and just go straight to a 4!
Absolutely.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2022.09.19 b.jpg (249.7 KB, 220 views)
Filipão is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 September 2022, 06:09 PM   #84
WILLIWALKER
"TRF" Member
 
WILLIWALKER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Real Name: Gerardus twins
Location: EU
Watch: Rolex Tudor Omega
Posts: 794
I have two pieces, a 5513 and a 14060 series M.
To be honest, I haven't worn them for several years like my SDDS.

I just have to think about changing my 126613LB for a 16613LB with full lugs and a dial that tends towards purple.

So to a degree I understand when you go from a 6 digit to a 5 digit even if in reality, I no longer wear them at all, it's ambivalent
__________________
Il est doux le sommeil du travailleur
WILLIWALKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2022, 06:54 AM   #85
shedlock2000
2024 Pledge Member
 
shedlock2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Real Name: Steve
Location: Canada
Watch: 16753; Bellini Dia
Posts: 1,770
Anyone change from 6 to 5 digit sub?

I think it broadly depends upon the model. I have tried on the new 226570 polar, and it fits me well. However, both the 5 digit EXPIIs look lost on my wrist (the black dial especially).

The 1675, on the other hand, fits me quite nicely — probably because of the thicker bezel; the 16710, with a narrower bezel, also looks a bit lost on my wrist. I have just under 8” wrists.







Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.


SS Submariner no date 1992 (sold); SS GMT II 2007 (sold); SS GMT II C 2008 ('M' series) (sold); SS Sub C 2011 (sold); BB GMT 1971 (sold); Omega 50th GMT
shedlock2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2022, 07:03 AM   #86
RFC
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Puerto Rico
Watch: 1968 5513 Sub
Posts: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainjogger View Post
If so why?

Thanks.
Yes. The 14060M is the closest and more faithful iteration of the 4 digit Subs. It’s more of a daily driver with the sapphire crystal and better water resistance. It’s lighter and more wearable than any 6 digit Sub. Not blingy. Has lug holes and aluminum bezel. What’s not to like?
RFC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2022, 07:45 AM   #87
Scholar
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 745
Did we ever get an explanation from Rolex for why they decided to butcher a beloved case design that had a well-deserved reputation for 50+ years straight, both ruining the proportions and cheaping out on the bevels?

(Should this be its own thread?)

It’s genuinely weird, like if Porsche decided to release a 911 that was a truck, or if Omega cancelled the Speedmaster Pro in favour of the chunky hockey puck 9300 case.
Scholar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2022, 01:43 PM   #88
Nico81
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Charlotte, NC
Watch: Out
Posts: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill11783 View Post
Not sure why you would do that. Modern version has better power reserve and a better band/clasp… two things that are important to me.

I went back from 116610 to 16610
116610 had a case that was awful, no
The clasp while “better” ate the whole back of my wrist, its huge
And remember, prior version of bracelet was in production 30 years so it held up pretty well

Overall pretty bad design On 116610
16610 looks better, feels better on the wrist , and has a classic tool watch look

That sums it up why I switched back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nico81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2022, 02:52 PM   #89
gwozhog
"TRF" Member
 
gwozhog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Point Blank, TX
Posts: 2,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainjogger View Post
If so why?

Thanks.
Yes I did years ago for a bit. Did not like the the tuna clasp at all. not secure. Went back to a 6 digit for good.
__________________
I once dated a girl in high school and her dad told me I would never amount to anything. He was right
gwozhog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2022, 11:18 PM   #90
rolexpatek363
"TRF" Member
 
rolexpatek363's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: up a hill
Posts: 1,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwozhog View Post
Did not like the the tuna clasp at all. not secure
"not secure" -- absolute nonsense.
rolexpatek363 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.