Mini-Review: Ceramic Sub v. Pre-Ceramic Sub

[LovesRolexes123]

Take it easy .... I was joking when I referred to JJ's 68,000 plus post count (though you do have to admit it IS rather impressive!). I have a low post count, but I am looking at my bracelet and card from my AD, and the bracelet is the model I indicated (and is the same number listed on various 16618s for sale all over the place and in pics on the watch boards, low post count or not! :)). My intention was not to "insult" you, beleive me, so I am sorry if you felt insulted by my reasoning re: the post count -- however, the monstrously high post count does indicate that someone has probably achieved a great deal of knowledge re: Rolex, and it is not "ridiculous" to assume that the person with such a post count is correct. (It may not be completely logical, but it is also not "ridiculous").

In addition to the above, when I ask James Dowling for an answer which he gives unequivocally on this, then I have to assume that he is correct.

I notice in my research that you have been posting this same question intermittently since 2006 on this and/or other board(s).

My AD says the center links are solid. However, since no one believes AD's half the time, I am inclined to call a Rolex Service Center. I may do that next week if I have time.

Also, I think that maybe an MRI would be the way to go? : )

OK, your turn:)

All in good fun anyway -- just a hobby, this watch collecting, but it sure does bring out the passion in many of us! Still, though, that "specific gravity" test seems to be open to a great deal of subjective interpretation. The CT scan just looks at the thing and shows what material it is made of (or if there is any "hollow" area within the link). Science is not my area, so I may just be all wet when it comes to these tests, however. But the CT scan shows it clearly -- can't quibble with that! :)

I do think that the X series from 1991'ish may well be at the crux of this issue -- your bracelet may just have the hollow links, which were changed in later models. (As with the president bracelets, once hollow, then all solid).

OK, so it's agreed, that they are solid now? : )

[Zirotti]

The ceramic bezels are worth the price themselves. Unreal the fit and finish.

[sevykor]

Originally Posted by LovesRolexes123

Take it easy .... I was joking when I referred to JJ's 68,000 plus post count (though you do have to admit it IS rather impressive!). I have a low post count, but I am looking at my bracelet and card from my AD, and the bracelet is the model I indicated (and is the same number listed on various 16618s for sale all over the place and in pics on the watch boards, low post count or not! :)). My intention was not to "insult" you, beleive me, so I am sorry if you felt insulted by my reasoning re: the post count -- however, the monstrously high post count does indicate that someone has probably achieved a great deal of knowledge re: Rolex, and it is not "ridiculous" to assume that the person with such a post count is correct. (It may not be completely logical, but it is also not "ridiculous").

In addition to the above, when I ask James Dowling for an answer which he gives unequivocally on this, then I have to assume that he is correct.

I notice in my research that you have been posting this same question intermittently since 2006 on this and/or other board(s).

My AD says the center links are solid. However, since no one believes AD's half the time, I am inclined to call a Rolex Service Center. I may do that next week if I have time.

Also, I think that maybe an MRI would be the way to go? : )

OK, your turn:)

All in good fun anyway -- just a hobby, this watch collecting, but it sure does bring out the passion in many of us! Still, though, that "specific gravity" test seems to be open to a great deal of subjective interpretation. The CT scan just looks at the thing and shows what material it is made of (or if there is any "hollow" area within the link). Science is not my area, so I may just be all wet when it comes to these tests, however. But the CT scan shows it clearly -- can't quibble with that! :)

I do think that the X series from 1991'ish may well be at the crux of this issue -- your bracelet may just have the hollow links, which were changed in later models. (As with the president bracelets, once hollow, then all solid).

OK, so it's agreed, that they are solid now? : )

No hard feelings friend... and I know JJ is a STAR and loved by all (including me). Like I said before, I'm looking for an answer and perhaps the difference in model numbers provides a resolution to the debate. Your inquiry into the matter with RSC is very much appreciated. I would prefer the links to be solid, and I have been searching for the answer, as you have found by doing a search on me, for a lwhile :). My next step is to find out what the difference in weight is between the 2 bracelet models (assuming both have the same number of links). I'll admit this is a bit OCD for me, but I have always been determined to learn all their is to know about my hobbies/collections. Thank goodness for this forum and its many members.

[LovesRolexes123]

Sevykor, I'll let you know what I find out. By the way, I have not done any "research" on you -- I have just been researching the topic since you raised it, and your name came up in my searches of the topic. Anyway, I shall certainly keep you posted if I gather any further info. A good forum we have here indeed! Best regards.

[Gaijin]

This thread could use some pics...

[LovesRolexes123]

Definitive Answer: I just got off the phone with the Rolex Service Center in NY. The center links in the 16618 are SOLID GOLD, nothing hollow about them. The technician said that several generations ago they were hollow, but that not any of the remotely recent ones are hollow. He also recommended that since gold wears out more quickly than SS, the watch have a decent snuggish fit to the wrist, if possible, to avoid too much rubbing of the gold.

OK, I have done all that I can! Hope this helps.

By the way, they were VERY friendly and helpful.

[dj7u]

Originally Posted by sevykor

It may be the case that there were 2 (or more?) variations of 16618 bracelets because mine is 92908 with an "X" serial number case. I will correct you with regards to specific gravity. CT was not made for use on metals and reading the results does require a certain level of training. Specific gravity is a simple procedure and the degree of error is null with the right apparati.

In addition, to suggest someone with more posts is more likely to be correct is ridiculous and rather insulting. The question asked is rather specific and it is illogical to assume "post count" will determine the correct answer. I would much rather rely on laws associated with the properties of matter rather than a complex CT scan with too many variables as to interpretation and outcome. More simply put, "the right tool for the job" would not be a CT scan regardless is the same conclusion is derived.

My intention with regards to this post was to find the TRUTH rather than be proven correct (I am not in politics). I do however appreciate you pointing out there were at least 2 bracelet models for the 16618 (not sure if I can believe you since you have a low post count too ;))

Is your gold bracelet 92908 with an "X" serial number 16618 case have solid center links? You should be able to tell really fast.

Have you ever seen the hollow gold center links for a two tone sub 16613? All you have to do is view the bracelet from the side. You can see the gap.

Basically, the gold center links on the TT subs are just wrapped with a thin solid piece of 18K gold to connect to each gold center link.

[dj7u]

Originally Posted by sevykor

Hate to burst anyones bubble, but the 16618 has hollow center links. Yes, it appears as if though the link is solid, but that's only because Rolex decided to add side walls the the center link (unlike the 16613 which shows the "emptyness" from a good side view). The 16618, due to the addition of the side wall, does make the watch much more stretch resistant.

If you pull a link off a 116618 and compare weight to the 16618, you should see a significant weight difference. Another, less desirable test is a small drill bit and good center aim :).

I examined a 116618 recently at an autorized Rolex dealer in Scottsdale. It seemed like the new ceramic all gold models have links that are thinner in height (depth) compared to the older non-ceramic models.

So, even though the cases on the new ceramics have more gold because the cases are larger. The bracelet I'm not so sure about.

Just need to weigh a 116618 bracelet then a 16618 to know for sure. But, I even noticed a steel colored metal (apparently not all gold unless was white gold) inside the clasp of the new 116618 which isn't on the older 16618.

[dj7u]

Some needs to see if the 1991 serial X is when it is hollow? I know that the 1993 serial S is suppose to be solid center links.

[dj7u]

Somewhere starting with one of these letters below. Rolex probably began doing solid gold center links on the 16618. So, perhaps the X serial# (1991) doesn't but starting with maybe the S serial# (1993)does.

R000001 .........................1987
L000001 .........................1989
E000001 .........................1990
X000001 .........................1991
N000001 .........................1991
C000001 .........................1992
S000001 .........................1993
W000001 .........................1994
T000001 .........................1996
U000001 .........................1997
A000001 .........................1998
P000001 .........................2000
K000001 .........................2001
Y000001 .........................2002
F000001 .........................2003
D000001 .........................2005
Z000001 ..........................2006
M000001 ..........................2007
V000001 ..........................2008

[LovesRolexes123]

dj7u, I doubt that anyone has the specific answer to your question readily available. You should call one of the Rolex Service Centers, and they will check with a technician and/or otherwise give you the answer to your question re: Serial Numbers / Solid Center links. Let us know what you find out.

Also, from my brief research, it appears that the all gold submariner existed WAY before the R serial number, perhaps with a model number of 16808? (I may be wrong on the number) (And other possible model numbers). So, it appears that the gold sub existed in a model number prior to the 16618, and there are books and a lot of info out there on these models I believe (but I don't have the energy to do the research any more on this topic!).

[dj7u]

Just found out the other day. I went into a watch store. They had two 16618's one being a X serial# (1991) & the other was a S serial# (1993).

Both had the same solid 18K center links.

So, the guy on here saying his 16618 serial X has hollow center links must have got scammed when he bought his.

[Tunacan26]

Great stuff. I love the pre-ceramic blue dial sub. I'd prefer a ss only bracelet, but don't have the nerve just yet to knock a bank over to buy the white gold model with the blue. The TT scares me, though I adore the appearance in contrast with the blue, as I'm a scratch magnet.

[sevykor]

Originally Posted by dj7u

Just found out the other day. I went into a watch store. They had two 16618's one being a X serial# (1991) & the other was a S serial# (1993).

Both had the same solid 18K center links.

So, the guy on here saying his 16618 serial X has hollow center links must have got scammed when he bought his.

No not scammed :), again the misinformation continues. If you know they are solid because they appear as so from a side bracelet view, then you are not confirming they are hollow behind that side wall. Yes, everyone knows the 2 tone sub shows hollow links, but many didn't know that older day dates (presidents) had hollow links because they too had side walls.

[sevykor]

Originally Posted by LovesRolexes123

Definitive Answer: I just got off the phone with the Rolex Service Center in NY. The center links in the 16618 are SOLID GOLD, nothing hollow about them. The technician said that several generations ago they were hollow, but that not any of the remotely recent ones are hollow. He also recommended that since gold wears out more quickly than SS, the watch have a decent snuggish fit to the wrist, if possible, to avoid too much rubbing of the gold.

OK, I have done all that I can! Hope this helps.

By the way, they were VERY friendly and helpful.

Thanks for doing the leg work. I've checked if there is any difference in weight between early 16618 (pre 2000) and late 16618 and the difference in weight (assuming they have all their links) is as low as 5 grams and as high as 8 grams (insignificant amount IMHO). The earlier are on average 5 to 8grams lighter although I doubt it is due to hollow links because the difference would be more substantial.

There was an earlier Submariner in 18k and it was the 16808. Not sure, but I've seen some referenced as 1680 from the 70's.

[dj7u]

That 8 grams which is nothing since 31.11 grams is one ounce of gold. Must simply be because the bigger watch not bracelet that the new ceramic 116618 has.

The proof is the weight is too close between the older 16618 and the new 116618. It's settled that the 116618 has solid center links. So, there you go obviously the 16618 is solid. Again, the ceramic 116618 only has a large lug area, etc. There's your extra 8 grams. Still, doesn't justify the $2,000 more in a MSRP price $27,250 vs $25,250.

The Rolex 16618 was MSRP $22,250 in the 90's but the 16613 was MSRP $7,895 instead of the later 16613 models being MSRP $9,300. The price always goes up with time.

Rolex is NOT going to scam people. If they're going to cut corners with hollow center links. Rolex is going to make it obvious like the 16613 hollow center links.

[LovesRolexes123]

dj7u -- As a point of clarification, Sveykor was comparing the pre-2000 16618 and the post 2000 16618 in his most recent post, and NOT the 116618.

Remember, the earlier president bracelets were hollow links with no visual indication that that they were hollow (at least I don't remember ever seeing a Prez bracelet that appeared to be hollow, even one of the earlier Prez bracelets).

The miniscule difference in gram weight from pre-2000 16618 to post-2000 16618 could be as simple as a slightly different clasp, different bracelet version, a slightly different version of the 1/2 link section, or one with some gold that he been worn away by virtue of wear or over-polishing.

I think this topic is discussed-out at this point! :)

[sevykor]

Originally Posted by LovesRolexes123

dj7u -- As a point of clarification, Sveykor was comparing the pre-2000 16618 and the post 2000 16618 in his most recent post, and NOT the 116618.

Remember, the earlier president bracelets were hollow links with no visual indication that that they were hollow (at least I don't remember ever seeing a Prez bracelet that appeared to be hollow, even one of the earlier Prez bracelets).

The miniscule difference in gram weight from pre-2000 16618 to post-2000 16618 could be as simple as a slightly different clasp, different bracelet version, a slightly different version of the 1/2 link section, or one with some gold that he been worn away by virtue of wear or over-polishing.

I think this topic is discussed-out at this point! :)

Good catch LovesRolex123 :) Also, The clasp is a bit different and that may be the 5-8 gram difference. Glad we can retire this debate.

[plittersdorf]

Thank you for excellent review.

[dj7u]

It's a certainty that the 16618's (31.35 jewel movement) have solid center links.

But, I think only the older Rolex Submariner model 16808's like the 1988 R serial# (30.35 jewel movement) may have the hollow center links.

I wouldn't want a 16808 just because it doesn't have the latest 31.35 movement like the 1990-2010 model 16618 or even ceramic 116618.

But, this Ebay model 16808 1988 R serial# looks somewhat like it has solid center links:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-Submariner...item3a58321009

The YG 16618 bracelet beginning in 2000 is probably slightly different just as the two tone 16613 begins getting the gold fused over stainless through the clasp beginning around 2000 as well.

I want to know the total weight in grams between of models: Ceramic Sub YG 116618, Ceramic GMT YG 116718, and YG Sub 16618. I bet the 16618 isn't much lighter.

But, the 116618 should easily be the heaviest since the 116718 has a smaller clasp area than the smurf blue Sub 116618.

[sevykor]

With a full set of links, the 16618 run from about 175 - 180 grams. Don't know the weight of the 116618 or 16608.

[LovesRolexes123]

I hereby declare no more solid center link discussion on this thread! :) Dj7u, buy a 16618 already! :)

[dj7u]

LovesRolexes123, your 16618 was among the latest with both the no holes case & engraved inner bezel?

[LovesRolexes123]

dj7u, as indicated in my initial post it is an M series, so I assume that it is among the latest group of 16618's with the features you mention (no holes case, engraved rehaut). The only thing that could be more recent would be a V series 16618, but I am not sure if the 16618 reference number has been issued in the V series, or if it will ever be.

[dj7u]

Ok, thanks. I know the inner bezel serial# engraving started in mid to late Z-series (2007).

Rolex probably made both 16618 & ceramic 116618 both in M (2008) & V (2009-2010)series.

I'm certain Rolex made both two tone 16613 & ceramic 116613 in M & V series.

[Johny]

hi some will like the new and some will prefer the original. i purchased a 16610. i think that the larger cases will take some getting used to. if i can get funds i am going to buy a new or low miles lv.

[dj7u]

LovesRolexes123, I did it! I bought a blue 16618 Z-serial# "with engraved inner bezel." I got for a steal at only $11,900 with free shipping. Came with everything like the larger-sized Rolex green box, Rolex certificate showing the serial#, Rolex tag showing serial#, and even the plastic bezel protector.

[LovesRolexes123]

dj7u it's about time! : ) congratulations! you will love the watch!

[Autobot]

Originally Posted by LovesRolexes123

3. Parachrom blue hair spring: Not sure if my M Series 16618 has this or not, but the watch is extremely accurate. I know for sure that the ceramic has the hairspring, and is the more accurate of the two -- even though we are just talking a few seconds here and there. (Incidentally, does anyone know if there wll be a V series 16618 made?). I realize, however, that Rolexes can be finnicky and need adjustment, so to say that ALL ceramic subs or subs with the blue hairspring are more accurate would be incorrect, subject to a test of every Rolex out there.

I know that none of the M series have the new hairspring, but do you or anyone else know if the V series has it or not? Thanks

[GMTII Owner]

Very good review! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and observations. Very informative.


John