ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
25 January 2018, 01:10 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: N/A
Posts: 386
|
Discounts on 5167r? And 5167r vs 116618lb (blue dial)?
Hello everyone,
I've been waiting for the 5711 blue dial, but with the recent news of the price increase, I'm starting to consider other options (should've gotten the white dial when it was offered to me a couple months back ). I'm considering the 5167r model instead, and was wondering what the typical discount would be on this piece nowadays. Also, when compared to the submariner gold blue dial, which of the two do you guys prefer? Thanks and hope everyone has a great day. |
25 January 2018, 02:00 AM | #2 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Real Name: Stephen
Location: Beach
Watch: 16660
Posts: 9,176
|
Quote:
What else is in your collection? If you have a PM sports Rolex, then the 5167r sounds tempting. Also consider the 5711/1r, assuming they don’t raise the gold one by 20% like they’re allegedly doing on the steel. The delta between the gold and the steel may make sense to go gold.
__________________
"Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm." --- RWE |
|
25 January 2018, 02:12 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: N/A
Posts: 386
|
My only other watch at the moment is a 116500 white dial, which was why I passed on the white dial 5711 when it was offered to me.
The 5711r is unfortunately out of my budget, unless I can source one in the EU with some discount plus VAT refunds. Argh... pretty bummed out about the price increase. |
25 January 2018, 02:13 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: N/A
Posts: 11,136
|
stick with the 5711, still great value
__________________
Instagram: @watches_anonymous |
25 January 2018, 02:13 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,835
|
I think the 5167r is an underrated piece. To me, it looks better than the 5168 and it's cheaper. This piece is on my list. I think a good price is $30k from an AD.
|
25 January 2018, 02:17 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
|
in 42mm i might agree with you. IMO the larger size makes the 5168 a winner in my book. I really like the 67r though. Its just too small and thin. One or the other im OK with, but both makes it a tough call for me to pull the trigger.
|
25 January 2018, 02:22 AM | #7 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,870
|
I’d get the 116618LB. Best value for a gold watch.
|
25 January 2018, 02:28 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,835
|
I agree, the 5167 does feel pretty thin. I have the 5164a and I think it is the perfect size/thickness. I'm not sure but isn't the 5168 42mm but with the same thickness as the 5167?
|
25 January 2018, 02:58 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: N/A
Posts: 386
|
|
25 January 2018, 03:01 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: N/A
Watch: the girls
Posts: 7,095
|
it is great looking watch !
__________________
Best George "Also remember that feet don't get fat and a watch will always speak volumes." Robert Johnston --------------------- *new*https://youtu.be/EljAF-uddhE *new * http://youtu.be/ZmpLoO1Q8eQ IG @passionata1 |
25 January 2018, 03:16 AM | #11 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,870
|
Quote:
First the Patek: it’s uncommon; it’s exceptionally finished and refined; it’s very comfortable and not overly heavy for a gold watch; it’s also more expensive (slow) to service; it’s a slow mover if flipping; scratches/dings are glaring. Now the Rolex: it’s derivative of its steel breathren but pretty rare in the wild; it’s not as exquisite or fine as the Patek but it’ll follow you to hell & back and survive; it’s relatively cheap (fast) to service; they don’t resale like hot cakes but there’s a larger market for it than Patek; gold Rolexes actually look good with some scratches/dings - this brand was meant to be worn hard. So which camp do you fall in? If you have a large collection then I’d get the Patek. However if your collection is small and every watch has to be justified then I’d get the Rolex. |
|
25 January 2018, 05:11 AM | #12 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: N/A
Posts: 386
|
Quote:
I'm torn as I'd like to experience some Patek pieces, but Patek isn't very welcoming for new collectors and it's reaching a point where I am getting turned off by the brand altogether. The problem, however, is that if there is a price increase for all models, now would be the best time to purchase a Patek piece. Regarding scratches and dings, I am curious to hear why you think the Rolex looks better with scratches and dings -- is it the ceramic bezel that makes the difference? |
|
25 January 2018, 06:05 AM | #13 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,897
|
Quote:
|
|
25 January 2018, 08:05 AM | #14 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,220
|
For me it would be between the 5164 and YG Subc, very tough choice, but I suspect you want a PP.
|
25 January 2018, 05:41 PM | #15 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,870
|
Quote:
|
|
25 January 2018, 05:55 PM | #16 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: another planet
Posts: 608
|
|
17 February 2018, 01:15 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: bklyn
Posts: 1,471
|
OP, curious if you've made a decision.
i'm also pondering on the 5167r. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.