16610 vs 116610

[BLK]

Thanks guys for all your input! Finally, I got my 16610!
I just love the classic look so much.....!

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by BLK

Thanks guys for all your input! Finally, I got my 16610!
I just love the classic look so much.....!

[Douglas9700]

Glad you made your choice, and a nice one at that - it's a beauty-enjoy!

[ancientmariner]

Great pic.

[Jambos5151]

I do love mine (116610) but when I see a 16610 out in wild , there is a certain classic style with it . Put them side by side if you can , try them on and then you'll know , good luck op

[BLK]

I like the Subc too but Subc still in production, I want to get the 16610 first! My next will be 114060

[faz]

Congratulations on your purchase. Beautiful piece.

I have the 5 digit bluesy, as well as the 6 digit batman ( yeah, not a sub, but similar case). I much prefer the fit and shape of the 5 digit over the 6 digit. Both wonderful and I wouldn't say no to either, but 5 digit has the classic case and size for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by BLK

Thanks guys for all your input! Finally, I got my 16610!
I just love the classic look so much.....!

Correct choice IMO, well done!

[mikeyyn]

As the great Harry Hill would say: "There's only one way to find out.....FIGHT!"

(you have to be from the UK to get that I think......)

[harshad4005]

Originally Posted by BLK

I like the Subc too but Subc still in production, I want to get the 16610 first! My next will be 114060

That's the way to go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mjclark32]

Originally Posted by BLK

Thanks guys for all your input! Finally, I got my 16610!
I just love the classic look so much.....!

Congrats!

[dominic.warren]

Either is a win! I own a 116610, 16613 and a Tudor 79190 at the moment. All are great and I enjoy wearing all of them for there own differences.

[Boaters]

I do like both and have owned both but the six digit just feels better to me as was said just more robust IMPO.

[mdtddd2007]

Classic is best!
Congrats!

[phillycheez]

Just get a sd4k. It's the old case with all the new modern features.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by phillycheez

Just get a sd4k. It's the old case with all the new modern features.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Nope, the lugs are stubbier and the SELs stick out awkwardly.

[vukotab]

I think that you made a right choice, that is one beautiful Sub!
Big congrats!

[ilovewatchestoo]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

Glide lock alone would swing it for me.

Agreed, though I've never owned any other Rolex than the new sub with the glidelock and it does make for the perfect custom fit. And the ceramic bezel provides a wide spectrum of colors depending on the lighting, including a grey tint at times. Get the newest.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

Glide lock alone would swing it for me.

I would never choose a watch based on the clasp. The old and much-maligned "tuna-can" clasp is perfectly adequate, and I have never felt the urge to adjust it on any of my three old subs, one of which I've owned and worn for 16 years. Just get it fitted right in the first place, and that's that. People fiddle with the glidelock because they can?

I would choose a watch based on aesthetics (or rather, I'd reject a watch for aesthetic reasons), and I have to say that the sub-C fails my personal aesthetic taste.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by BLK

Thanks guys for all your input! Finally, I got my 16610!
I just love the classic look so much.....!

If you like the classic look, may I present an alternative to the 114060? Matt dial, lovely tritium lume, graceful case, open-six silver date wheel, acrylic crystal:



I know which I'd rather look at.

[helson]

I sold 14060 for SubC.
Maxi dial and Glidelock is the right combo for me. And Ceramic bezel is a bonus.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by Hollister

I would never choose a watch based on the clasp. The old and much-maligned "tuna-can" clasp is perfectly adequate, and I have never felt the urge to adjust it on any of my three old subs, one of which I've owned and worn for 16 years. Just get it fitted right in the first place, and that's that. People fiddle with the glidelock because they can?.

If you're happy without the Glidelock, more power to you. I can say that every single watch I owned prior to the SubC presented adjustment issues for me, particularly as they related to the expansion and contraction of my wrist. The SubC is the one watch I own that has solved that issue, and now that I have it, buying a watch without such a clasp seems like a comedown. I didn't buy the Sub just for the Glidelock. I got it because it was perfect for my needs in every other respect, as well, including aesthetics. The Glidelock just sealed the deal.

[Hollister]

There's a thread somewhere with someone fitting a glidelock to a 16610. If I thought it was worthwhile, I'd do it to my three subs, but I don't think it's worth bothering with. It's a solution looking for a problem.

The main deal-breaker for me is the overall appearance of most of the current six-digit references. The exception, for me, being the OP39 which is a throwback to the five-digit case proportions.

We all have different tastes.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Hollister

There's a thread somewhere with someone fitting a glidelock to a 16610. If I thought it was worthwhile, I'd do it to my three subs, but I don't think it's worth bothering with. It's a solution looking for a problem.

The main deal-breaker for me is the overall appearance of most of the current six-digit references. The exception, for me, being the OP39 which is a throwback to the five-digit case proportions.

We all have different tastes.

I completely agree. It's not as if I couldn't just add a Glidelock setup and heavier bracelet if I wanted such a thing. I think it's too bulky and heavy, and I can easily adjust my tuna clasp with a toothpick, but I rarely feel compelled to do such a thing.

[BlackBay1]

Originally Posted by BLK

Thanks guys for all your input! Finally, I got my 16610!
I just love the classic look so much.....!

Congrats and wear it in good health.

[gossbeau]

I would go for the 6 digit one!!

[Bigsykedaddy]

Originally Posted by Hollister

There's a thread somewhere with someone fitting a glidelock to a 16610. If I thought it was worthwhile, I'd do it to my three subs, but I don't think it's worth bothering with. It's a solution looking for a problem.

The main deal-breaker for me is the overall appearance of most of the current six-digit references. The exception, for me, being the OP39 which is a throwback to the five-digit case proportions.

We all have different tastes.

You can say the new Sub C is a throwback to the 5512 (sorta)

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Bigsykedaddy

You can say the new Sub C is a throwback to the 5512 (sorta)

Hardly even close.

[Onikage]

Originally Posted by Bigsykedaddy

You can say the new Sub C is a throwback to the 5512 (sorta)

Apparently according to Rolex. Every Sub prior to the SubC bears a closer resemblance to a 5512 imo. The SubC is radically more square and different looking to me.

[WouterV]

Originally Posted by Dustytrail

You could install a glidelock clasp onto an 5 digit sub



http://www.newturfers.com/vb/forum/w...th-a-glidelock

Thank you for this! I was also thinking about changing this on my SUB. As I recently switched back from the 6digit to the 5 digit! May I ask you what you paid for these 2 parts? 1x Glidelock, 1x 1/2 link