The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 11 January 2018, 04:08 AM   #1
dbhak22
2024 Pledge Member
 
dbhak22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,940
VERSUS: Semi-Modern GMTs

Fifteenth edition of the "VERSUS" post/picture. What is "VERSUS"? Well, I thought it would be fun to compare two watches (and only those two watches) and discuss pros/cons by outlining the differences and getting folks' ideas/thoughts/opinions on TRF. We got folks here that have been collecting and studying these things for decades and those who are just starting to venture into the crazy world of Rolex (and everyone in between). Therefore, it would be fun and educational!

For this edition, we have a showdown of a couple semi-modern GMTs. A GMT-Master reference 16750 and a GMT-Master II reference 16710 both with all black bezel inserts. Quite similar but also quite different.
  • One has tritium (and thus patina), the other has the newer Superluminova.
  • One has a jubilee bracelet, the other an oyster.
  • Open 6/9 date wheel versus closed 6/9.
  • Caliber 3075 movement (quickset date) versus caliber 3185 (quickset hour).

Which do you prefer and why?






Previous VERSUS:
1. VERSUS: Submariner 1680 v. 16610
2. VERSUS: Rolex Submariner and Sea-Dweller 16610LV and 126600
3. VERSUS: Rolex Submariner 16610s
4. VERSUS: Sea (Deepsea 116660) to Sky (Explorer 1016)
5. VERSUS: Submariners Vintage and Modern
6. VERSUS: Datejusts with Unique Dials
7. VERSUS: Vintage Submariners
8. VERSUS: Vintage GMTs
9. VERSUS: 5-digit Sub and GMT
10. VERSUS: Special Edition Modern Sea-Dwellers
11. VERSUS: A Touch of Red (GMT-Master / Sea-Dweller)
12. VERSUS: Vintage Mk1 Sport Models (1675 and 1680)
13. VERSUS: Stainless Steel and Two-Tone Datejust
14. VERSUS: 1960s Dress and Sport
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808)
dbhak22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 05:10 AM   #2
Frogman4me
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,268
Tritium with patina 100% of the time for me.
Frogman4me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 05:15 AM   #3
springer
2024 Pledge Member
 
springer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 17,157
Depends on your taste. I prefer tritium models but I'm not a huge fan of the later 16750 glossy dial models. Not sure which one I'd prefer but would lean toward the GMT II 16710.

Anyone wanting more info on the differences between these models should feel free to read this thread in the Rolex Reference Library. https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=568151
__________________
Member of NAWCC since 1990.

INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP
Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics.
springer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 05:17 AM   #4
mattedialdoc
"TRF" Member
 
mattedialdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,002
No contest: 16750 all day long.....but gotta have the matte dial


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
mattedialdoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 05:27 AM   #5
swish77
2024 Pledge Member
 
swish77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Aaron
Location: CT/NYC
Watch: ing the time!
Posts: 6,772
Well, you're asking on the vintage forum, so I'm sure most readers here would prefer the older GMT ... including me!

Tritium, lug holes (some 16710s don't even have 'em), the open 6s and 9s, etc ... Just enough vintage touches to be appealing to old-school watch lovers. Bracelet question is moot, because that's easily changeable (albeit not cheap). Also, I believe the cases on the 16750 (and the 16700) are a tad thinner than the 16710.

Another interesting comparison would be the 16700 vs. the 16710. I actually prefer the standard quick-set date feature on the 16750s and 16700s over the jump-hour on the 16710s, but not a deal-breaker feature.
swish77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 05:31 AM   #6
fskywalker
2024 Pledge Member
 
fskywalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Francisco
Location: San Juan, PR
Watch: Is Ticking !
Posts: 24,524
16710


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________
Francisco
♛ 16610 / 116264
Ω 168.022 / 2535.80.00 / 2230.50.00
Zenith 02.470.405
Henry Archer Eclipse

2FA security enabled
fskywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 08:31 AM   #7
simplymod
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Real Name: Michael
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Watch: 5513 MKIII Sub
Posts: 51
I prefer everything about the 16750 with the exception of the bracelet. Nothing better then a good ol Oyster :-)
simplymod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 08:50 AM   #8
dbhak22
2024 Pledge Member
 
dbhak22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogman4me View Post
Tritium with patina 100% of the time for me.
Wouldn't expect it any other way from you David, :)
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808)
dbhak22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 08:52 AM   #9
dbhak22
2024 Pledge Member
 
dbhak22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by swish77 View Post
Well, you're asking on the vintage forum, so I'm sure most readers here would prefer the older GMT ... including me!

Tritium, lug holes (some 16710s don't even have 'em), the open 6s and 9s, etc ... Just enough vintage touches to be appealing to old-school watch lovers. Bracelet question is moot, because that's easily changeable (albeit not cheap). Also, I believe the cases on the 16750 (and the 16700) are a tad thinner than the 16710.

Another interesting comparison would be the 16700 vs. the 16710. I actually prefer the standard quick-set date feature on the 16750s and 16700s over the jump-hour on the 16710s, but not a deal-breaker feature.
HAHA, good point...I had a mod move a similar post from the "General Discussion" over to the Vintage section so have been playing it safe since...don't want to create unnecessary work for anyone...although I rarely see posts from the vintage side move to the general side.
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808)
dbhak22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 January 2018, 09:38 AM   #10
landroverking
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: TEXAS
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 7,648
I prefer. 1675.
landroverking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 January 2018, 01:23 AM   #11
Toronto Soup King
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Real Name: Pete
Location: Toronto, Canada
Watch: 1016.
Posts: 681
I have a 1675 and wouldn't trade it for any other Rolex model with the exception of some PM watches. Between these two? The GMT 2 for me. Quickset trumps lug holes for me here - I don't wear my 1675 as often as I should, because it's such a PITA to set.
Toronto Soup King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 January 2018, 02:21 AM   #12
Tom1675
"TRF" Member
 
Tom1675's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Real Name: Tom
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toronto Soup King View Post
I have a 1675 and wouldn't trade it for any other Rolex model with the exception of some PM watches. Between these two? The GMT 2 for me. Quickset trumps lug holes for me here - I don't wear my 1675 as often as I should, because it's such a PITA to set.
16750 for me, but matte if we open the discussion up a bit...

As for me, I have a 1675 and love it. I haven't ever understood the PITA of setting these non-quickset movements, even if you are wayyyyy off on the date, it takes around 3 minutes to adjust. Its just not that big of a deal and part of the charm.
Tom1675 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 January 2018, 03:20 AM   #13
rolstaff
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Real Name: Juergen
Location: Utah
Watch: GMT
Posts: 308
You did not mention the biggest difference:

16750 has plexy and 16710 safir.

That's why I would chose the 16750. Plexy in combination with a glossy dial is great !!!
rolstaff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 January 2018, 10:26 AM   #14
mineral
"TRF" Member
 
mineral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,670
I enjoy the 16710 and 16700 very much and they are so versatile and wear at any occasion
__________________
Watching date changes every midnight
mineral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 January 2018, 01:37 AM   #15
dafuture
"TRF" Member
 
dafuture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,942
I'd say 16750. I really prefer the more vintage patina look on GMTs.
__________________
Current
Rolex Submariner 126610LN || Cartier Tank Americaine || Seiko SRPE93
dafuture 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

Asset Appeal

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.