Looks to be a very typical Sub rep; perhaps using an old TW Best case, or similar with the deep rehaut (which is good). Of course, as with most any Rolex reps, it will need some work, modifications and parts to make it better. Here's why:
1) Bezel insert is incorrect; fonts are a bit too short; pearl is no good. Typically, the color on rep inserts is not right either. Yes... Even with black, there can be differences in color Swap to a gen insert... Requires a little work, but the result is worth it.
2) Crown is too tall, too thick. A genuine crown is around 1/4th shorter in profile. A swap to a genuine crown and tube will improve the appearance, but more importantly, improve the function.
3) CG's will need to be shaped and filed down. They are too thick and chunky. Better to have this problem, however... Some replicas have the CG's too thin and spikey. Better to start with too much than too little.
4) Crystal looks alright, but I'd like to see a side angle to see how tall it is, and perhaps get a better idea of that rehaut depth. This would also reveal if the crystal gasket is visible at a 3/4 angle, which is something you don't want.
5) Cyclops looks to be in the right position inboard of the edge, but looks to be slightly crooked/offcenter. This can be repositioned on the sapphire crystals.
6) Dial printing is too large and looks silver. Fonts on the 16610 dial should be white, and the printing should be crisp.
7) The SELs look okay, but not great. They look like they sit flush with the lugs, which is good, but the middle link looks a bit too rounded on the edges (common problem with reps). A different angle on this one would tell me if they're the right size on the outer links and shaped right as wel.
These are a few things off the top of my head. I am sure others can point out some additional flaws as well... As mentioned prior, other angles of the watch would help identify issues with the case profile, back, etc.
Hope this helps!