16610 vs 1680

[gplracer]

What makes most people like the 1680 over the 16610?

[FxrAndy]

Vintage, plexy crystal, maybe it is easyer to pass off or more believable being older? No one has ever questioned my 1680 but when i wear a DSSD people ask if it is real

one of my main likes about the vintage rollys is the lack of the white gold marker surrounds, they look more toolish.

[panerai153]

I think probably because it's a vintage. Tritium dial/hands.It was the first date sub and there is so much history and nostalgia attached to that model. I remember when the first Rolex subs came out with the wg surrounds on the dial indices, you would have thought the world was coming to and end from the reaction of Rolex purists.

From the standpoint of utility, the modern 16610 is much better. the movement (genuine) is better, the luminova dials,hands are better and the newer bracelet is much sturdier. However, because it has been produced by the hundreds of thousands if not millions, it is a very common Rolex. Some of the appeal of the 1680 is the fact that it was produced in much smaller numbers and thus rarer and more desirable.

[Gorilladame]

For me also the uglyness of that fat plastic crystal and the history and on top of it the fact that you can

[ubiquitous]

For me... The sapphire black dial models always drive me nuts, as everytime I look down at the dial, all I see is reflection. Reflections of the indicies bouncing off the back side of the crystal and then again off the glossy dial. Couple that with the other reflections that the crystal catches on the exterior, and it's just enough to make me change to vintage

Plus, I just love the acrylic crystals... The charm they add to a vintage watch is something that a lot of people connect with, yet it's a difficult aspect to really describe.

[Rolexious]

That is why many of us have both.....Love my 1680 MBW White and my BK WMv3. With slightly aged genuine bezel insert from the bay for $65.

[gplracer]

I guess it is time for me to do some more 1680 research...... I might even sell my watch with the valjoux 7734 and give up the 7032 idea.

Edited August 22, 2010 by gplracer

[highoeyazmuhudee]

theyre both nice models, but how many people here have actually seen a 1680 in person vs a 16610?, and there in lies its appeal.. Rolex has now become jewelery, the 1680s pure ugliness of a giant plastic crystal spanning 2 stories +a cyclops is so very unqiue and appealing. I love them both, but the pure outrageous-ness of the crystal and date mag makes it somehow feel special, like your trusty old black and decker powertool or that 15 year old toyota, call it character i guess.

[vlydog]

For me it comes down to the appeal of having something that is a bit more rare. I agree with S. Call it ugly if you will, but I love looking down at the 1680's beefy piece of acrylic with its dead sexy silver date-disc popping through the cyclops.

[Dizzy]

For me... The sapphire black dial models always drive me nuts, as everytime I look down at the dial, all I see is reflection. Reflections of the indicies bouncing off the back side of the crystal and then again off the glossy dial. Couple that with the other reflections that the crystal catches on the exterior, and it's just enough to make me change to vintage

Plus, I just love the acrylic crystals... The charm they add to a vintage watch is something that a lot of people connect with, yet it's a difficult aspect to really describe.

+1

[By-Tor]

I must belong to the minority here because the 1680 wasn't for me. I tried a rep (I owned a MBW) but disliked the bulged crystal and I prefer the white gold hour markers on the 16610.

I totally understand the attraction though. It's a great watch with great legacy. But for me 16610 is the perfect Sub. Actually 14060M (the modern no-date) is my favorite. If I ever buy another gen Rollie, that would be my pick.

[TeeJay]

Personally, I prefer the matte dials and lack of surrounds on the indices: Cleaner, simpler, more elegant in their monochromatic utilitarianism. As an extension from that, I prefer the 7919 and 7016 Tudor subs, simply because the shapes of the indices allow for greater visibility, I believe, than the 1680 dial

[alligoat]

I fall in the middle. One of my first purchases was a Watchmaster Red Sub and I had the notorious RBJ do a few mods since I was just getting into reps. Then I bought a 1680 white sub gen. But the plasic crystals on these are a little too delicate for my rough and tumble world. Next I got the 16800 matte dial gen in my avatar and built the 16800 franken. Finally I ran across a good deal on a 16800 gen with a later tritium dial and hands which still glow- '98-99 replacements??. The latest 16800 has become my beater.

Here's the matte dial 16800's gen left, franken right

The beater 16800 still has decent lume and the sapphire crystal takes more abuse than the plastic,

gen 16800 left, ETZ 16610 A serial on the right

I've gotten the Dw on the ETZ fixed- centered, but I'm still working on the bezel- the ETZ bezel is too loose and prone to popping off!

[highoeyazmuhudee]

I agree with Alli' 16800 thats my true love. LOVE the franken -whats in it?

[alligoat]

I agree with Alli' 16800 thats my true love. LOVE the franken -whats in it?

It has a 2834-2 with the old style DW- open 6's and 9's. It's a noob case w/ drilled lugholes, ziggy relumed matte dial, WM pearl, a gen crown and tube and a gen 93150 w/ 593 end pieces.