ammandel Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 First time Ive seen one of these! Maybe this is old news to you all! I think this is an nteresting piece actually. The brightness of the gold is very unique actually and seems quite modern if anything. I always think of gold watches as old fashioned but this has a whiter look to it so it looks prettttty good. I could probably just about pull this off actually.. now where did I leave that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllergyDoc Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 This is real? I didn't know Rolex had released a watch like this. Hmmm..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Yeah, it's a good looking watch. Just like the GMTIIc. However, I'm not too fond of the new bulkier lugs and crown guards. Somehow the GMTIIc leaves me cold as well... I can't explain it... somehow it lacks the "classic Rolex spirit". But then again maybe I'm just getting old, boring and conservative. @Doc: Looks definitely genuine to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 I like this new style personally, the only new Rolex designs to make me go are the DeepSea and Yachtmaster II..... In fact I ordered the steel fantasy version of this Submariner a few days ago, only because I no longer have my GMTIIc though I wonder if Rolex will turn that fantasy watch into reality? I have seen the blue dial/bezel version in white gold at my local AD, I think it was about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmurphy926 Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Jeez...check that date position...I guess I spent too much time trying to get perfect alignment on my old WM9 v1. So is a centered date wheel now a tell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmurphy926 Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 In fact I ordered the steel fantasy version of this Submariner a few days ago, only because I no longer have my GMTIIc though Hey Mickey, When you get it, pix and your thoughts would be great. I've considered this one myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkBachs Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Holy carp, that's the ugliest eBay auction page I've ever seen! I second the comment about the date wheel, that's terrible! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I've reached the conclusion that Rolex isn't as anal as we are about the position of the date in the window. I also don't think they're as concerned about date mag being absolutely, positively 2.5. And of course, why should they be- their watches are still 100% Rolex. Now we have the 18K full yellow gold with black dial (116618)- wonder if they'll produce the white gold w/ the black dial (116619)? TT's should be out soon- Basel 2009, I guess. Stainless is scheduled for 2010- kinda cool that you can get your rep before the gen comes out! You could bs someone that you 'have connections'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4GTR Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 almost overnight, for some reason i've decided I don't hate gold anymore. I don't understand it. The crownguards will take some getting used to. And The polished center links on the subs is a big mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Hey Mickey, When you get it, pix and your thoughts would be great. I've considered this one myself. No problem, I will do my usual wrist shot thing! Unless it arrive in bits or something, I am using an untested off site dealer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmurphy926 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 No problem, I will do my usual wrist shot thing! Unless it arrive in bits or something, I am using an untested off site dealer Good luck and thanks!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amptor1 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 That photo is slightly off center, you can tell by looking at how deep the rehaut is on the left compared to the right and I'm sure rolex didn't fudge the rehaut. Also look at the CG's, I haven't seen a rep with them of that shape yet. All gold rolexes don't appeal to me a slight bit. I'd still go TT with blue dial, that's my favorite one. Too many black subs on these boards... kinda plain watch imo. I think this watch would look cheaper if they didn't polish the center. Well you can tell it is genuine by the plastics they used and the upc code attached to the case. The serial # in the rehaut is obviously photoshopped out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmurphy926 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 That photo is slightly off center, you can tell by looking at how deep the rehaut is on the left compared to the right and I'm sure rolex didn't fudge the rehaut. ? If this is in response to my comment about the off center date, I wasn't claiming that the cyclops is off center, I was referring to the position of the date (on the date wheel) in the date window (the rectangular hole in the dial). Well you can tell it is genuine by the plastics they used and the upc code attached to the case. I never doubted the watch in question is gen, but I don't think this is a very safe means of determining gen vs rep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammandel Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I can't believe the authenticity of this watch is even slightly in question! haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmurphy926 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I can't believe the authenticity of this watch is even slightly in question! haha Yeah..I know...I think some may have misinterpreted the early comments of this being a never before seen model as a question of it's authenticity. I know your OP wasn't implying that. I still prefer the 16610 sub to this new model, but maybe in time, it will grow on me. I don't hate it, I just like the older style better. I think this is a much bigger step in the subs evolution than has been seen since maybe the introduction of crown guards. If Mickeys SS rep version turns out nicely, I may order one too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammandel Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I've personally think the 16610 is somewhat 'tacky' and 'tinny' in the current market. Not just talking about reps.. The luxury watch sector is a large market now with the bar set very high. The submariner was one of the models that was seriously in need of these modernised updates. Rolex has long been synonomous with innovation. There was little innovative about the plasticy bezeleling and flimsy bracelet. Even the way the bezel works is in somewhat like a paperclip in the middle of some jagged metal. The new sub design for me represents Rolex's flexibility while maintaining design staples. The thicker, rounder CG's go to show the look of quality more and add to the general 'boldness' of the design. Good to see the maxi dial now being used in all the new models too. As for the polished mid links.. this is a 18K watch.. a slight departure from the idea of 'tool watch'. Maybe the SS version will retain its fully brushed bracelet, as long as it has the new clasp! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmurphy926 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I've personally think the 16610 is somewhat 'tacky' and 'tinny' in the current market. Not just talking about reps.. I know a lot of people think the same way you do ammandel, and although I really like the function of the new clasps, I have to admit (not sure why I feel like I should be ashamed to admit this) that I consider the relative light weight of the 16610 subs to be something that adds strongly to it's "tool" or "sports" watch capability. And I think there is something to be said for simplicity in design. The more complex things are, the more apt they are to break and the harder they are to fix. I also like the 65 Mustang more that the new ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.