gmtII's old vs. new- it's a tie...see pictures

[Tudor66]

Look out, here comes another discussion about gmtII's old vs. new.

I sat in a meeting this morning when I noticed the guy sitting next to me was sporting a 2005 GMTII coke bezel watch. For those of you who haven't read my redundant threads, I've been saving up and trying to decide between old vs new GMTII's. Anyway, he let me try on his watch. It's a perfect fit for my wrist, it fits under the cuffs fine, and would be a great daily use watch.

The meeting reminded me that I needed to try on the new GMTII-C at lunch to reek havoc on the seemingly immovable clarity I obtained in the morning. So I went to an AD for lunch and tried on the new GMTII-C. For all that benefits of the older model there are certainly new model benefits that leave my comparison at a dead even tie. Here are my latest thoughts after wearing both today:

-old GMTII: less expensive, fits great, bezels/band options, classic look, matching red dial/bezel- though I have to buy a used one.

-new model: quite expensive, feels impressive, ceramic dial looks awesome, has the "new car" smell- I have to wait longer to save up, and I don't know if I can wait until the end of the year...!

[Joey_V]

For me, no contest. GMTIIC.

[jmsrolls]

Originally Posted by Joey_V

For me, no contest. GMTIIC.

For me, no contest. GMTII.

THE classic look:



No PCLs and no ceramic bezel to chip, scratch, or shatter plus a red "fourth hand" that is visible against a black dial.

Fr. John†

[pacifichrono]

All really nice! I have a 1675 on its way to me this weekend.

[DolphinV8]

I was torn between the 16610LV & 116610LN. I like how you can change the bezel inserts on the older models, but the new ceramic bezel & bracelet are also very nice. I ended up buying the older Sub, and I love it a lot. However, I am still thinking about the ceramic Sub. I guess when you can't make up your mind, you gotta own them both? =P

[Tudor66]

Originally Posted by DolphinV8

I guess when you can't make up your mind, you gotta own them both? =P

Yes, I do need both watches, and some mental assistance if I don't buy one this year...I may just BAN myself if I don't pull the trigger by 2012...

[capote]

Old one for me, a classic Rolex. The new one is too shiny and square. But if you like the new one you should save a little longer and get that one

[Runnin' Rebel]

I couldn't resist these pics

And you can't ban yourself for that reason ! You gotta have a better reason.
Just get both. Only 1 person can ban himself at a time on here

[Chris B]

I've owned both but only miss 16710

[CharlieSF]

Both watches look great on you. I too am saving for my first and plan on purchasing the GMTIIC (though the SubC is also on my mind a lot). They're both beautiful, but the IIC looks damn good on you. Just my $.02. Happy saving and best of luck!

[Bobble]

Don't forget you can pick up a used BNIB GMTIIc thereby saving money and getting one sooner? I love the coke bezel, but decided on ceremic due to all the other updates. Of course that doesn't mean I won't get a coke someday

[Auragentum]

Looking at the watch only (without sitting on the wrist) I find the GMTIIc more attractive. The new contemporary font on the bezel, the ceramic finish, the new bracelet and other update touches makes it look better IMO. I do not like the RolexRolexRolex print though.

Sitting on a wrist, I find the old(er) GMT more aesthetically pleasing. Main reason is the smaller case and the smaller letters on the bezel, making the watch look smaller overall in diameter. The look is more harmonious. In comparison the GMTIIc looks jumbo sized and somewhat bloated unless you have a large wrist, IMO.

[mike]

Here's a solution.

[jamesbondOO7]

Originally Posted by mike

Here's a solution.

Holly fart! This is killing me!

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by mike

Here's a solution.

Mike nice GMTs
All you need right now to complete the collection is a nice 16713 which I happen to have fresh from RSC.... So fresh I have yet to wear it!

[HL65]

Very nice Mike!

No question for me - Old!!!

[jamesbondOO7]

Absolutely no doubt the 16710 looks much much better. The question really is (for me anyway): "can you buy a secondhand watch"? In my case, I would only buy a secondhand watch from someone I know. A watch is just so personal, you want to know where it has been.....

[dddrees]

I'm another believer in both the old one and the new one.

Don't forget the greater flexibility you can have with the older one. Different bracelets and inserts.

[RRGHOST1]

Both are nice,the new 116710 feeling more of a better made watch somehow. I had a Pepsi 16710 and it was nice but my late father in law had the ceramic.The only thing i dont like about the new one is the green hand and green lettering as i prefer the red.

[Dan Pierce]

Mike's "solution" is always best.

However, my wallet will not allow that so the classic, uber-versatile GMT II will always be THE Rolex for me.
dP

[yannis]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

Mike's "solution" is always best.

However, my wallet will not allow that so the classic, uber-versatile GMT II will always be THE Rolex for me.
dP

Don't you love this pic? Classic Dan mate!! I like both watches especially that Pepsi really does it for me. Had two flipped them both and i will get one again one day...for good. It is a special watch indeed...the 16710 and its predecessors that is.

Here is one from me showing both:

[Dan Pierce]

Originally Posted by yannis7777

Don't you love this pic? Classic Dan mate!! I like both watches especially that Pepsi really does it for me. Had two flipped them both and i will get again one day...for good. It is a special watch indeed...the 16710 and its predecessors that is.

Thanks, Yannis!
dP

[Deyn Man]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

Mike's "solution" is always best.

However, my wallet will not allow that so the classic, uber-versatile GMT II will always be THE Rolex for me.
dP

kabooom!!!!! i will also do this one day...

and most likely with the old sub LV and an extra black sub insert.... :)

[Dan Pierce]

Originally Posted by Deyn Man

kabooom!!!!! i will also do this one day...

and most likely with the old sub LV and an extra black sub insert.... :)

Thanks, Dean!

Believe it or not I've got even more GMT options coming soon.
Stay tuned............
dP

[East Bay Rider]

First, congrats to you for being smart, waiting and saving up for it rather than whipping out the plastic.
Second, really you can't go wrong with either. I prefer the old but I can see the good qualities in the new. I doubt that once you have either, you'll not be satisfied and regret your decision. Have fun with it, enjoy the process and just know that whatever you choose, you chose correctly.

[rossi46]

After trying on a Sub no-date at the AD while I was buying my 116710, there's no way in hell I could ever pay $5k+ for a Rolex with the old style stamped clasp. It felt like something that belonged on a $10 watch.

You haven't brought up the clasp, so maybe you don't notice/care, but to me it was a huge deal the instant I held the watch. The new clasp exudes quality, the old style cheapness.

[Sixxgrand1]

Originally Posted by rossi46

After trying on a Sub no-date at the AD while I was buying my 116710, there's no way in hell I could ever pay $5k+ for a Rolex with the old style stamped clasp. It felt like something that belonged on a $10 watch.

You haven't brought up the clasp, so maybe you don't notice/care, but to me it was a huge deal the instant I held the watch. The new clasp exudes quality, the old style cheapness.

The older style clasp worked on millions of ROLEX without fail. The new clasp has broken with little effort on a number of members GMTIIC's...I prefer the simplicity and light weight of the older clasp. Also sand and grit never caused an issue in those older clasps if you ever played volleyball on the beach and took a tumble - those clasps would rinse clean in seconds and never failed. I think ROLEX was light years ahead with that (Explorer/Sub/GMT) clasp design. Light, simple, effective. If it didn't have the weight or 'exude a quality' - hell it sure worked perfectly! IMHO.

[rossi46]

Originally Posted by Sixxgrand1

The older style clasp worked on millions of ROLEX without fail. The new clasp has broken with little effort on a number of members GMTIIC's

Really? You're actually going to state that "millions" of the old clasp have worked without a single fail? While the newer clasp, which any objective judge would clearly state is of higher quality, has "broken with little effort". I've been on this board for 3+ years... and simply can't recall this purported abundance of newer-style clasp failures.

What I can recall, however, is the feeling of utter cheapness of the old-style clasp. Regardless of how flawless it might have been, it does not feel appropriate for something that costs thousands of dollars.

[azguy]

Old for sure, in my humble opinion, running a coke or pepsi insert is what makes the GMT so iconic......You know what you are looking at in an instant.

[kyle L]

Classic 16710, you can always find a ceramic in the future! They aren't going anywhere.