ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
26 April 2022, 12:23 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Europe
Posts: 36
|
Do any of you own BOTH the 16600 and 16610? Which do you prefer and why?
Are these two models differentiated enough to warrant owning both? Am I the only one here nuts enough to even consider this?
|
17 May 2022, 09:34 AM | #2 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: Merle
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 2,542
|
I went with the 16600 and could not be happier!
|
17 May 2022, 09:39 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: New York
Posts: 2,100
|
If you want to talk nuts, I had the 16610, 16600, and 14060m at the same time. Then traded them all. Have since bought back the 16610 and 14060m. Am now considering re-acquiring the 16600.
In my experience/opinion, the 16610 wears the best/most comfortable. However, the substance (height) of the 16600 is a nice feeling, as is feeling different from the masses in having picked a SD. The 16600 actually looks best on my 6.5 inch wrist of all of them. |
17 May 2022, 02:29 PM | #4 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 353
|
Sounds familiar
Quote:
The 16600 and deepsea are the most worn ones, the form factor of a SD or DSSD and the feel are second to none . The 16610 feels like a Daytona in comparison, low, light, but something is missing. 6.5 wrist too |
|
17 May 2022, 11:35 PM | #5 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: New York
Posts: 2,100
|
Quote:
I’ve had all those also and agree, though I’d say the 14060m sits so flat it makes the 16610 feel beefier by comp. All relative I guess. I moved the 116600 and SD 43 on cus the protruding caseback was giving me some discomfort. Otherwise I’d still have them. The DSSD I wish I’d kept. Might get the new iteration if I can. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
17 May 2022, 12:21 PM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Canada
Posts: 84
|
I have the 14060, 16610 and 16600. They are all great watches but prefer the 16600 as bulkier (in a good manner), sits higher on the wrist, heavier and not as common as the 2 others.
|
17 May 2022, 01:48 PM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Real Name: Ross C.
Location: Miami, FL.
Posts: 964
|
I picked up 16600T few years ago and absolutely love it. I got it because it doesn't have the cyclops window mainly and later on I also acquired 116660 mainly because again no cyclops window.
|
17 May 2022, 02:01 PM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Real Name: Krishna
Location: Australia
Posts: 611
|
Have both. Prefer 16600 but not comfortable to wear. 16610 is better in that department
|
17 May 2022, 08:56 PM | #9 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Islam
Location: Montreal, Canada
Watch: DJ,SD 4000,LV
Posts: 742
|
In the past i owned the 16610 lv and the 16600 and i remeber i prefered the seadweller mainly because of the proportion of the case
__________________
current: ROO elephant, ROO 44 panda, datejust 16013, omega const. day date Sold: Gmt 16710, sub 16610LV, SD 16600, SD 4000, sub c 116610,sub c 116613, Daytona116503 , ROO navy, ROO vampire, omega seamaster |
17 May 2022, 09:04 PM | #10 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Somewhere Cold
Posts: 907
|
I have a 16600, but also plan on picking up a 16610 when the right watch comes along.
__________________
Rolex GMT Master II 116710LN Rolex Sea-Dweller 16600 Rolex Explorer 224270 Rolex Explorer II 226570 Polar Omega Moonwatch Sapphire Sandwich Panerai PAM00111 2 Factor Authentication |
17 May 2022, 11:43 PM | #11 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,095
|
This was part of my very first Rolex journey …. Ultimately I decided on the 16600.
I wore that watch for about 16 years before I stupidly traded it in |
17 May 2022, 11:50 PM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: East Coast
Watch: 16610
Posts: 4,933
|
I have the 16610 and would not consider another as its really too similar for my taste that is. Now, the choice was made for me as my 16610 was gifted to me back in like 1998.
That said, the SD is larger and heavier and for me, who actually uses the watch to live in rather than an investment; the extra heft of the watch flopping around playing tennis, golf, baseball, basketball, cycling is not an advantage. The sub is more versatile due to its proportions and lack of heft. Many get the SD to be different or like to think they are going against the grain (they are not as it looks from about 1 foot away identical to a sub) but unless one is actually using for saturation diving or some such thing, there is no advantage and only downside to the SD. Not a SD hater, but its not as versatile but too close to justify owning both in my opinion. |
18 May 2022, 09:41 AM | #13 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: New York
Posts: 2,100
|
Quote:
Honestly I agree 100 percent. I believe the 16610 is the perfect watch. I don’t want to but I do. It’s annoying that it is so common so copied so recognized. It gives the impression I’ve put zero thought into my choice. That I am another sheep. So I’ll try to be different. No date, SD etc. But really it’s that version of me that is the inauthentic one. Not the 16610 wearing one. After trying them all, it is the best - for me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
18 May 2022, 11:50 AM | #14 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: East Coast
Watch: 16610
Posts: 4,933
|
Quote:
I struggle with the ubiquity of the watch as well. I mean for me, i was a kid and had no idea of what Rolex really was or the status aspect. Back then I remember seeing them in the malls, and would go in and something drew me to the design, and the decision was made for me in some way because mine was a gift. However, if one wants to go against the grain, there are other watches for that. For example, I have the 16610, but also a seiko h558. Other than on the forum here, never seen one of those in the wild, not since the 80’s anyway. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
18 May 2022, 01:36 PM | #15 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: New York
Posts: 2,100
|
Quote:
Interesting perspective, you’re absolutely right Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
18 May 2022, 12:03 AM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Italy EU
Watch: Rolex Panerai
Posts: 7,504
|
Having had both multiple times, only 16600T will remain with me
|
18 May 2022, 12:43 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: United States
Watch: Ever changing!
Posts: 1,150
|
Owned both and prefered the look and wear of the 16600. It's slightly narrower across the round of the case. Wears really well.
|
18 May 2022, 02:41 AM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: OH
Posts: 712
|
Not quite the answer but I have the 16800 and 16660. I prefer the 16660.
__________________
Rolex: 114060, 116600, 116610LV, 116660 JC, 116710BLNR, 126710BLRO, 326934 x 2, 16520, 16660 x 2, 16800, 16030 Tudor: BB Pro, Pelagos LHD, P01 VC: 4500v |
18 May 2022, 05:00 PM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: LonZealand
Posts: 830
|
I love Rolex, but I sometimes wish we had more pictures than references. Google will be my friend.
|
18 May 2022, 07:46 PM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,797
|
I traded my old 16610 for a 16600. Sold that, but recently reacquired.
For me (and it is of course a vey personal preference) the 16600 is hands down the better watch. Thicker (deeper) bezel, thicker crystal, polished bracelet sides, and IMO better proportions with the lightly smaller dial. The extra depth rating & HEV is of no practical value to me but it makes the watch more special. I don't see the point in having both, because the 16600 makes the 16610 redundant for me.
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
18 May 2022, 11:10 PM | #21 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2016
Location: USA
Watch: 16610
Posts: 472
|
I will echo others’ opinions. I have had the opportunity to wear many of the 5digit and 6 digit models; the 16610 is simply the best overall watch imo on multiple levels. I think it would be cool to have both if possible, but I find the protruding caseback of the Sea Dwellers to be a bit more uncomfortable if you are actually engaged in sports while wearing. That said I think the 16600 and 16610 are the pinnacle of Rolex watches in many ways. I have tried so hard to love the ceramic divers and ironically I find them to be less useful when boating, fishing, surfing, and snorkeling primarily due to their weight and overall bulkiness.
__________________
Inspiration move me brightly |
18 May 2022, 11:32 PM | #22 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Joe
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Daytona + GMT BLNR
Posts: 4,852
|
Own both. The 16600 gets much more wrist time. Like the case size and no date window.
|
10 October 2022, 09:22 PM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: London
Posts: 1
|
Hey guys - new to the forum. Can I consult your expertise, please? I just picked up a GlideLock clasp at a super reasonable price, and would love to know if it will fit the original bracelet on my 16600? I believe it's a GlideLock from a 116600. Any joy??
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.