Anyone change from 6 to 5 digit Daytona?

[inadeje]

Kudos to @mountainjogger for the post inspiration.

Has anyone gone from 6 digit Daytona to the 5 digit Zenith?

I have the SEL Zenith and the previous older end link version. The SEL is arguably as solid a bracelet as the current 6 digit, with only the later clasp being marginally better.

i also have the ceramic Daytona’s, and if push came to shove and I could only keep one it’d be the zenith. The dial layout and índices are, to my eyes, more cohesive and balanced, while the overall zenith movement watch is more mythical in my view.

[1665fan]

Yes I prefer the 16520 to the ceramic……classier, less flashy, better dial, and more rare….how could you go wrong

The best are the first batches with all brushed bracelets……..had the best of the vintage and modern feel with the brushed bracelet

[kwingy]

Might get flamed for this but I had the Zenith quite a few years ago and honestly I didn't like it at all. I had one of the later models with SEL bracelet but honestly the clasp was so cheap and the hollow bracelet didn't do anything for me. Maybe it was the one I had as well, but the timing keeping and power reserve were not great either. It had a tendency to stop on the wrist. I did not keep it long.

IMO other then the Zenith looking better with the dark subdials, the 6 digit reference is superior in every way.

[springer]

I sold the ceramic with the white dial a couple years ago and replaced it with a 16520 Zenith Daytona with the white dial. For me, it offered more bang for the buck.

[VegasBaby]

I changed my “A” serial 116520 for a 16520 Zenith years ago. Found the silver rings on the sub-dials made the white dial version boring. The black rings, on the white dial Zenith, really make the watch pop! Of course, still have my 116500 white dial ceramic as well…

[ratty]

I had three of the 6 figure versions but I always wanted to try the Zenith 5 figure versions.

I got the chance of an early white dial version with the all brushed bracelet and non fliplock clasp and bought it. To me it feels noticeably different to the 6 digit equivalent and I like it. I then saw one of the last black dial versions with the solid end link bracelet which I really liked and bought it as well.

To me, the 5 digit 16520 is significantly different to the 116520. The five digit is lighter to wear and looks and feels far more 'classy' to me. I find then so comfortable and often find myself just looking at them because I appreciate the design. I prefer the earlier versions with the smaller sub dial surrounds, for the white version, and the later ones for the black dial versions, especially if the sub dials have started to dull down a little. I have never had any problems with either of the versions of the clasp fitted to these watches.

For normal wear I'm happy to wear either, but if I'm going walking in forests, out on the hills or if I might go swimming I'd wear a 6 digit because they are easier to get serviced and I'm really not going to worry about or probably even notice another scratch on it. My 116520 (and 116509) feels solid and totally indestructable as a watch of these prices should. I don't 'baby' the 5 digits, but I really do not want to damage them, especially the dials.

I would like to try the early versions of the 6 digit with the thin hands, I suspect that I would also really like these and I wouldn't be as nervous about servicing them as I am with the 5 digits. Rolex UK will happily service the 5 digits, but because of the age of the dials, if there is any doubt about any lume flaking off the dial they will not guarantee the service. They will change the dial if I want, but I definitely don't want that as I feel it would change the character of my watches.

I like the WG 116509 versions of the watch with the WG bezels, but I have no interest at all in the dark ceramic bezelled versions or those with the rubber strap. I actually think that the current white dial in the SS version with the ceramic bezel is trying to go back to the 5 digit dial designs.

In my view, if you are interested in a classy and comfortable Daytona, the 5 digit is very hard to beat. If you want the latest thing or something more obvious, it's probably not for you.

[inadeje]

Originally Posted by ratty

I had three of the 6 figure versions but I always wanted to try the Zenith 5 figure versions.

I got the chance of an early white dial version with the all brushed bracelet and non fliplock clasp and bought it. To me it feels noticeably different to the 6 digit equivalent and I like it. I then saw one of the last black dial versions with the solid end link bracelet which I really liked and bought it as well.

To me, the 5 digit 16520 is significantly different to the 116520. The five digit is lighter to wear and looks and feels far more 'classy' to me. I find then so comfortable and often find myself just looking at them because I appreciate the design. I prefer the earlier versions with the smaller sub dial surrounds, for the white version, and the later ones for the black dial versions, especially if the sub dials have started to dull down a little. I have never had any problems with either of the versions of the clasp fitted to these watches.

For normal wear I'm happy to wear either, but if I'm going walking in forests, out on the hills or if I might go swimming I'd wear a 6 digit because they are easier to get serviced and I'm really not going to worry about or probably even notice another scratch on it. My 116520 (and 116509) feels solid and totally indestructable as a watch of these prices should. I don't 'baby' the 5 digits, but I really do not want to damage them, especially the dials.

I would like to try the early versions of the 6 digit with the thin hands, I suspect that I would also really like these and I wouldn't be as nervous about servicing them as I am with the 5 digits. Rolex UK will happily service the 5 digits, but because of the age of the dials, if there is any doubt about any lume flaking off the dial they will not guarantee the service. They will change the dial if I want, but I definitely don't want that as I feel it would change the character of my watches.

I like the WG 116509 versions of the watch with the WG bezels, but I have no interest at all in the dark ceramic bezelled versions or those with the rubber strap. I actually think that the current white dial in the SS version with the ceramic bezel is trying to go back to the 5 digit dial designs.

In my view, if you are interested in a classy and comfortable Daytona, the 5 digit is very hard to beat. If you want the latest thing or something more obvious, it's probably not for you.

1000% agree

[Agamemnon]

I prefer the "ceramics". More modern.

[prnceofpersia23]

Love my ceramic but sometimes I consider trading it for a white dial Zenith.

I also love the earlier versions with the brushed center links.

[Lamontsanders]

I owned a 116520 and despite the nicer bracelet it just didn’t work. Too flashy for me and I traded it. Picked up a black 16520 and it’s a completely different watch. Lighter, less flashy, perfect design. Bracelet could be better but otherwise I think the black 5 digit is the best modern steel Daytona. I’d love to own a white zenith but the white 500 is a strong contender too.

[travisb]

I almost always prefer the more modern references but not with the Daytona. I've got two 16520 Zenith Daytonas and no longer own any 6 digit.

[Brian Page]

wish the modern bracelets were all brushed...