Sub-Cs noticeably bigger than 16610/114060?

[chili90]

Hey guys,

I'm going to visit a local AD to try on the new Sub-Cs in my hunt for my first Rolex/"nice" watch.

But with the relatively larger maxi case, are the Sub-Cs noticeably larger than their non-ceramic counterparts? I've tried on the old 16610s and thought they were just the right size for my 6.5 inch wrist, does that mean I can expect the 116610 to be a good size for the wrist too or would it be too big?

Thanks!

(sorry I meant "bigger than 14060" in my title)

[JP Chestnut]

The new fat cased watches wear much larger. Their lug-to-lug length increased despite the same dial diameter. The Sub Date and the Sub both use the same case now, so they're exactly the same size.

On the positive side, at least you can remove another link of the short side of the bracelet. No more breaking permanent links for 6.5 inch wrist people. I would consider the new style Subs to be right on the "OK" side of "too big" for my 6.5 inch wrist.

[Redmy]

it's not as big as you think... after you try it on, you will love it!

[slm9555]

My wrist is only 6.5 inches and I removed 2 links total - 1 from each side and the Sub C wears perfect for me.

[walds11]

I can attest to that. The Sub-C grew on me and had no qualms about getting rid of my 16610. And I was attached to my 16610 because I had it so long.

Originally Posted by Redmy

it's not as big as you think... after you try it on, you will love it!

[Victory07]

The new style wears MUCH larger.

I prefer the size, color and markings of my M series. I prefer the solid links of the new model. It was a tough call but I won't be upgrading.

Here is a picture I found online that pretty much sums it up:

[stockae92]

The fat case (actually more like the fat lugs) does makes it look larger and feel slightly larger as well. but the watch still fits well on 6.5" wrist

i am on a love/hate relationship with it. part of me watns to keep the watch because of all the nice features, the other part of me wants to trade it in for Exp II 42mm or even DSSD. :p

[bscepter]

i chose the 16610 over the 116610 because the newer one just felt too big. those big lugs just kind of stick out, whereas the old lugs flow right into the bracelet.

[karmatp]

I had a new Sub C and found that I much prefer the older model. The case is just odd, and don't even get me started on the new ceramic shine. Rolex could have given their ceramic the tool look like the new ceramic Omega's, but no, they had to bling it out and destroy every ounce of tool watch the Sub had left.

[mmmk604]

I've had a 16610LV and now a 116610LN. It's a bit bigger, but I love it.

Here's a pic on my 6.5" wrist.

[Roller07]

Yes they are noticeably bigger and they weigh more and they wear bigger than the older ones. I have both and each style is unique and love them both.