ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

SubMarine · 4 November 2014, 12:41 AM

I know that I would, for one.

Eric Chan · 4 November 2014, 12:43 AM

40mm is good for me. Sometimes it is best not to mess with a classic.

grrr · 4 November 2014, 12:50 AM

It is not a timeless classic for no reason. Better not to mess with it.

ssultan · 4 November 2014, 12:59 AM

This has come up many times. If, and it's a debatable if, Rolex releases a 42mm Sub, I'll buy it. But then I'm a sucker for the Sub and love my 40mm SubC ;)

ronricks · 4 November 2014, 01:01 AM

It already wears like a 42mm.

vitalsignsrn · 4 November 2014, 01:01 AM

They most likely wont because of the SD already filling in the gap. I like it at 40mm & they've made it visually larger with the maxi case I think.

tkerrmd · 4 November 2014, 01:02 AM

think the DSSD killed that idea

ssultan · 4 November 2014, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vitalsignsrn

They most likely wont because of the SD already filling in the gap. I like it at 40mm & they've made it visually larger with the maxi case I think.

Agreed. The SubC wears like a 42mm while the new 4000 SD wears smaller, almost like the older Subs.

Then there's the deepsea at 44. They've got most basis covered.

Urosfan · 4 November 2014, 01:06 AM

The ln fits just as well as my exp 2

joejoe1225 · 4 November 2014, 01:13 AM

Perfect as is for me.

Knappo 1307 · 4 November 2014, 01:15 AM

Nope.....

Im Lauf der Zeit · 4 November 2014, 01:42 AM

Thankfully the trend is towards taking watches off of steroids and sticking to classic sizing...

viper9669 · 4 November 2014, 01:45 AM

The current case size is alright, 42mm would make it a tad huge, imo.

Noonan · 4 November 2014, 01:46 AM

IMO, it's perfect as-is. I wouldn't want it any larger.

jack81 · 4 November 2014, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

40mm is good for me. Sometimes it is best not to mess with a classic.

Couldnt have said it better

Fiery · 4 November 2014, 02:03 AM

No thx. But, I'd love to see a RG Sub-C on an OEM rubber strap, and also a Pt Sub-C

otisc · 4 November 2014, 02:11 AM

The last thing Rolex needs to do is chase trends by altering one of their icons.

antbkny · 4 November 2014, 02:13 AM

sub is perfect as is i think. they should have made the seadweller 42mm in my opinion.

Psmith · 4 November 2014, 02:28 AM

It may not be a Sub (unless a Sub II) but I expect there will eventually be a 42mm Rolex diver. It's just too obvious a gap in the range for Rolex to leave unfilled, with the Subs/SD at 40 and the DSSD at 44.

42mm has been a standard and popular sport watch size for years, and Rolex will be well aware of this (for example the 216570 has given the Exp II a new lease of life).

AK797 · 4 November 2014, 03:02 AM

I like it as is, wearing like a 42mm with the maxi case, but if it came out in 42mm with the old smaller lugs it would be interesting to see how it looks and feels.

nivkaizer · 4 November 2014, 03:05 AM

It's perfect the way it is

sierra11b · 4 November 2014, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK797

I like it as is, wearing like a 42mm with the maxi case, but if it came out in 42mm with the old smaller lugs it would be interesting to see how it looks and feels.

I imagine it would be similar to the Exp42 which I thought wore a little more balanced than any Maxi case. I don't think the maxi case is uncomfortable and think it's fine the way it is.

NukeMan · 4 November 2014, 03:55 AM

Nope. 38 mm, thats something!

Psmith · 4 November 2014, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronricks

It already wears like a 42mm.

Not my experience, having owned several 42mm watches

In my opinion it wears like what it is - a 40mm watch. The deep caseback does make it sit up a bit on the wrist though (compared to say a GMT or Exp II) and gives it some presence

Spoonage · 4 November 2014, 04:28 AM

I voted yes... However I think it could be a SubC (40mm) and SubC II (42mm)... Or like others said make the SeaDweller 42mm

Frosty · 4 November 2014, 04:31 AM

I like 40

Nycturbovr6 · 4 November 2014, 04:31 AM

I like it the way it is

dysondiver · 4 November 2014, 04:47 AM

rather see it in 38 , and a bit thinner.

capote · 4 November 2014, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NukeMan

Nope. 38 mm, thats something!

Finally somebody is thinking outside the box. I have read a 500 threads with people wanting it bigger but this is a first. I say 37 mm!

Gerardus · 4 November 2014, 04:58 AM

For me 40 mm is enough.
(Just sold my Breitling EVO 44mm)
It was just to big IMHO

View Poll Results: Would you like to see Rolex make a 116610LN model that's 42MM?
Yes, I would jump on it.	46	23.47%
No thanks, it's perfect as it is.	150	76.53%
Voters: 196. You may not vote on this poll

4 November 2014, 12:41 AM	#1
SubMarine Banned Join Date: Aug 2014 Real Name: Douglas Location: London, UK & USA Watch: Submariner 16610 Posts: 723	How many of you would love to see the 116610LN in 42MM? I know that I would, for one.

4 November 2014, 12:43 AM	#2
Eric Chan "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Eric Chan Location: Vancouver, BC CAN Watch: Day-Date 118238 Posts: 8,798	40mm is good for me. Sometimes it is best not to mess with a classic. __________________ Official Member: 'Perpetual 30' Vegas International GTG 2016

4 November 2014, 12:59 AM	#4
ssultan "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Real Name: Sameer Location: ON, Canada Watch: Submariner Posts: 718	How many of you would love to see the 116610LN in 42MM? This has come up many times. If, and it's a debatable if, Rolex releases a 42mm Sub, I'll buy it. But then I'm a sucker for the Sub and love my 40mm SubC ;)

4 November 2014, 01:13 AM	#10
joejoe1225 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Real Name: Joe Location: USA Watch: ROLEX Posts: 1,928	Perfect as is for me. __________________

4 November 2014, 12:50 AM	#3
grrr "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: TRF Watch: Rolex/Panerai Posts: 382	It is not a timeless classic for no reason. Better not to mess with it.

4 November 2014, 01:01 AM	#5
ronricks 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: ATL Watch: 126610LV Posts: 2,753	It already wears like a 42mm.

4 November 2014, 01:01 AM	#6
vitalsignsrn "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Judy Location: Ontario Watch: 116234 - 14060M Posts: 4,607	They most likely wont because of the SD already filling in the gap. I like it at 40mm & they've made it visually larger with the maxi case I think.

4 November 2014, 01:02 AM	#7
tkerrmd "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Tom Location: In a race car! Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES Posts: 24,123	think the DSSD killed that idea

4 November 2014, 01:06 AM	#9
Urosfan "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: NYC Watch: Me now Posts: 19,372	The ln fits just as well as my exp 2

4 November 2014, 01:15 AM	#11
Knappo 1307 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: Jason Location: USA Watch: Sea Dweller Posts: 8,561	Nope.....

4 November 2014, 01:42 AM	#12
Im Lauf der Zeit "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: NYC Posts: 1,000	Thankfully the trend is towards taking watches off of steroids and sticking to classic sizing...

4 November 2014, 01:45 AM	#13
viper9669 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Real Name: Patrick Location: SIN Watch: Rolex Posts: 5,066	The current case size is alright, 42mm would make it a tad huge, imo.

4 November 2014, 01:46 AM	#14
Noonan Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: US Watch: 3570.50 Posts: 2,156	IMO, it's perfect as-is. I wouldn't want it any larger.

4 November 2014, 02:03 AM	#16
Fiery "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Europe Watch: Sub-C 116610LN Posts: 2,649	No thx. But, I'd love to see a RG Sub-C on an OEM rubber strap, and also a Pt Sub-C __________________ "In an age of obsolescence and gimmickry, this simple classic virtue of a Rolex is indeed a rarity." (Rolex ad from 1974)

4 November 2014, 02:11 AM	#17
otisc "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Austin, TX Watch: 116610LV HULK Posts: 639	The last thing Rolex needs to do is chase trends by altering one of their icons.

4 November 2014, 02:13 AM	#18
antbkny "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Real Name: Anthony Location: Brooklyn, NY Watch: Dblue Posts: 6,723	sub is perfect as is i think. they should have made the seadweller 42mm in my opinion.

4 November 2014, 02:28 AM	#19
Psmith "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Real Name: Clive Location: Exoplanet Watch: spring-driven Posts: 38,856	It may not be a Sub (unless a Sub II) but I expect there will eventually be a 42mm Rolex diver. It's just too obvious a gap in the range for Rolex to leave unfilled, with the Subs/SD at 40 and the DSSD at 44. 42mm has been a standard and popular sport watch size for years, and Rolex will be well aware of this (for example the 216570 has given the Exp II a new lease of life). __________________

4 November 2014, 03:02 AM	#20
AK797 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Neil Location: UK Watch: ing ships roll in Posts: 59,369	I like it as is, wearing like a 42mm with the maxi case, but if it came out in 42mm with the old smaller lugs it would be interesting to see how it looks and feels.

4 November 2014, 03:05 AM	#21
nivkaizer "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: GOTHAM Watch: Sub, TT DJ, DJ Posts: 114	It's perfect the way it is

4 November 2014, 03:55 AM	#23
NukeMan "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Real Name: Jonas Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 988	Nope. 38 mm, thats something!

4 November 2014, 04:28 AM	#25
Spoonage 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: California Posts: 3,133	I voted yes... However I think it could be a SubC (40mm) and SubC II (42mm)... Or like others said make the SeaDweller 42mm

4 November 2014, 04:31 AM	#26
Frosty 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2009 Real Name: Larry Location: So Cal Watch: Rolex GMT 1675 Posts: 5,087	I like 40 __________________ “Anyone can be sarcastic; it takes intelligence to solve a problem!”

4 November 2014, 04:31 AM	#27
Nycturbovr6 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: New York Posts: 7,630	I like it the way it is

4 November 2014, 04:47 AM	#28
dysondiver "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: tom Location: northern ireland Watch: my fins Posts: 10,063	rather see it in 38 , and a bit thinner.

4 November 2014, 04:58 AM	#30
Gerardus "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Real Name: Gerardus Location: often in the air Watch: ♕ Posts: 12,142	For me 40 mm is enough. (Just sold my Breitling EVO 44mm) It was just to big IMHO __________________ ♕126610 ♕126333 ♕116300

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)