Daytona vs Daytona Ceramic side by side

[Daytona88]

Originally Posted by WristEnvy

Glad I have the white SS. Will def add the black DaytonaC.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

ditto for me!

[anothernewphone]

Originally Posted by Ckci

My biggest issue with the new one as I look at it more is that the bezel seems huge (overwhelms the dial). I really don't like that. I much prefer the narrower bezel on the 6263.

I feel the same way. I compared it to the TAG Heuer F1 quartz watches.

[BLACKHORSE 6]

I think the ceramic bezel version does nothing but help all Daytona models. If demand for the ceramic models is high, it will raise interest in the model in general.

As good as the new ceramic model looks, my original SS version isn't going anywhere.

[bbressler]

The C is a home run, but the more I see of it the more I appreciate the steel bezel Daytona for some reason

[Ckci]

Originally Posted by BLACKHORSE 6

I think the ceramic bezel version does nothing but help all Daytona models. If demand for the ceramic models is high, it will raise interest in the model in general.

As good as the new ceramic model looks, my original SS version isn't going anywhere.

I agree at this point I think the new Daytona is engendering an appreciation for everything Daytona.

Re: Anothernewphone: I figured somebody must be thinking the same thing.

[Wesley Crusher]

I was never huge on the 116520. It just didn't do too much for me. I'm actually pretty shocked how much the ceramic bezel changes the look of the watch. The white version especially is smoking hot... I'm a huge fan of the 116500.

[Psychopath]

Very nice pics


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tunadubby]

For me, a lover of dress and vintage, the white dial SSC is truly spectacular. Was in the market for a sports watch that can truly function as a sports watch (which rules out most vintage Rolex). The white dial SSC was an exact match of what I wanted.

[Daryl]

Started talking to my wife about it hehehe


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wristy]

The panda ceramic knocked me on my ass but I think I need to give it some time.

[dazzpowder]

Originally Posted by PcarSBA

The third material makes it less traditional IMHO. Ceramic works for a sub because the colored ring standing out became iconic pretty early in the model lineup. For the Daytona the ceramic ring devaluates it for me personally.

I like the traditional metal/glass combo. Now it's metal/ceramic/glass

Old Daytona's did come with black Bakelite insert so still traditional

[dazzpowder]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

I think it will be a nice watch addition to compliment the Platona, will show you when mine arrives!

The ceramic just makes them look so much bigger even though they are the same dimension

[ibenimages]

Thanks make it a lot easier! The Ceramic wins by a mile:

- scratch resistant
- love the modern look fonts and numbers on bezel
- semi panda dial. Nice contrast.

Originally Posted by 77T

I had to flip that pic and narrow it down because looking at the original whilst standing on my head was blurring my judgement with all that blood in my noggin.


Attachment 722434

I think cleaner text on the C500 dial and stark contrast of the bezel is a winner. Also, in low light, the PVD'd Platinum deposited in the Tachymeter scale will be more visible.

Originally Posted by Steel28

I love and respect 116520 which I owned before BUT not even close versus Daytona-C. Speechless, new release is a WINNER.

Sent from my GT-N5100 using Tapatalk

[ratty]

Originally Posted by redmess

Nice work.

The more I look at this picture of the new black dial version the more I like it.

[swatty]

I'm liking the black sub dials on the White dial, both vintage and Basel 2016

[HogwldFLTR]

No Daytona is a loser; they're all beautiful watches.

[Chrispare]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

No Daytona is a loser; they're all beautiful watches.

You are completely right

[ragingcao]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

No Daytona is a loser; they're all beautiful watches.

Agree

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Ckci

My biggest issue with the new one as I look at it more is that the bezel seems huge (overwhelms the dial). I really don't like that. I much prefer the narrower bezel on the 6263. Ken's pic again.Attachment 722793
Does anyone else feel this way or is it just me?

It looks bigger in those pics than in real life. The bezel is quite a bit thinner than the Subc/GMTcs and as they have very fortunately decided to put the lovely PM style Tachy numbers on the bezel, the bezel could not be any smaller.

[tunadubby]

Originally Posted by AK797

It looks bigger in those pics than in real life. The bezel is quite a bit thinner than the Subc/GMTcs and as they have very fortunately decided to put the lovely PM style Tachy numbers on the bezel, the bezel could not be any smaller.

Thanks for your thoughts! Given that you've seen it live, is this new iteration more or less blingy than the previous? And between the new black and the new white, which looks more sober (less blingy)
Thanks again!

[BABKA]

Originally Posted by Danny83

Im surprised Rolex took this long for the ceramic

They could have made a killing long ago emulating the infamous 6263.

For me, this white dialed version is a real hit and I can't wait to buy one some day!

[BLACKHORSE 6]

The 116520 became a classic in its own time.

The 116500 will do the same.

[Mick P]

Chaps

When I first got into Rolex, I honestly thought the Daytona was a waste of space.

However with the passing of time and the usual daily reading of this misbegotten forum, I have suddenly, and much to the annoyance of my wife, becoming massively interested in buying a Daytona.

Naturally I was going to play safe and buy a 116520, however I thought they are a bit ordinary and started looking at the vintage models and I was seriously looking at buying a 6265 or 6263 which got more history and class than the 116520.

Then Rolex bring out this new ceramic model and it just seems to press all the buttons. It is relatively cheap, looks modern and yet has a vintage look which will considerably widen its appeal. Without any doubt, bringing out this model is a Rolex masterstroke.

My dilemma is that my wife is moaning her socks off at me for wanting to buy another Rolex (the last one incidentally was a solid gold 31mm Presidential for her, not me) and I could easily buy both a white and black ceramic for much less than the 6263 or 6265. However at the age of 67, I don't want to go on a waiting list as I would like to have it now.

I can foresee a lot of 116520s coming on the market by flippers eager to acquire the new model. as it is in all fairness, absolutely brilliant.

Regards

Mick

[goldenpauls]

...........and don't forget the good old Zenith Daytona !! ......... white face with black sub dials and appreciating slowly but surely all the time :-)

[JUSTIFIED]

Originally Posted by beshannon

I will happily keep my stainless white dial

Me too!

[Hpozzuoli]

I am absolutely hooked on late 70's early 80's daytonas with the black bezels. Aside from the DJ, these older daytonas define the brand (to non watch guys). The old ones are very pricey and wanting a few other pieces I might have to set aside my vintage desire for the new modern piece with the vintage feel. No matter how you slice it the new piece is poised for success. I currently have a black face Daytona in the collection.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Mick P

Chaps

When I first got into Rolex, I honestly thought the Daytona was a waste of space.

However with the passing of time and the usual daily reading of this misbegotten forum, I have suddenly, and much to the annoyance of my wife, becoming massively interested in buying a Daytona.

Naturally I was going to play safe and buy a 116520, however I thought they are a bit ordinary and started looking at the vintage models and I was seriously looking at buying a 6265 or 6263 which got more history and class than the 116520.

Then Rolex bring out this new ceramic model and it just seems to press all the buttons. It is relatively cheap, looks modern and yet has a vintage look which will considerably widen its appeal. Without any doubt, bringing out this model is a Rolex masterstroke.

My dilemma is that my wife is moaning her socks off at me for wanting to buy another Rolex (the last one incidentally was a solid gold 31mm Presidential for her, not me) and I could easily buy both a white and black ceramic for much less than the 6263 or 6265. However at the age of 67, I don't want to go on a waiting list as I would like to have it now.

I can foresee a lot of 116520s coming on the market by flippers eager to acquire the new model. as it is in all fairness, absolutely brilliant.

Regards

Mick

If you are prepared to pay a grand over retail you can probably have one this summer/autumn, Mick. I think if I really wanted this watch I would probably pay over retail rather than wait a year or so, time is more important than money, within reason, for me.

[Mick P]

Originally Posted by AK797

If you are prepared to pay a grand over retail you can probably have one this summer/autumn, Mick. I think if I really wanted this watch I would probably pay over retail rather than wait a year or so, time is more important than money, within reason, for me.

Neil

I did not know that, it's worth looking into.

Thanks for the tip.

Mick

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by Mick P

I can foresee a lot of 116520s coming on the market by flippers eager to acquire the new model.

I agree! I'm a buyer of one of those flipped / "rejected" 116520's if the price is right! 😀👍🏻

[MinMay]

They both look nice. It's like buying a Porsche 911 in silver or white.