16520 or 116500?

[athom]

Hi guys, I'm coming back with a new question, once again, without thinking about money, would you more go for a 16520 or a 116500 ? (black dial but that doesn't play a role actually)...Also please explain me why.

Many thanks!

[Anton911]

Money aside,whether16520,116520 or116500 you choose are all great Daytona’s in their own right.
It depends what floats your boat as to say as all those references are superb watches.
Unfortunately all three references mentioned are fetching huge premiums and not likely to change anytime soon.
One factor in choosing is that the pre-ceramic references are not being produced any more,however it’s a personal choice as you cannot go wrong with any Daytona.

[TimeToWatch]

I think it boils down to preference. The 16520 is THE Daytona which sparked the buzz surrounding the model that has carried on to this day. In terms of legacy and heritage, it’s hard to beat the 16520. The 16520 also comes in many variants, which collectors love - hanging cosmograph, porcelain dial, Patrizzi, etc. It also is unique in that it houses the El Primero movement, an interesting story in Rolex history and the origins of its limited availability. The 16520 was legitimately hard to source whereas the 116500 shortage feels manipulated. I’d venture that long term, it will be the more valuable model.

The 116500 on the other hand brings you all of the modern greatness of Rolex in the same classic design. The ceramic bezel was a game changer and feels right at home on the Daytona.

Both are similarly priced currently, so pick your poison.

[101031-28]

16520. Hands down. Production stopped around 2001 with some P serials before 116520 overtook production completely. It's a classic, already following in the footsteps of the previous 4 digit reference.

[Chester01]

It’s a tough call. The 5 digit daytonas we’re less flashy and subdued in appearance with a great movement. The new version is more flashy, but the movement is better. Some have nostalgia for old zenith movements, but the reality is the Rolex movement is superior. The 5 digits seem to be going up in value, but they too were produced for many years.

In the end, I personally would go 5 digit, but based on appearance. I like that it’s less flashy less jewelry like. In many years, I can see the zenith versions and the 116520’s being a bit more sought after as the first Daytona with an in-house movement than the 116500.

[athom]

Originally Posted by Chester01

It’s a tough call. The 5 digit daytonas we’re less flashy and subdued in appearance with a great movement. The new version is more flashy, but the movement is better. Some have nostalgia for old zenith movements, but the reality is the Rolex movement is superior. The 5 digits seem to be going up in value, but they too were produced for many years.

In the end, I personally would go 5 digit, but based on appearance. I like that it’s less flashy less jewelry like. In many years, I can see the zenith versions and the 116520’s being a bit more sought after as the first Daytona with an in-house movement than the 116500.

It is also my thought, on one hand the 5 digits with small markers are less flashy and more elegant, on the other hand I'd have a 116500 with warranty and a better movement. Ok the 16520 will stay the last with Zenith but the new one will stay the first daytona with a rolex movement so....just the markers are so big imho...

[ROLEXster]

The Daytonas are all unique pieces.
Can't go wrong with any of them.

Some say 116500 is more sporty.
Others say 116520 is more dressy.
Some like the Zenith movement of the 16520.

Buy what you like and enjoy.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by athom

It is also my thought, on one hand the 5 digits with small markers are less flashy and more elegant, on the other hand I'd have a 116500 with warranty and a better movement. Ok the 16520 will stay the last with Zenith but the new one will stay the first daytona with a rolex movement so....just the markers are so big imho...

The 116520 was the first with the in-house movement. The ss bezel. Not the 116500


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1665fan]

Find a nice patrizzi, you can’t get that in any other version of the daytona

[MinMay]

Oyster and Daytona for the win!!!!

[faimag]

Any daytona ref will do. If you prefer like-new looks, the 500 is your only choice, as most 520s are well worn.

[Chalet]

Originally Posted by 101031-28

16520. Hands down. Production stopped around 2001 with some P serials before 116520 overtook production completely. It's a classic, already following in the footsteps of the previous 4 digit reference.

Fairly sure production stopped 2000

[theflywrist]

I would vote 16520.
I own and really love my 116500 in white, but I much prefer my 16520.
I would go for a black 16520. I own an A series, and I have to say, it is the perfect sapphire model Daytona. It has the older elements that I love, especially the slim hour markers and brushed lugs.

Either way you cannot go wrong.
Good luck!

[DGB]

The 500 is a better watch in all aspect, built, movement, bracelet, clasp etc....

The Zenith has a charm that can’t be beaten.

On your wrist the 5 digits is lighter, more delicate, the new one would be less exposed to scratches on the bezel.

There is no right or wrong here, just a choice between old and new.

I would go for the 16520 hands down, anytime every time, with all the dial variances, it is a much more interesting watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kans86]

Originally Posted by DGB

The 500 is a better watch in all aspect, built, movement, bracelet, clasp etc....

The Zenith has a charm that can’t be beaten.

On your wrist the 5 digits is lighter, more delicate, the new one would be less exposed to scratches on the bezel.

There is no right or wrong here, just a choice between old and new.

I would go for the 16520 hands down, anytime every time, with all the dial variances, it is a much more interesting watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+1. The charm of the 16520 is hard to resist. I will choose the 16520 over the 116500. But the best way would be to have both.

[inadeje]

I have the 16520 and the DaytonaC, I don’t feel that they wear any differently to be honest. The bracelet may feel a tad more solid on the C but only when it’s in your hand, never feel it on the wrist. Both are great pieces. I guess I prefer my Zenith because its been we me for so long (22 yrs) and, I would never part with it.

[athom]

Originally Posted by Chester01

The 116520 was the first with the in-house movement. The ss bezel. Not the 116500


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

my bad ! Then maybe I should go for a 116520 instead of the two others

[athom]

Originally Posted by theflywrist

I would vote 16520.
I own and really love my 116500 in white, but I much prefer my 16520.
I would go for a black 16520. I own an A series, and I have to say, it is the perfect sapphire model Daytona. It has the older elements that I love, especially the slim hour markers and brushed lugs.

Either way you cannot go wrong.
Good luck!

slim hour markers, slim hands and brushed lugs are THE reason why I'd more go for a 16520...but the caliber from the 116520 is so much better than the zenith...

[athom]

Of course I can't go wrong with any of these three references but I want to be able to wear it often, to don't have a too fragile one, to do not go to the watchmaker every two days, something reliable and not to keep in a safe for ages!

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by athom

my bad ! Then maybe I should go for a 116520 instead of the two others

No worries lol. I mean I have the 116520 and it’s a great watch. But the zenith Daytona is just a bit less flashy and more in-line with a tool watch. I mean it’s a heavily modified zenith movement (which is already a fantastic movement-owned a 2 tone zenith Daytona). In the end you have to wear it. The 116520 is the first with in house movement and the bracelet is much more solid and heavy. But in the end the slight edge in appearance goes to the zenith where the slight edge in movement goes to the 116520. But you wear it and look at it, so you have to like the look.

Between the 116520 and ceramic 116500, the 116520 has the ss bezel and in my opinion more inline with their heritage and adding the ceramic is more jewelry like as it can be chipped as there is no ring surrounding the bezel. They added that bezel just to show off their technology in my opinion. Yes it’s a bit more scratch resistant but the ss bezel will hold for decades and is cheaply replaced. In the end, you can’t go wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rmlovett1]

Originally Posted by athom

Of course I can't go wrong with any of these three references but I want to be able to wear it often, to don't have a too fragile one, to do not go to the watchmaker every two days, something reliable and not to keep in a safe for ages!

All three of these will be a robust & reliable, as long as they’re taken care of properly. I wouldn’t hesitate wearing any one of them as a daily watch.
If picking one in today’s market, I’d go 5 digit, if I found a great condition, complete set, watch. They’re just not making them anymore, and a great piece to have in a collection (if you like the older references).
Tough decision, but any of them will be a great addition, no wrong choice

[Amochosto]

If it’s not obvious to you, pick the cheapest. For me I don’t like the shiny steel Bezel, so I picked the 116500

[Brny11]

I want my watches that are new to be vintage one day. I get that discontinued and vintage market is desirable but for me I want latest and greatest. Put my miles on and let it age with me. So 116500.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jjcthe1]

Bumping this because I am now having this dilemma.

Assuming both are black face, any other opinions here?

It looks like now they are about the same price. Any comments on the current market pricing as well?

[BobDyl]

My comments are only in terms of wearability: if bezel scratches bother you, go ceramic. Also note that the black dial 520s will wear smaller if you are on the edge wrist size wise (7"+ imo and the black dial 520s start looking small).

[scooba]

I have owned all three versions , I really liked the Zenith but just had to own the new version with the Rolex in house movement ,I then had to upgrade mid cycle with the new larger clasp version 116520/78490 ? Bracelet. Then when the 116500 came out with ceramic bezel and white panda I knew I needed that version .

The new 500c is easily the best version in my opinion

[Mr.Rolex1]

Its nice to own vintage but its easier and more fun to wear modern.

I perfer the look of the ceramic daytona

[jjcthe1]

thanks guys, feel free to keep the opinions coming but I agree with the overall consensus of modern is more usable and wearable. It is also MUCH easier to find as a complete set at a realistic price the 15620s are all over the place as far as price is concerned.

[gmstevenson]

16520

[Muxi]

The C500s look tidier being less prone to scratches.