|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
18 August 2010, 03:51 AM
|
#34 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Piedmont, CA
Watch: various vintage
Posts: 2,272
|
Increase in case size/diameter? Meh is my opinion. I think the sleek design is more in tune with the "spirit" of what Rolex had in mind when they intro'ed the Daytona to the world.
Updating the design? Absolutely needed IMO. The 116520 is simply way too derivative of the 16520. The only way you can tell the difference with a casual glance is the color of the subdials.
__________________
1680 MK II 2.2M (my daily); 1655 MK IV 8.1M (my 1st vintage); 16660 x 4 - 8.0M spider & matte 7.4M, 8.0M, 8.0M; 16610LV F MK I/MK I; 116528 Z; 14060 M COSC; Tudor 75090 Gone.....never forgotten: 14000 F, 14060 V COSC, PAM 048, 16623 F, 1680 MK V 3.1M, 16800 matte 8.3M & 1655 MK IV 7.4M |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Threaded Mode