Model Comparison

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by CRM114

The 16610 Sub Date you've pictured is not the modern Sub ref the OP's asked about, the 114060. If you're going bother to do a visual comparison and claim "same watch" at least find photos of the correct ref(s) for each.

The Sub the OP referred to (unlike the one you pictured) has no date function/cyclops. On the other hand, every GMT Master has a date/cyclops. The case/lug differences (thicker/blockier/fatter) of modern version Subs vs older versions, and vs GMTs old and new are not merely noticeable, but obvious.

Harping about "festive colors" (and the supposed trouble of coordinating them with clothes or situation) as a big factor in decision-making is an error you've been informed about but seem to always forget; for the last 40+ years GMT Masters/Master IIs have been available with all-black, LN bezels. The modern, standard 116710 comes with an all-black LN bezel. The idea that one must buy a GMT Master II with a colored "festive" bezel is 100% wrong. It becomes a false premise and therefore a fallacy to ignore this easy and obvious availability when urging someone to make a decision based-on such undisputable wrongness.

As for "under the hood", the ability for a watch to DISPLAY 2 or 3 time zones simultaneously is precisely why the GMT Master was invented. To call a readily-visible display capability "under the hood" is utterly oxymoronic. You may as well say having the date feature is also "under the hood".

Contrary to your notion that your Sub is "fashion jewellery" because you've personally found it's inherent functional, dive watch forte' (superior WR rating) useless to your own life and therefore fashion is the only reason you wear one, not everyone else finds a date and/or extra time zone display features of a GMT Master useless to theirs.

It seems you're on a quest to assign everyone else your own superficial motivation for wearing a Sub in order to ignore the watches' different physical characteristics and capabilities. One certainly don't have to be a professional pilot to enjoy or find the forte' of the GMT Master useful on a day-to-day basis no matter how many times you repeatedly declare, with absolutely no authority, that "Nobody uses them that way". Belabour your idea of the "sameness" between GMT and Sub all you want in your effort to equate fashion motivation/wearing something that's tool aspect is useless to you with everyone else's, when the reality of differences in form, function, and usefulness of timekeeping display features for anyone not wearing flippers or outside your own head is much different.

The funny thing is, the one thing where they are the same (color of bezel due to LN bezel option for GMTs) is the one thing you keep insisting is the only difference worthy of supposedly being a great factor in decision-making between the two.

Again, you're noodling in the deep-details and that wasn't my point.

My point is that if the OP is simply looking for a nice Rolex sport model and is not a diver or a pilot and merely wants a nice looking wristwatch, from 5 feet away the difference between the Submariner and the GMT is that the GMT offers colorful bezels if one is inclined to find them a good differentiator. My Lord, the amount of time you GMT people spend debating blue vs. burgundy bezels, yellowed vs. white markers, Oyster vs. Jubilee bracelets, "Coke" vs. "Batman". If 90% of your time is spent discussing styling, well, there's the reason the GMT has that perception as the "colorful stylish Submariner".

If one ignores the feature differences it's a matter of styling, no different than comparing a Pepsi GMT to a Coke GMT. For those who just want a colorless bezel, the bonus of a black Submariner over a black GMT is a far less busy bezel and a far less busy dial.