ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

barneb10 · 17 September 2020, 05:43 AM

We all love polls

Fall is upon us, and I write this while enjoying a hot coffee outside.

What's your preference, and why? No reasoning is silly. Anything that makes you definitively choose one over the other.
I do like the fact that 16700 is closer to the original 1675, the last of the GMT Master, and made in less quantities; but really do appreciate the value of being able to set the hour on a 16710 without interrupting the running seconds, and being the first of the GMT Master II.

And of course, the mandatory pictures

dpt.calvin · 17 September 2020, 05:44 AM

Where’s the poll?

rmagoo57 · 17 September 2020, 05:59 AM

16710. Newer the better for my taste. Love the hour hand function!

lee fowler · 17 September 2020, 06:24 AM

Both for me!

faimag · 17 September 2020, 06:38 AM

Have both but prefer the 16700 for the quick date setting.

barneb10 · 17 September 2020, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmagoo57

16710. Newer the better for my taste. Love the hour hand function!

Not having to halt the time to set it once arriving and your next destination is a fantastic capability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee fowler

Both for me!

Quote:

Originally Posted by faimag

Have both but prefer the 16700 for the quick date setting.

Always interesting to see people owning both and prefer the older one.

Dan Pierce · 17 September 2020, 06:54 AM

Can't lose either way. Proud 16710 owner here.
dP

Gert · 17 September 2020, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barneb10

We all love polls

Fall is upon us, and I write this while enjoying a hot coffee outside.

What's your preference, and why? No reasoning is silly. Anything that makes you definitively choose one over the other.
I do like the fact that 16700 is closer to the original 1675, the last of the GMT Master, and made in less quantities; but really do appreciate the value of being able to set the hour on a 16710 without interrupting the running seconds, and being the first of the GMT Master II.

And of course, the mandatory pictures

Nice pics. How about the difference of SEL’s and non-SEL’s between the 2 models? Any difference in comfort on the wrist or sturdiness?

Jackie Daytona · 17 September 2020, 07:46 AM

16700 quick set date for me is so much nicer than a jumpy hand feature. Hacking, yes...I know, just seems silly versus a quickset date. Plus it’s the last of the original GMT breed, which in my opinion is kinda cool (and sad) on its own.

Onikage · 17 September 2020, 08:10 AM

16710 no holes was the pinnacle, even though setting one upon retrieval can be a pain in the buttock, and a quickset date would be of vastly more use to me. Rolex will never make anything like it ever again. The watch to which all others are compared and nothing can touch it as far as I'm concerned. Two extremely similar watches but these went as close to ceramic as possible without being the ceramic one.

dricig · 17 September 2020, 08:15 AM

mt "P" serial 16710,
SEL's, Lug holes & Luminova.
It will always look modern, I don't like patina!

fskywalker · 17 September 2020, 08:19 AM

16710

eskiserkan · 17 September 2020, 08:37 AM

16700 for me. Thinner, quick date set, lug holes, cleaner dial, more vintage feel with hollow end links.

barneb10 · 17 September 2020, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

Can't lose either way. Proud 16710 owner here.
dP

Very nice piece

barneb10 · 17 September 2020, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eskiserkan

16700 for me. Thinner, quick date set, lug holes, cleaner dial, more vintage feel with hollow end links.

Agreed. Quick set is very convenient to have.

Stevie_Goodlife · 17 September 2020, 10:50 AM

16710!

Dan Pierce · 17 September 2020, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barneb10

Very nice piece

Thank you.

Mine is a 2001 K series w/ SELs & lug holes, only available for about 3 years.
dP

garyk · 17 September 2020, 11:25 AM

Nice DP...

dbenny11 · 17 September 2020, 11:26 AM

16710 for me

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Chester01 · 17 September 2020, 11:28 AM

Both are awesome.

brigadoonb · 17 September 2020, 11:35 AM

No 16760 love?

rmagoo57 · 17 September 2020, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onikage

16710 no holes was the pinnacle, even though setting one upon retrieval can be a pain in the buttock, and a quickset date would be of vastly more use to me. Rolex will never make anything like it ever again. The watch to which all others are compared and nothing can touch it as far as I'm concerned. Two extremely similar watches but these went as close to ceramic as possible without being the ceramic one.

Amen! I found a sweet Z series, stick dial. But, she's a wiggler!

Dan Pierce · 17 September 2020, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garyk

Nice DP...

Thanks, Gary!

dP

FTX I · 17 September 2020, 12:26 PM

I need a quickset date so if I ever have a 5 digit GMT again it will be the 16700.

ps. a 16750 would be great as well of course.

View Poll Results: Your Rolex GMT Master pick
16700	20	20.20%
16710	79	79.80%
Voters: 99. You may not vote on this poll

17 September 2020, 05:43 AM	#1
barneb10 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2019 Location: USA Posts: 379	5 digit GMT Poll We all love polls Fall is upon us, and I write this while enjoying a hot coffee outside. What's your preference, and why? No reasoning is silly. Anything that makes you definitively choose one over the other. I do like the fact that 16700 is closer to the original 1675, the last of the GMT Master, and made in less quantities; but really do appreciate the value of being able to set the hour on a 16710 without interrupting the running seconds, and being the first of the GMT Master II. And of course, the mandatory pictures Attached Images

17 September 2020, 06:24 AM	#4
lee fowler 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: UK Watch: GMT Posts: 2,559	Both for me! __________________ Instagram: @lee1563

17 September 2020, 06:54 AM	#7
Dan Pierce 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Real Name: D'OH! Location: Kentucky Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3 Posts: 36,217	Can't lose either way. Proud 16710 owner here. dP Attached Images __________________ TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club

17 September 2020, 07:46 AM	#9
Jackie Daytona 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2019 Real Name: Brian Location: Nashville Watch: 16750 Posts: 6,626	16700 quick set date for me is so much nicer than a jumpy hand feature. Hacking, yes...I know, just seems silly versus a quickset date. Plus it’s the last of the original GMT breed, which in my opinion is kinda cool (and sad) on its own. __________________ 16750 \| 6516(wife’s) \| 126334 \| 16570 \| SBGA413 \| SRPE33 \| 126610LV

17 September 2020, 05:44 AM	#2
dpt.calvin "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2020 Location: TRF Posts: 2,270	Where’s the poll?

17 September 2020, 05:59 AM	#3
rmagoo57 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2019 Real Name: Ron Location: Detroitish Watch: GMT II/Sub/Exp II Posts: 2,560	16710. Newer the better for my taste. Love the hour hand function!

17 September 2020, 06:38 AM	#5
faimag "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Location: US, SG, DK, GR Watch: Reverso Posts: 3,089	Have both but prefer the 16700 for the quick date setting.

17 September 2020, 08:10 AM	#10
Onikage "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: England Watch: 16710, 16628 Posts: 7,757	16710 no holes was the pinnacle, even though setting one upon retrieval can be a pain in the buttock, and a quickset date would be of vastly more use to me. Rolex will never make anything like it ever again. The watch to which all others are compared and nothing can touch it as far as I'm concerned. Two extremely similar watches but these went as close to ceramic as possible without being the ceramic one. __________________ GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL ( D- Serial #) ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4

17 September 2020, 08:15 AM	#11
dricig "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Dave Location: NY Metro Posts: 680	mt "P" serial 16710, SEL's, Lug holes & Luminova. It will always look modern, I don't like patina! __________________ Rolex 15010 Date -16013 TT DJ 16610LV -16750 GMT-16600 SD 16710 GMT -Tudor 79280

17 September 2020, 08:19 AM	#12
fskywalker 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Real Name: Francisco Location: San Juan, PR Watch: Is Ticking ! Posts: 25,183	16710 __________________ Francisco ♛ 16610 / 116264 Ω 168.022 / 2535.80.00 / 310.30.42.50.01.002 / 210.90.42.20.01.001 Zenith 02.480.405 2FA security enabled

17 September 2020, 08:37 AM	#13
eskiserkan "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2017 Location: Bursa Watch: 116500LN Posts: 493	16700 for me. Thinner, quick date set, lug holes, cleaner dial, more vintage feel with hollow end links.

17 September 2020, 10:50 AM	#16
Stevie_Goodlife "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2019 Real Name: Esteban Location: New York Watch: Five Digit GMT Posts: 114	16710! __________________ IG: what_stevie_likes

17 September 2020, 11:25 AM	#18
garyk 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Gary Location: USA Watch: Daytona Posts: 11,756	Nice DP... __________________

17 September 2020, 11:26 AM	#19
dbenny11 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2020 Location: US Posts: 20	16710 for me Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

17 September 2020, 11:28 AM	#20
Chester01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: East Coast Watch: 16610 Posts: 4,933	Both are awesome.

17 September 2020, 11:35 AM	#21
brigadoonb "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: USA Watch: Smurf Posts: 431	No 16760 love?

17 September 2020, 12:26 PM	#24
FTX I "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Real Name: Flavio Location: N/A Posts: 14,654	I need a quickset date so if I ever have a 5 digit GMT again it will be the 16700. ps. a 16750 would be great as well of course.

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