|
|
Post by dba on Feb 1, 2018 21:03:58 GMT -6
After trying two of the 6 digit models, a 216570 Explorer II and a 116710 GMT II LN; I found they never really clicked with me. I did like the Explorer II MUCH better than the GMT. The 40 mm "Super Case" just doesn't do it. So a 16610 Submariner came across my radar and I'm back in the 5 digit camp; Tuna Can Clasp and all!! Couldn't be happier with this watch.  |
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor 
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,970 
Name: Roger
|
Post by Baco Noir on Feb 1, 2018 21:11:47 GMT -6
Congrats! I love the aluminum bezel subs.
One of these days, I’m going to try to grab one of the older ones with the matte dial and lug holes.
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Feb 1, 2018 21:50:53 GMT -6
Congratulations! It occurred to me when I read your post that my interest in diver watches did begin to lessen quite a bit with the introduction of ceramic bezels. Although I did have a couple, they were soon gone. The super case with huge lugs doesn't really appeal either. I keep looking at the 114060, then turning away. This one of your's looks great, and in very great shape as well.
The Sub of yours does remind me of why I like my Tudor BB36 so much. Especially the narrower lugs.
Cheers,
Carl
|
|
Nicko
WWF Veteran
Token Ex-pat
Posts: 4,815
Location: Sunny southern Spain
Since: Mar 14, 2013 14:03:18 GMT -6
|
Post by Nicko on Feb 2, 2018 8:13:50 GMT -6
Congrats! I love the aluminum bezel subs. One of these days, I’m going to try to grab one of the older ones with the matte dial and lug holes. Yeah, sure you will Rog. ROFL |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Feb 6, 2018 15:24:14 GMT -6
Congratulations! I am a fan of the "legacy" Subs instead of the newer cases myself. Those lugs simply do not blend the case into the bracelet well enough to suit me. I think she's a beaut!
|
|
|
|
Post by dba on Jul 26, 2018 15:56:20 GMT -6
After trying two of the 6 digit models, a 216570 Explorer II and a 116710 GMT II LN; I found they never really clicked with me. I did like the Explorer II MUCH better than the GMT. The 40 mm "Super Case" just doesn't do it. So a 16610 Submariner came across my radar and I'm back in the 5 digit camp; Tuna Can Clasp and all!! Couldn't be happier with this watch. Until I wasn't. While I did like the Sub, and I'm still of big fan of five digit models; I missed having a GMT hand. Most of the 16710 models are way out of my price range and I hated the 116710 when I had it. I love the polar white face on this one, so I'm back in the six digit camp.  |
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,970
Name: Roger
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jul 26, 2018 17:50:48 GMT -6
After trying two of the 6 digit models, a 216570 Explorer II and a 116710 GMT II LN; I found they never really clicked with me. I did like the Explorer II MUCH better than the GMT. The 40 mm "Super Case" just doesn't do it. So a 16610 Submariner came across my radar and I'm back in the 5 digit camp; Tuna Can Clasp and all!! Couldn't be happier with this watch. Until I wasn't. While I did like the Sub, and I'm still of big fan of five digit models; I missed having a GMT hand. Most of the 16710 models are way out of my price range and I hated the 116710 when I had it. I love the polar white face on this one, so I'm back in the six digit camp. Excellent choice! I LOVE my 42mm polar Explorer II. The proportions work and I love how the black and orange pop off that white dial. |
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jul 26, 2018 19:19:45 GMT -6
After trying two of the 6 digit models, a 216570 Explorer II and a 116710 GMT II LN; I found they never really clicked with me. I did like the Explorer II MUCH better than the GMT. The 40 mm "Super Case" just doesn't do it. So a 16610 Submariner came across my radar and I'm back in the 5 digit camp; Tuna Can Clasp and all!! Couldn't be happier with this watch. Until I wasn't. While I did like the Sub, and I'm still of big fan of five digit models; I missed having a GMT hand. Most of the 16710 models are way out of my price range and I hated the 116710 when I had it. I love the polar white face on this one, so I'm back in the six digit camp. So, you sold the Sub for the GMT, or do you now have both? Either way, I am very happy for you. They are both great watches. Love the Polar White face as well on that one. I did try one a couple of years ago, and found it very comfortable as well. Congratulations! Carl |
|
|
|
Post by aerome on Jul 28, 2018 18:15:00 GMT -6
I'm with you on that. Let a GMT and a 5 digit sub go some years back and I regret it. My Polar EXPY II may be the biggest I have left. Love the DJ's and the old cases.
|
|
|
|
Post by rigsby on Jul 29, 2018 3:29:59 GMT -6
Congrats! I like that watch too.
|
|
|
|
Post by dba on Jul 29, 2018 21:15:35 GMT -6
So, you sold the Sub for the GMT, or do you now have both? Either way, I am very happy for you. They are both great watches. Love the Polar White face as well on that one. I did try one a couple of years ago, and found it very comfortable as well. Congratulations! Carl I just have the Exp II. |
|
|
|
Post by dba on Apr 9, 2019 15:13:45 GMT -6
After trying two of the 6 digit models, a 216570 Explorer II and a 116710 GMT II LN; I found they never really clicked with me. I did like the Explorer II MUCH better than the GMT. The 40 mm "Super Case" just doesn't do it. So a 16610 Submariner came across my radar and I'm back in the 5 digit camp; Tuna Can Clasp and all!! Couldn't be happier with this watch. Until I wasn't. While I did like the Sub, and I'm still of big fan of five digit models; I missed having a GMT hand. Most of the 16710 models are way out of my price range and I hated the 116710 when I had it. I love the polar white face on this one, so I'm back in the six digit camp. Until I wasn't again. Since giving my son my 16613, I was always thinking about another TT watch. I started with a GMT Master in 1984 and so it was time to come back to a GMT.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Apr 15, 2019 20:09:48 GMT -6
Well I think everyone here knows my feelings about the 16610 very clearly. But I have to say the "vintage" models are ALL magnificent and hold an allure unapproachable by some of the current references. Not that I see the 16610, an 80's GMT or Polar Explorer vintage...
|
|
