126610LV MK1 or MKII?

[Paddydog52]

“Per the Submariner book:

124060LN = 16,400 shipped per year or 10 per average AD per year.

126610LN = 35,500 shipped per year or 20 per average AD per year.

126610LV = 20,000 shipped per year or 12 per average AD per year.

So Green Date isn't as rare as No Date but more rare than Black Date.

Another fun fact - 72,000 steel Submariners produced per year out of 1.2M Rolexes shipped per year is 6% of overall production. So when people say "everyone owns a Submariner", no, actually, they don't.“

So based on the 32 month run (2 years and 8 months) that would mean that the likely number of MK1 126610LV produced would be 46,666

Others have crunched the numbers and come to the 53,000 figure so a reasonable ballpark area would be the range of 45,000-55,000 and within that you will have the correct figure.

[thenewrick]

Mark 1 doesn’t look as good as mark 2 for many people. Many people don’t care that they produced fewer mark 1. Rolex makes many many many subtle changes in models throughout the years that aren’t related to any special event or have any meaning other than a minor detail like composition of the material in the bezel ceramic. There are also changes like adding anti reflective coating to models like the BLNR which didn’t warrant a change in nickname.

The mark 2 was also an anniversary edition nod to the original Kermit. This has not been acknowledged by Rolex officially in any capacity and only verified through reports of industry insiders speaking with Rolex representatives.

Many just see the mark 2 as an upgrade in coloration as well as the anniversary nod and that is likely what causes any price differential. I’m not sure if there really is a significant differential.

The mark 2 is also newer. Newer can command a price premium sometimes. Less age is less age. Longer warranty is longer warranty.

I think production numbers play a much smaller part to collectibility than you think. Remember the Daytona is the highest produced Rolex next to the Datejust. That hasn’t affected its collectibility much that I can tell. Its lowest production numbers often correlate with most depreciation as well.

[Paddydog52]

Originally Posted by thenewrick

Mark 1 doesn’t look as good as mark 2 for many people. Many people don’t care that they produced fewer mark 1. Rolex makes many many many subtle changes in models throughout the years that aren’t related to any special event or have any meaning other than a minor detail like composition of the material in the bezel ceramic. There are also changes like adding anti reflective coating to models like the BLNR which didn’t warrant a change in nickname.

The mark 2 was also an anniversary edition nod to the original Kermit. This has not been acknowledged by Rolex officially in any capacity and only verified through reports of industry insiders speaking with Rolex representatives.

Many just see the mark 2 as an upgrade in coloration as well as the anniversary nod and that is likely what causes any price differential. I’m not sure if there really is a significant differential.

The mark 2 is also newer. Newer can command a price premium sometimes. Less age is less age. Longer warranty is longer warranty.

I think production numbers play a much smaller part to collectibility than you think. Remember the Daytona is the highest produced Rolex next to the Datejust. That hasn’t affected its collectibility much that I can tell. Its lowest production numbers often correlate with most depreciation as well.

You make some valid points, I could likely find as many people who prefer the MK1 colour over the MK2 to be fair, the MK1 is the classic Rolex green seen everywhere when the brand is being marketed so would think that that colour will always stand the test of time.

Don’t think the datejust is comparable to a sub in any context really but like I say I see where you’re coming from on other points

[Paddydog52]

To be fair every SS sub has doubled from the retail price over time, obviously in theory the SS sub with the universally recognised colour bezel could buck that trend but I would say you probably won’t go wrong future value wise with a SS sub, two tone is a different matter as they havnt performed very well but all SS subs have without exception.

[JRell]

I can convince myself to like either more. I used to have the MK1 and will get the MK2 this year, so I am now team MK2! To the point about the Rolex green, I think if you see either in the wild alone, you would think Rolex green as they are not that different. This photo was recent at my AD. The OP41 is what I consider more Rolex green, but they are not even that far apart. Plus the newer Rolex box is lighter green, correct?

[Paddydog52]

Originally Posted by JRell

I can convince myself to like either more. I used to have the MK1 and will get the MK2 this year, so I am now team MK2! To the point about the Rolex green, I think if you see either in the wild alone, you would think Rolex green as they are not that different. This photo was recent at my AD. The OP41 is what I consider more Rolex green, but they are not even that far apart. Plus the newer Rolex box is lighter green, correct?

I’m not sure if the newer boxes are lighter green or not, I’m sure someone will be able to confirm though

[thenewrick]

If I had to speculate on why the bezel color change is more valued it would be in this order: 70th Anniversary nod, color preference, less old/more warranty, MSRP crept up over time so the MK2 retailed for more than MK1.

I don't think there's as big a gap in demand for one or the other as you're thinking. I don't follow used prices either though so I may be ignorant.

I will say that I've enjoyed wearing the Mk2 more than I had anticipated. It's comfortable and legible and all around good watch. The green makes it pop a little without being toyish like the Pepsi or a bit gaudy like two-tone/gold. I passed on Mk1 when offered because I wasn't really into the Sub at the time and didn't care for the color. The updated color and that it was an anniversary special made me pull the trigger. That being said, out of my 3 watch collection now, the Sub is the one I'd be most likely to part with. The OP41 Silver is just about perfect for me. The vintage Rootbeer is just a personal favorite all time Rolex for me. The Sub is just a really good watch.

[kritameth]

Interesting the poll is so close. No doubt more of the MkI votes are due to anchoring bias, statistically speaking, but still impressive. Because personally, the MkII looks better than the MkI in every way.

[spellmanski]

Isn't MK II closer to matching the original LV MK I?

[PenDelicate]

I presume the first is the Mk1.

But it looks like a computer render.

And really looks a lot closer in shade to the Mk2 than other photos I've seen.

Can we get a side-by-side in the same lighting conditions?

[Joearch]

I can’t tell the difference between them. Maybe a very small amount. The aluminum bezels have significant variations, so matching ceramic to aluminum is tricky.

I have not seen Rolex call any version of a ceramic LV an anniversary model.

[Paddydog52]

Originally Posted by Paddydog52

I’m not sure if the newer boxes are lighter green or not, I’m sure someone will be able to confirm though

Don’t think that box colour is the shade you see in the background whenever Rolex are sponsoring an event so the MK1 is still the trademark Rolex green as things stand anyway

[Paddydog52]

Originally Posted by thenewrick

If I had to speculate on why the bezel color change is more valued it would be in this order: 70th Anniversary nod, color preference, less old/more warranty, MSRP crept up over time so the MK2 retailed for more than MK1.

I don't think there's as big a gap in demand for one or the other as you're thinking. I don't follow used prices either though so I may be ignorant.

I will say that I've enjoyed wearing the Mk2 more than I had anticipated. It's comfortable and legible and all around good watch. The green makes it pop a little without being toyish like the Pepsi or a bit gaudy like two-tone/gold. I passed on Mk1 when offered because I wasn't really into the Sub at the time and didn't care for the color. The updated color and that it was an anniversary special made me pull the trigger. That being said, out of my 3 watch collection now, the Sub is the one I'd be most likely to part with. The OP41 Silver is just about perfect for me. The vintage Rootbeer is just a personal favorite all time Rolex for me. The Sub is just a really good watch.

There is clearly more demand for the MK2 currently hence why it trades around £1000 more than the MK1, I don’t believe that will be the case in 3-5 years time if the MK2 stays in production between now and then, if it isn’t discontinued this May (and presuming Rolex don’t discontinue marquee models such as the sub outside of the watch and wonders even)t then the MK2 will have at least a 3 year run compared to the MK1 which was 2 years and 8 month, 3 years compared to 4 months less is nothing in the scale of things so values between the two will only shift if the MK2 is produced up to and especially beyond 2029 as that is when I believe Rolex are intending to produce many more watches per year.

[thenewrick]

I don't think production numbers really matter. Plus we'll likely see a 75th anniversary version replace it in a few years. I wouldn't be surprised if they just added a green dial to it for a new Hulk.

[garyk]

From my original from Feb 2004 to my newer one from April 2022, I really don’t care which bezel is which green. Very satisfying watches to own and wear!





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Paddydog52]

Originally Posted by Paddydog52

There is clearly more demand for the MK2 currently hence why it trades around £1000 more than the MK1, I don’t believe that will be the case in 3-5 years time if the MK2 stays in production between now and then, if it isn’t discontinued this May (and presuming Rolex don’t discontinue marquee models such as the sub outside of the watch and wonders even)t then the MK2 will have at least a 3 year run compared to the MK1 which was 2 years and 8 month, 3 years compared to 4 months less is nothing in the scale of things so values between the two will only shift if the MK2 is produced up to and especially beyond 2029 as that is when I believe Rolex are intending to produce many more watches per year.

As long as it does what every other SS sub has done (within 10 years of first release and/or discontinuation, which I believe is the case) then at some point between now at 2030 I should end up with it being worth just under £20,000 with greys offering around £17,000 then I’m happy.

[Zach69SS]

MK1 the darker bezel for sure. MKII too light.

Cheers,

[BNA/LION]

Mk1

[LndLord]

I have to see an mk2 in person

[vipereaper30]

The new bezel is markedly improved with a more striking lime green versus the paler mint green hue of the MkI. Even if production levels end up being significantly higher I think the market will always have a slight premium on the newer bezel because it really does look cooler. That being said, you really should reserve judgment until you've seen both side-by-side in person.

[Hkspwrsche]

Originally Posted by Cassian739

I’m curious as well to see what you get back!? Please do provide an update when you get it back.

+ 1

Can’t wait to hear this result and cost.

[Paddydog52]

If the 126610LV was discontinued this year (I don’t think it will be) then the £1000 difference between the MK1 and MK2 wouldn’t be as vast, they would probably be basically the same price fairly quickly, can’t see this reference being discontinued for a good few years, maybe only a couple of years though as the 16610LV only ran for 7 years so who knows but the green bezel sub seems to be popular hence why Rolex have made sure to have one available since 2003.

Not sure what change they can really make to a new iteration of the SS green bezel sub, obviously they added green to the dial with the Hulk, they only thing they can do is change the shade of green, not sure if that’s even worth a new reference really so I suspect the 126610LV will still be in production for a good few more years (have to keep in mind that Rolex arnt adverse to doing what you least expect them to do, I like that about them, it keeps things interesting)

[Paddydog52]

I’m presuming the 126610LV MK1 has the lowest production out of all recent SS subs, guess what you define as recent as presumably Rolex didn’t used to knock out as many watches as they do now but then again the SS subs did seem to have much longer runs back then, also scarcity doesn’t always equate to higher valuations, think the MK1 could well be the lowest production over the last 30-40 years perhaps?

[Paddydog52]

If vintage is considered to be 20-25 years then how many years would neo vintage be? At least 10 years? I guess you only see really decent returns once the watch has moved into the vintage range, between production year-10/15 years the price movements down seem to be as high, referring to SS subs only.

Also Should you pay out the £700 for a service come the 10 years even if the watch has sat in its box bar being wound a few times each year as a preventative measure? Thanks