GMT lugs/case shape vs sub41

[slm9555]

I’m in the market for a new gmt or sub. I had the last gen sub and while I loved it, by the time I sold it after 8.5 years I was not a fan of the boxy case, wide/thick lugs.

I love the aesthetics of the models that have gone to a 21mm bracket with more tapered lugs. Dj41, op41, sub41, etc. I also very much like the case shape of the dj36/op36.

Is the current gmt case shape closer to the current sub or last gen sub? I have an opportunity to get the gmt at retail but I’m concerned about the wide lugs and boxy case compared to the sub. The current sub has a clean tapered look and I like the more balanced head to 21mm bracket. I find the dial and bezel of the gmt to be more interesting. Any chance Rolex moves the gmt soon to the sub case and 21mm?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[padi56]

Originally Posted by slm9555

I’m in the market for a new gmt or sub. I had the last gen sub and while I loved it, by the time I sold it after 8.5 years I was not a fan of the boxy case, wide/thick lugs.

I love the aesthetics of the models that have gone to a 21mm bracket with more tapered lugs. Dj41, op41, sub41, etc. I also very much like the case shape of the dj36/op36.

Is the current gmt case shape closer to the current sub or last gen sub? I have an opportunity to get the gmt at retail but I’m concerned about the wide lugs and boxy case compared to the sub. The current sub has a clean tapered look and I like the more balanced head to 21mm bracket. I find the dial and bezel of the gmt to be more interesting. Any chance Rolex moves the gmt soon to the sub case and 21mm?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have a look on Rolex.com all watch dimensions and pictures.

[gt0279a]

First, when they updated the GMT from 116710 to 126710 they slightly updated the case lugs to be thinner but it is extremely subtle.

Still more substantial than the 126610 Sub.

Personally, I think the new GMT looks proportional and prefer the 20mm lug width.

The 116610 is just too blocky IMO.

The 126610 Submariner has more tapered lugs closer to the 5 digit references.

I would go for a 126710 GMT if you prefer the look as it is a very balanced watch.

[SubDate]

This was one of the main reasons why I chose the sub over the GMT. The case on the GMT to me looks strange with the way it integrates or I should say it does not integrate with the bracelet. It looks very chunky and the bracelet just looks like it rams into it. That’s really the best description I can give. While as you mentioned the sub bracelet transitions to the case more gracefully. Plus, the sub has the Glidelock adjustment which for me was a game changer, as well as no polish center links.

[slide13]

To my eyes the GMT never looked quite as boxy as the 116610/114060 Subs. They were always just that little bit thinner that worked better.

As someone who really didn't like the 11xxxx Sub cases I wouldn't let lug width deter me from a current GMT if I wanted one at all, they look good even if they aren't quite as svelte as the current 12xxxx series Sub.

[Krash]

My new GMT 126710BLNR seems to have thinner lugs than my Submariner 114060.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ROLEX*]

Just to top-up the question, any difference between 16610LV and 16710 casing lugs?

[Gearjockey]

These are among my favorite threads.

“I don’t like 116xxx subs, but I’ll pay big $$$ for a Hulk.”

[Roddypeepa]

To my eye the difference between the 11 series sub and the 12 series gmt is almost negligible. I think the 116710 and 116610 have the same case, different caseback.

I think the 126710 has lugs a fraction of a mm thinner than the previous gen. Hardly any difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[georgekart]

Closer to 11 Sub than to 12 Sub. You should probably try one on before making a decision. If you want thinner lugs go for a 12 Sub.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by Roddypeepa

To my eye the difference between the 11 series sub and the 12 series gmt is almost negligible. I think the 116710 and 116610 have the same case, different caseback.

I think the 126710 has lugs a fraction of a mm thinner than the previous gen. Hardly any difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, they all look great to me. I should have said that in my post above.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StanCho]

I have both.

Apart from the lugs, the cases are identical in width, length, lug to lug, etc. Sub has a bit wider bezel but in reality, the GMT is something like 40.2mm and the Sub41 is 40.5.

The sub it a tad thicker due to higher WR rating and associated thicker caseback.

[Roger Lococco]

Probably a minority viewpoint here, but in my view the super case (or whatever modern Subs and GMTs are called) is a terrible design. A step backward from the prior generation.

Would absolutely love a modern GMT cased within a YM or Daytona footprint.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[garyk]

IMHO, I’ve seen the posts, praises and complaints over the years about case size, super case, thinner lugs, etc and I’ll I can say, I really love these watches regardless! Perfect sizes all!!!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[omar-rye]

The GMT lugs are somewhere between the 116 and 126 Subs. I believe they taper the same as the 126 on the outside, but the difference lies in the 1mm size difference between the lugs. I find the GMT lugs look bulkier and stand out like a sore thumb on the Oyster bracelet, but they appear proportionate and attractive on the Jubilee.

[123Blueface]

Here you go for comparison.
40 subs, 41 subs and GMTs.

Note, major difference will be in thickness of case. Sub thicker due to cover for diving.