First Rolex GMT II or Yacht Master ?

[alika]

get the BLNR and you will be more than happy :)

[Nickshangs]

I'd go GMT batman on this one as its more versatile and I can see it holding its value when they stop making it . The GMT will be much cheaper too compares to the platinum yatchmaster and you won't lose on the GMT if you want to flip later on

[Secretariat]

I'd choose the BLNR.

[locutus49]

YM is SS with a platinum bezel insert.

Originally Posted by silverbullet818

Don't forget about the cost difference.

The BLNR is a stainless watch. The YM is platinum (based on your original email) so there will be a huge price difference.

[Bafflingbs]

Gmt.

[rebel_1]

I've never owned a BLNR, although I have owned a SS, TT and currently a YG GMTIIC. I also own a Blue dial YM. IMHO, the YM is more comfortable than the GMT. I travel frequently across a couple of time zones in the US. I used to prefer the GMT or the Explorer II for this reason. Now, for some reason, it's not as big an issue to just add or subtract. I can see how having a GMT time zone at a moments notice would be helpful for a pilot since everything is in Zulu time. But for me, my flying as a pilot days are behind me. So it seems my need for a GMT watch complication.

[Lightforce1911]

The blue dial ym is amazing. Tried it on yesterday wow. They didn't have blnr but the all black gmt didn't do nothing for me. My vote is ym all the way

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

[Tj O'Reily]

I have the BLNR and wore it daily until I bought my Daytona at Christmas. I love my GMT and since I travel a bit for my job I have actually used the GMT functionality. As you know it has the ability to just change the hour hand without interrupting the minutes or seconds. It makes it easy to change time zones.

I have always kept the 24 hour hand set to GMT time (London) and when I travel it's great to use the bezel to adjust to my home time. I know it's not hard to calculate the time differences in your head, but it's just a little satisfying to use the GMT function as intended for the watch. I've considered a diver but I don't dive so I'd never really be able to use the function.

I have been looking for my next Rolex and think that it will be the blue face Yacht Master. It's a beautiful looking watch and this will give me a black, white and blue faced Rolex and think it will be a nice trio. I just wish that it wasn't called a yacht master. I don't have a yacht. I don't go yachting. Maybe Rolex could call it the Submariner II!

Overall I think you have a lucky decision to make. They are both similarly priced, the yacht master being slightly more money. I wouldn't let the price difference be the factor in your decision. Either way you cannot go wrong.

[Nairn1980]

Which did you end up buying and pics please :)

[jackass266]

Here's my opinion on it. The first rolex i bought was the BLNR. I decided it was for my wife to start wearing a watch so I bought her the yachtmaster but size 36 mm. Unfotunatly I couldn't stop eying her watch so I decided to buy one for myself. The 40 mm size. Now I have both. I love them both! I bought myself a 16622 and did decide to by the 116622 bracelet and keep the 16622 bracelet and just put it away. Like I said, I love them both but I love my 16622 just a little bit more. I do mis the GMT function on it though.

[skydriver]

I personally prefer the look of the GMT and the bezel. For some reason, I just cannot seem to really enjoy the bezel of the YM. But, you are the one who will be looking at it a 100 times a day for the first year, so you had better make the right choice. Also, I am sure the GMT will be much less than the YM, and once you have one Rolex, you will be looking to purchase another, and the money you save between the two might just allow you to get your next Rolex that much sooner.

[Trurolexer]

Blnr

[fixinbones]

YM is more comfortable and wears smaller like a Daytona. I think the YM is more special

[Dove37]

Is the case of the 116622 the same as the 16622? Or is it larger and or "sturdier" looking.

Thanks

[Perpetual888]

I definitely agree with you in that the BLNR has a more classic and traditional Rolex look. It's also more similar looking to what you originally had your eye on... the TT blue/gold Sub.

Both are very nice looking watches. My preference would be for the BLNR - not only for the beautiful and traditional look of the watch, but also for the GMT function.

[DawgByte]

Originally Posted by silverbullet818

Don't forget about the cost difference.

The BLNR is a stainless watch. The YM is platinum (based on your original email) so there will be a huge price difference.

Only the bezel on the YM is made of Platinum. The rest of the watch is 904L SS.

To the original posters quandary. It's entirely subjective from an aesthetics perspective. For me I prefer the GMT Master II "Batman" (all black), so much so that I am the proud new owner of one and absolutely love it. Functionally speaking, I travel internationally and will be tracking 3 separate timezones on my GMT. My 24 Hr. dial is already set to Greenwich Mean Time, so from a practical perspective when I was making my choice between the GMT and Sub I knew I'd get more use out of the former.

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by DawgByte

Only the bezel on the YM is made of Platinum. The rest of the watch is 904L SS.

To the original posters quandary. It's entirely subjective from an aesthetics perspective. For me I prefer the GMT Master II "Batman" (all black), so much so that I am the proud new owner of one and absolutely love it. Functionally speaking, I travel internationally and will be tracking 3 separate timezones on my GMT. My 24 Hr. dial is already set to Greenwich Mean Time, so from a practical perspective when I was making my choice between the GMT and Sub I knew I'd get more use out of the former.

I'm confused and curious. Do you have the LN or the BLNR?

[Cryten]

I'm also confused, but for a different reason. This thread is a year and a half old, I'm sure the OP has made his purchase by now.

[DawgByte]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

I'm confused and curious. Do you have the LN or the BLNR?

When I posted this I had just purchased the GMT and wasn't familiar with all the terms. I thought a Batman was all black instead of BLNR. Mine is all black, which I prefer over the BLNR.

[sea-dweller]

BLNR between the two...

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by DawgByte

When I posted this I had just purchased the GMT and wasn't familiar with all the terms. I thought a Batman was all black instead of BLNR. Mine is all black, which I prefer over the BLNR.

Hah, no worries. I don't get the Batman moniker either. The LN is a handsome piece. Conrats!

[Lordofrolex]

GMT for sure

[floris]

I owned a GMT II (z serial - black bezel) for eleven years and loved the watch. Recently I purchased a Yacht Master and I love it more than my first GMT. It wears so comfortable and it's in a way understated since most people don't know the model which I like. The bezel sparkles in the sunlight which I love. As many said before follow your heart. You won't go wrong with either

[moorery2001]

I'm a proud owner of the GMT Master II (non ceramic) so I'm a little biased but I believe that it is a GREAT watch!!

[Sakuru]

Originally Posted by AK797

Ceramic bezel is tougher against scratches than the platinum.

That's correct. However, ceramic bezels are more likely to shatter if they suffer hard impacts. It's a little like comparing sapphire and acrylic crystals: both have their pros and cons.

FWIW, I have not heard of people complaining about scratches on the platinum YM bezels; and IIRC, the late J.J. Irani said it was a non-issue.

Originally Posted by Alc

I work in the finance office, we wear white long sleeve button shirts and company logos. I would want to wear with a suit when the occasion presents itself, along with casual attire polo shirts.

Personally, I would say advantage GMTc for branded company attire and polo shirts, and advantage YM for suits. However, either watch would be fine with either informal or formal clothing.

Originally Posted by Alc

I tried on both and noticed the GMT looked bigger in depth, I like the traditional ceramic bezel and love the color combo as well. I think the Yachtmaster is more striking but like the signature look of the Sub and GMT

Sounds like the OP was leaning strongly towards the BLNR ... presumably that's the one he eventually picked.

Originally Posted by Mezz72

I'll call a spade a spade n say forget about the YM - they are not equal. if they are, you wouldn't get such a one sided support for the blnr here.

As others have already said, this is almost entirely a subjective decision. Majority opinion - even assuming the small sampling on this thread reflects wider views - does not make one model 'better' or 'less equal' than the other.

Originally Posted by ju5t1nb

Buy what keeps you up at night, forget social media or what others think.

[SpyShops718]

Yacht-master with blue or silver dial. You can get a 16622 for 5-6k

[jstan9]

I, too, own both of these watches. I was smitten by Rolex as a pre-teen in the 1970s. The 'rich guy' in the neighborhood wore a yellow gold day-date president encrusted with diamonds around the bezel. It was definitely a statement. I'll never forget him at the beach (a larger-than-life Tony Soprano looking guy), going into the surf and being warned by beach-goers that he'd forgotten to take his watch off. "No worries, Rock, the watch can handle it," he'd reply.

Flash forward. In 1999, to celebrate a career milestone, I decided to buy a white-dialed Explorer II. It must've been a hot item then because Tourneau in Manhattan didn't have it. They let me pay monthly with the agreement that I'd pay the difference when they got the watch. They never did. On a trip to NY (I live in San Francisco) I went in and they told me they'd given up on getting the watch and wanted to give me my money back.

I saw a Yacht-Master (Pl/SS) in the window. Though it's the (currently) unfashionable 35mm midsize, it fit great, was super comfortable, and I thought it was the most beautiful watch I'd ever seen. Though I always wanted the 24 hour GMT complication, I paid the difference and have loved that Yachtie for 17 years.

The GMT desire never left and when the bug got to me I began to research and though I was unfamiliar with the GMT Master (I started looking at the Explorer II, still a fine-looking watch). I discovered and fell in love with the BLNR Batman.

Now, the differences. The YachtMaster has a very useful bezel. You can time a steak, or how long you've left the water on out back. I also use it to time hours. Say, on a road trip, if we need to stop in three hours for the dog, I'll set the bezel pointer at the 2 hour if it's 11. It's not precise to the minute, but very handy. And the 2235 caliber movement is a wonder of the world. My 17 year-old yachtie runs like a top.

The BLNR has the fine GMT complication. I set it to Stockholm time (family there) and it's a wondrous feeling to glance at your watch and know where they are in their day or night. We all have iPhones with world clocks but the beauty and simplicity of the GMT hand is just better. More fun, instantly intuitive, and discreet.

When I travel, I set the GMT hand to California (Pacific time) and, as others have posted, being able to jump the hour hand without stopping the second hand is super handy. It's an all-rounder great watch. I find myself staring at it (I suppose that will pass with time, I've only had it five weeks : ) I also marvel at the precision of the movement -- I'm testing it now and in three days is only a second off.

The 40mm size and the sharp edges (the yachtie has rounded lugs and is just more comfortable to wear), make the BLNR more noticable on my wrist. I'm small-framed and have thin wrists, so a 40 is as large as I can wear.

And while 35mm watches get little love on the forums, I've never felt self conscious about my mid-sized yachtmaster. As one posted on another thread noted, up until the 70s and 80s, watches were smaller -- high tech in the 60s was a thin small watch. The current fashion for over-sized watches may be here forever. It may not. I don't know. But I've been happy with mine! I mention this mainly because my 'comfort' comments are probably partly related to the mid-size 35mm compared to my 40mm BLNR.

Conclusion: these are two of the most beautiful watches ever made, IMO. And I love them both. I'd initially decided to sell the Yacht-Master and put the money toward a brand new BLNR but I'm dragging my feet. That watch and I have been through a lot. And it still seems as beautiful as ever to me.

These are my two rolexes pictured. Thank you all for a great forum, and an interesting thread.

[Zigzagler]

Same dilemma here. Another challenge these days is that the waiting time for BLNR is 2 years and most rolex store have been telling me they aren't getting any in the past 6 months or so. I don't know who to trust anymore. And the fact that 3rd party reseller are selling it left right Center charging premium of course!

[crazymcmichael]

Originally Posted by Zigzagler

Same dilemma here. Another challenge these days is that the waiting time for BLNR is 2 years and most rolex store have been telling me they aren't getting any in the past 6 months or so. I don't know who to trust anymore. And the fact that 3rd party reseller are selling it left right Center charging premium of course!

me to... i love the ym... i want-
the new blro
the hulk
the blnr
or this watch
i think i would buy on whatever of those i can get my hands on first..... do you know how much the resale value of this watch is sinking? I think this is one of the best watches round

[JY2016]

Originally Posted by Lordofrolex

X2

Honestly, I would walk into an AD try them both on and you'll just know. Me personally I would get the GMT II.

Couldn't agree more!