ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
View Poll Results: Which GMT II | |||
16760 (fat lady) | 25 | 51.02% | |
16710 | 24 | 48.98% | |
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
10 April 2014, 01:43 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Missouri
Watch: Bark DD
Posts: 400
|
Question for GMT II afficianodos: 16760 (fat lady) or 16710
On an earlier post, I mentioned that I am thinking about flipping my sub C, and I am considering one of the older GMT II's on a jubilee. It turns out that a friend at work has a fat lady 16760 that he has almost never worn, and the jubilee is in pristine shape. He's had it for over 20 years, but wears his DD or bluesy or breitling most days (in the last few years, I don't remember seeing him wear it once).
Anyway, I don't know very much about the GMT's except what I've googled over the last few days. My question is if there's much improvment in the newer 16710 compared to the 16760. From what I gather, there wasn't a whole lot of change between the two. Also, is there much of an aesthetic change? And finally, is the jubilee on a late model 16710 any different from the jubilee on the fat lady? Thanks much for any experience or expertise. And FYI there would be some cash to even out the trade, and he bought the GMT from an AD. He also said he would send it in for service prior to any trade. Good Guy for sure. |
10 April 2014, 02:24 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: Joe
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,036
|
Personally, I prefer the Pepsi 16710 on Oyster bracelet. But to be fair, I have never owned a 16760. Good luck whichever direction you go!
|
10 April 2014, 02:54 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 307
|
I would still prefer the 16710. I flipped my IIc because I wanted a smaller profile. Then again I don't know exactly how the 16710 compares to the 16760 in terms of dimensions but I know the 16710 is slimmer for sure.
|
10 April 2014, 02:57 AM | #4 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: ATL
Watch: 126610LV
Posts: 2,735
|
16760 is .5mm thicker and the crown guards are also much thicker/bulkier.
|
10 April 2014, 02:59 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North Carolina
Watch: DD 118206
Posts: 1,858
|
Good luck with whatever you do on this. I'll be checking in on how this thread rolls out. I must admit, Im now curious about your question as I had been thinking about the 16710.
|
10 April 2014, 02:59 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2009
Real Name: Michael
Location: S.Florida/Ontario
Watch: 6263, 1675
Posts: 2,259
|
personally, I always liked the thicker cases, that is one reason why I own 3 Big Blocks, a fat lady, SD and a Milgauss...
__________________
life is good |
10 April 2014, 03:20 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: PacNW
Watch: Enthusiast
Posts: 2,611
|
Love love love the Fat Lady! Would love to have a Jubilee for mine in addition to the Oyster.
|
10 April 2014, 12:20 PM | #8 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Missouri
Watch: Bark DD
Posts: 400
|
Quote:
http://www.doubleredseadweller.com/w...ransition.html |
|
10 April 2014, 02:30 PM | #9 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North Carolina
Watch: DD 118206
Posts: 1,858
|
Quote:
|
|
10 April 2014, 02:46 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Michigan USA
Watch: Rolex & Omega 4 Me
Posts: 1,685
|
|
10 April 2014, 02:47 PM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Real Name: Dennis
Location: Bay Area - 925
Posts: 40,018
|
I'm a 16710 fan also! Pepsi bezel!
|
10 April 2014, 04:40 PM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Real Name: Walter A.
Location: Sunny California
Watch: 16760
Posts: 2,629
|
16760 all the way, it's my daily and is extremely elegant on jubilee.
__________________
Our shadows taller than our soul........ |
10 April 2014, 07:27 PM | #13 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Quote:
|
|
10 April 2014, 07:56 PM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Watch: Subs
Posts: 689
|
In that article is says the bezel is thicker too on the 16760. Does that mean a pepsi insert would not fit into a 16760?
|
10 April 2014, 09:51 PM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Real Name: Chris
Location: NCR
Watch: Today's watch
Posts: 736
|
|
10 April 2014, 10:18 PM | #16 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: NYC
Watch: Patek / AP / Rolex
Posts: 794
|
Quote:
BZ |
|
14 April 2014, 01:08 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Missouri
Watch: Bark DD
Posts: 400
|
Here are some pics of my friends fat lady, because who doesn't like pics.
BTW, does anybody know if there is a weight difference or comfort difference between the two? Thx. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
14 April 2014, 01:12 PM | #18 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 SUBMARINER Patron
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Far East
Watch: Golden Tuna
Posts: 28,741
|
16710 for me.
|
14 April 2014, 02:48 PM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Andreas
Location: Margaritaville
Watch: Smurf
Posts: 19,879
|
Fat lady, nothing beats that fatter case and Coke bezel.
__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. |
14 April 2014, 03:53 PM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 604
|
Between the two you should get that fat lady... Better investment. Now I'm no diver or cave explorer executive scientist etc. But I can assure you there has never been a better
Piece of equipment built for its intended purpose than 16760 or 16710 |
Tags |
16710 , 16760 , gmt ii |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.