ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
9 July 2008, 09:53 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: london
Watch: Sub LV, GMTC
Posts: 5
|
GMT IIC SS vs Submariner LV
Which of the two watches do you prefer? There isn’t much difference when it comes to the price. UK AD prices are GMT £3600. LV £3280. You get more watch with the GMT - clasp, blue hairspring, wider bezel. LV – hollow links. It may just come down to the modern vs. the classic look. The LV would probably be the more recognisable Rolex. Interested in what TRF think…
|
9 July 2008, 10:27 PM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Vince
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Watch: Rolex Sub & GMTIIC
Posts: 626
|
I have those two watches, sort of .....
I have those two watches, except my GMTIIC is two tone. I would say that if you get in the water a lot the Sub would be the choice but if you travel a lot the GMT is the one to go with and even if you are just swimming and staying in shallow water the GMT is probably a better choice. The other consideration is that they may not be making that case design on the Sub LV in a couple of years so if you like that look it might be the way to go.
|
9 July 2008, 10:34 PM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 266
|
I still haven't warmed up to the super case as of yet, so I would probably go with the classic case over the new.
__________________
Rolex: 16600 | 116400 V Panerai: Fiddy | 232 Sinn : U1 |
9 July 2008, 10:37 PM | #4 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sardinia,Italy
Posts: 46
|
God LV is beautiful....
|
9 July 2008, 10:58 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 36
|
I have seen both up close and the GMT is quite bright and it catches the eye for sure. I have the LV and if they were both the same price I would probably still chose the LV as it is less showy.
|
10 July 2008, 09:27 AM | #6 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,571
|
Quote:
|
|
9 July 2008, 11:09 PM | #7 |
Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London
Posts: 123
|
I've got the GMT IIc and its a stunning watch. To be honest really still like the LV but if i had a choice, which i did, i would definately go for the GMT IIc. The extra £400 gives seemingly alot more. The GMT can track 3 times zones, plus has the new case, bracelet and ceremic bezel
On the grapevine, i hear theres a new subby on the horizon. I would get the GMT IIc now, then keep some cash aside for the new subby. Thats what im doing anyway. |
10 July 2008, 12:16 AM | #8 |
1,000,000th PostMember
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 14,048
|
It's obvious
__________________
GMT - Master II C - 116710 LN |
10 July 2008, 01:13 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North A
Watch: 16710
Posts: 254
|
gmt2c for me and then save up again for a sub lv
|
10 July 2008, 01:53 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Bryan
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Watch: Sub LV
Posts: 1,165
|
GMT2c is a great feeling and solid watch and if Rolex ever Pepsi's the thing I will be ready to buy, however the SUB LV is still the classic case that screams Rolex so I prefer the LV so I got one. Remember it does not matter what we think try both on and just get the one that talks to yea.
__________________
Sub LV |
10 July 2008, 02:20 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Simon
Location: UK
Watch: OP and daytona
Posts: 1,783
|
GMT IIc, all the way, a lot more for the buck.
|
10 July 2008, 03:53 AM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex
Posts: 18,421
|
...LV...
NO DOUBT!!! |
10 July 2008, 04:01 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2008
Real Name: Eric
Location: So. California
Watch: Submariner
Posts: 382
|
|
10 July 2008, 08:58 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: so cali
Posts: 1,253
|
I have the GMTc and I would go with the C since it has all the updates. Trust me you'll love the watch. So if you like classic Rolexes..go with the LV nothing more classic. But if you like modern watches....GMTc is the choice. I do love the LV tho and am thinking about getting one sooner or later, i just like the GMTc more plus I like modern watches.
|
10 July 2008, 09:06 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
|
I own the GMT II C and i tried on the LV on tuesday. There is no contest in my opinion the GMT wins by a mile. The ceramic bezel, polished centre links another time zone- it is much nicer and much more of a watch, in my humble opinion, but the LV is still a fantastic watch
__________________
"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." Member No.# 11795 |
10 July 2008, 09:08 AM | #16 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: StL
Posts: 450
|
IIC
|
10 July 2008, 09:12 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Not a lot I can add to whats already been said. Vince makes a great point about the difference in case design. Don't overlook the ability to swap the LV insert should you want a bit of a different look.
I decided this was the way to go. |
10 July 2008, 10:17 AM | #18 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: san francisco
Watch: gmt2c pam372
Posts: 842
|
Quote:
The LV has the greater depth rating over the GMT IIc. If that matters to you, get the LV |
|
10 July 2008, 10:23 AM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 831
|
it is hard to beat a submariner...however not too sure about one with green bezel.
Have try the GMT II C, it felt quite nice, like the bracelet and clasp much more than any of the submariner family. Since already have a SS subdate I would go with the GMT II C |
10 July 2008, 10:25 AM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northeast
Posts: 943
|
LV all the way
__________________
16610LV 16200 116600 116500 |
10 July 2008, 06:49 PM | #21 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Mike
Location: NW England
Posts: 791
|
Hi,
I have the GMT II C also. Just a point about the depth rating......The GMT II C has the triplock crown like the LV and the SD so I would think that it would be at least as capable as the Sub in that department. I also believe that the new sub will use the same case as the GMT. Regards Mike. |
10 July 2008, 07:02 PM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North A
Watch: 16710
Posts: 254
|
when some of the forummers suggested the LV since it is classic - they were referring to the case right? not the bezel colour?
cause i do have some friends who find the LV a bit gaudy due to the colour....i thought so as well, in the beginning... but now am getting used to it and am beginning to acquire the taste for it, so to speak i dont mind having one!!! |
14 July 2008, 05:33 AM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: John
Location: Nashville, TN
Watch: S/S GMT Master IIc
Posts: 1,210
|
I was considering the Sub w/date before my AD introduced me to the IIc. I tried on the IIc and the rest is history. I LOVE the watch and think you will to. However, it's personal preference and you can't go wrong with either one. My next watch will be a Sub version of some sort (not sure if I want the date or no date).
Good luck and let us know what you decide. John
__________________
|
14 July 2008, 02:11 PM | #24 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Real Name: Steve
Location: SF BAY AREA CA
Watch: 16710 Coke
Posts: 3,047
|
would have to say.......IIc!!!!
__________________
Rolex Blue TT Submariner (95) Rolex SS GMT IIc (08) Rolex GMT II 16710 COKE (08 for me..) Rolex Explorer II Blk (91) Breitling SuperOcean Steelfish (07) Panerai 104 & 177ti ( 04/03) |
10 July 2008, 10:34 AM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: so cali
Posts: 1,253
|
One other thing....I use to hate how the numbers looked on the bezels of all GMTs, but the new ceramic is really nice ..you get used to it.
|
14 July 2008, 01:05 AM | #26 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Real Name: Barry
Location: Acworth, GA USA
Posts: 622
|
I say focus on the features of each watch.
If you time things like I do, the LV is the obvious choice. If you need to monitor 2 times zones, then get the GMT. |
14 July 2008, 02:19 PM | #27 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sierra Navada CA.
Posts: 114
|
If it’s just a SS GMTIIc I would have to go with the LV. IF it’s a TT, the GMT IIc. I still think that it’s the handsomest watch I have ever laid eyes on!!!
|
14 July 2008, 08:59 PM | #28 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Real Name: Robb
Location: USA
Watch: BLNR
Posts: 4,939
|
Here are some side by sides.... You decide!!
__________________
126610LN l 166610LV l 126619LB l 116710BLNR l 126710BLRO l 126720VTNR l 126718GRNR l 116500 white l 116500 black l 116508 john mayer l 116519LN l 116503 white l 126655 l 226627 Ti Master l 116518LN |
10 July 2008, 11:13 AM | #29 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: london
Watch: Sub LV, GMTC
Posts: 5
|
These are all very interesting opinions when it comes to choosing a model. Some people say which feature would be used is the watch to go for. But in all honesty I wonder how many Rolex owners actually use their watches features on a regular basis! Deep-sea diving, Daytona’s stopwatch? The two time zones may well be the most common.
|
10 July 2008, 02:10 PM | #30 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Real Name: BK
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 242
|
My vote would be for the GMT IIc. Love the feel of the bracelet, plus the new subs are coming out in the next 6 months. The LV would be cool if it were a "anniversary model" (released back 4 years ago). Just my opinion.
BK |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.