BLNR vs Daytona 116520?

[m9ramen]

Ignoring the obvious price difference, which is a more versatile watch for a first time Rolex owner?

[Steve36Efc]

Not sure about versatility, but my preference is the GMT Blnr.
I was never a fan of the Daytona until the ceramic bezel came on the scene. I do feel they could both be worn on any occasion I’m just not a fan of the older Daytona’s.

[2th_doc]

Cant go wrong either way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[s14roller]

I'd say Daytona would go a bit easier in most situations.

[sutats]

The 116710BLNR would definitely be more versatile in this case as it also has a date and second time zone function and is certainly not as conspicuous as the 116520. The 116520 is a flashy watch as it's almost entirely polished all around.

[markseattle]

Versatile? No question in my mind it's the BLNR. A watch that you should be able to wear everyday and in most situations. Date, GMT, looks like a diver at a glance.


Mark

[MaverickMP]

I think they’re equal in versatility. Go for the one you like best. BLNR has a date where Daytona does not. If that matters to you. Would be reallly hard for me to decide but I’d prob go BLNR and save for the new daytonaC

[AK797]

I'd just give it to a ceramic bezel model, if it came on glidelock with brushed PCLs it would be very versatile and durable.

[watchwatcher]

The GMT almost always wins for me in any question about versatility. Now...is it better than a Daytona? No, both are iconic steel watches, IMO.

To this point: I was at our local "Scare Fest" the other day, and one the guys that has played Jason in the Friday the 13th movies was wearing a BLNR. Looked spectacular in the flesh. When I complimented him on it, he was a little taken aback, but asked what I was wearing...just happened to have my Daytona on. It was a nice WIS moment. Did one watch look better or more versatile? No...just two great watches worn by a semi-famous guy and another guy that just likes watches.

[m9ramen]

Thanks for all the inputs!

[Bruins7]

both iconic and both my favorite rolexes. get both!

[F308gt4]

My preference would be for the BLNR. Very nice as your only Rolex, and it’s my only Rolex.

I hate to say this (please don’t shoot me), but the Daytona does not sing to me. If I really wanted an iconic chronograph, I’d pick the Omega Speedmaster over the Daytona. It the only Omega I’d pick over a Rolex.

[sensui]

Definitely the gmt as the more versatile watch.

[Mystro]

Blnr.

[Seaswirl]

As a one and only, the BLNR. Otherwise, Daytona.

[RichM]

The GMT gets my vote.

[chazadams]

In this case, BLNR without a doubt for me.

[KrismanX]

116520 as my one-and-only daily driver for the last 3 years.

Hardly anyone notices it. It has no date. Those are the only things I can say that are not purely praising the watch.

A GMT-II has more obvious "OoO it's a Rolex" visual cues like the bezel and Cyclops that get noticed more easily, and catches attentions thusly. It has a date and 24-hr hand.

A complication-based decision would easily put the GMT ahead; unless you're Dr. Tom. Cliché answer would be to try them both on if you get the chance. It's the only way to know for sure what will do the job.

After 3 years on the wrist, I've got no complaints about my watch. This thing drove up Pikes Peak, jet skied the Florida Keys, slopped around the French Quarter, hiked the Rockies, hit the beaches, and desk dives daily. Suits-Shorts. Water-Dirt. I LOVE MY '520.

Happy Hunting

[ferrissteve11]

My vote goes for BLNR....never cared for the Daytona.

[roadie1]

Good to hear about a 520 as a daily! How’s she holding up cosmetically? Post some pics!

Originally Posted by KrismanX

116520 as my one-and-only daily driver for the last 3 years.

Hardly anyone notices it. It has no date. Those are the only things I can say that are not purely praising the watch.

A GMT-II has more obvious "OoO it's a Rolex" visual cues like the bezel and Cyclops that get noticed more easily, and catches attentions thusly. It has a date and 24-hr hand.

A complication-based decision would easily put the GMT ahead; unless you're Dr. Tom. Cliché answer would be to try them both on if you get the chance. It's the only way to know for sure what will do the job.

After 3 years on the wrist, I've got no complaints about my watch. This thing drove up Pikes Peak, jet skied the Florida Keys, slopped around the French Quarter, hiked the Rockies, hit the beaches, and desk dives daily. Suits-Shorts. Water-Dirt. I LOVE MY '520.

Happy Hunting

[m9ramen]

I ended up picking up a BLNR!!! (thanks dkoi)

[Tangier11]

Chalk me up GMT

[Seaswirl]

Congrats OP. You picked up a really great watch.

[underdog33]

BLNR. I love the Daytona Ceramic but the BLNR is more versatile. The BLNR would be even more versatile if it had brushed links/bracelet.

[ScottD]

Originally Posted by m9ramen

I ended up picking up a BLNR!!! (thanks dkoi)

Congratulations. You'll enjoy it.

[JRT]

GMT (with a date) is more versatile than Chronograph (without a date).

[Seaswirl]

Originally Posted by JRT

GMT (with a date) is more versatile than Chronograph (without a date).

1. OP already made his pick;
2. Why is a Date more versatile or did you mean practical?

[MCO1]

Good call on picking the GMT as your first!

[danbrew]

Hands down, BLNR. Having said that, I'm on the prowl for a ceramic Daytona. lol, i know, i know, just like everybody else.

[rodneygt3]

Having both in the Daytona & BLNR -- BLNR all the way for versatility. However, when I am at the race track I make sure to bring the Daytona.