Introducing

[Chrispare]

Congrats !

[wallasey runner]

Originally Posted by mdw3

No, no, no! 16808 and 1680/8 are NOT the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. The model posted on this thread is a ref. 16808, which is described as 18K gold Submariner with SAPPHIRE crystal, water resistant to 1000ft. The model illustrated in the Rolex brochure shown on this thread is indeed a ref. 1680/8 (older model), which is correctly described as 18K gold Submariner with PLASTIC crystal, water resistant to 660ft. Got it? Good.

Michael

You mean like the 1680 morphed into the 16800 and the 1665 morphed into the 16660 - I get it !!!

[omitohud]

Originally Posted by wallasey runner

You mean like the 1680 morphed into the 16800 and the 1665 morphed into the 16660 - I get it !!!

My friend if u look at the brochure u provided, it clearly shows 1680/8. Its 4 digits reference from the 70's before switching to 5 digits. The /8 is added to represent gold. 1680/8 is not equal to 16808. I bet OP's stamp shows 16808, as opposed to 1680 on the earlier version. Here is mine, notice the 660ft 200m n compare to OP's picture.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wallasey runner]

Originally Posted by omitohud

My friend if u look at the brochure u provided, it clearly shows 1680/8. Its 4 digits reference from the 70's before switching to 5 digits. The /8 is added to represent gold. 1680/8 is not equal to 16808. I bet OP's stamp shows 16808, as opposed to 1680 on the earlier version. Here is mine, notice the 660ft 200m n compare to OP's picture.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are saying eactly the same as mdw3 said below - i get it, the 1680/8 is the gold nipple sub with plexi glass - the 16808 is the later model with saphire crystal and different meter reading - exactly the same as when the transitional 16800 and 16660 replaced the earlier 1680 and 1665 - the saphire replaced the plexi glass and the depth ratings were increased - you my friend did not properly read my response.

[sea-dweller]

Congrats!

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by mdw3

Once again, not a 1680. 16808 is the correct reference for this model.

My bad. 1680/8 it is!

[mdw3]

Originally Posted by zapokee

My bad. 1680/8 it is!

Please re-read the post above. Not a 1680/8, but in fact a 16808.

Michael

[omitohud]

Originally Posted by wallasey runner

You are saying eactly the same as mdw3 said below - i get it, the 1680/8 is the gold nipple sub with plexi glass - the 16808 is the later model with saphire crystal and different meter reading - exactly the same as when the transitional 16800 and 16660 replaced the earlier 1680 and 1665 - the saphire replaced the plexi glass and the depth ratings were increased - you my friend did not properly read my response.

U r an expert. Bravo. 👏


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wallasey runner]

Originally Posted by omitohud

U r an expert. Bravo. 👏


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sadly no expert, but i did own a 1983 16800 and considered buying a 16660 from your neck of the woods HQ Milton in SF. So i do understand about the transitional changes introduced by Rolex in the early 80s and that the most desirable models are those that retain the tritium dials but have the new sapphire glass - the best of both worlds scenario. Clearly this doesn't apply as much to the 1680/8 and the 16808 as the dial didn't change to such a similar degree as the other models mentioned - apart from the depth rating. The plexi to sapphire was clearly the most obvious change.

In the end flipped everything and got a 1974 1665 DRSD - image attached, you showed me yours - so i'll show you mine.

As for the sarcasm - i'll leave that to the school yard where it belongs.

[Mr-R]

Very nice! Congrats!

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by mdw3

Please re-read the post above. Not a 1680/8, but in fact a 16808.

Nice watch. Not into the bickering, though. I'm out...

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by zapokee

Well played, Ken, though it's probably an exchange of well-intended views rather than an argument.

Stunning 1680, OP. Wear it in good health!

Originally Posted by zapokee

My bad. 1680/8 it is!

Originally Posted by zapokee

Nice watch. Not into the bickering, though. I'm out...

[Frogman4me]

Congrats

[seattleal]

Originally Posted by mdw3

no, no, no! 16808 and 1680/8 are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. The model posted on this thread is a ref. 16808, which is described as 18k gold submariner with sapphire crystal, water resistant to 1000ft. The model illustrated in the rolex brochure shown on this thread is indeed a ref. 1680/8 (older model), which is correctly described as 18k gold submariner with plastic crystal, water resistant to 660ft. Got it? Good.

Michael

+1 It's a 16808!

[mluther]

OMG - funny thread