16610 – extra eyes required, please

[boothus]

Hello,

I'm new to this forum.
On my hunt for a 16610 I came across this watch located in Germany. I'm not fussed about the Bracelet not being original as I plan to wear it on a Nato (the dealer has made it very clear in the description that it's aftermarket) but having only ever handled two submariners, I'm struggling to tell if this looks overpolished or not.

I'm traveling to Berlin next week, so would be able to take a look in person but – to be honest – I'm not sure how much more I'd be able to tell vs. looking at the pictures provided.

Might be worth pointing out that another reason why I'm looking at this particular watch also is that it's a 1987, which is my year of birth.

I would post a link but unfortunately I can't since I've only just joined – 3 pictures attache though.

I know this isn't something easily judged from a few pictures but if anyone can spot any obvious signs of a poor polishing job or overpolishing I'd be keen to get your thoughts.


Many thanks,
Ben

[Onikage]

The transitional solid endlink and lughole combo shouldn't have an open 6 datewheel. Also mismatched lume. Something's amiss buddy. Endlink fitment is rough too... Possibly aftermarket bracelet.. Just keep looking!
*you did say aftermarket bracelet sorry.

[Onequik135i]

Yes, that open ended 6 did draw a red flag to me too regarding it’s a 16610. I would pass on it.

[indy16zo6]

The date “6” looks wrong for sure. I’d put the brakes on right there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[boothus]

Thank you all, that's pretty resounding feedback – will give it a miss.
Ben

[marcellomatt5]

SEL bracelet, plus swiss T<25 dial, plus open 6 DW... Frankenstein...

[boothus]

Originally Posted by marcellomatt5

SEL bracelet, plus swiss T<25 dial, plus open 6 DW... Frankenstein...

hmm, all of the 1987 models I've seen so far had a swiss T<25 on the dial – are you sure that's a mismatch? I've seen others with just a 'swiss' or a 'swiss made' but not from 1987

Edit: on closer inspection of another 1987 16610 I've also found that the open 6's and 9's appear to be a feature. Again, I can't post a link but listing number 70HTM3 on chrono24 references "Hands are tritium and do NOT luminate. Original date disk with open 6’s and 9’s." this is from a verified, well reviewed dealer in the US.

[faimag]

For a 1987, which is the first year of production of 16610, and until about 1999, T<25 is correct. Open 6/9 datewheel is also correct for the first few years of 16610.

Seems to have a service insert (pointy rather than flat four). May also have a service dial and hands as there is no patina at all. (uniform color). All these during a service before 1998!

Case is polished (no bevels/chamfers) but still acceptable.

I won’t comment on the aftermarket bracelet.

[Dsmith1974]

Originally Posted by faimag

For a 1987, which is the first year of production of 16610, T<25 is correct. Open 6/9 datewheel is also correct for the first few years of 16610.

I think he meant that T<25 was a mismatch with SEL (not mismatched with the date of manufacture).

[faimag]

Yes but SEL is irrelevant here as the bracelet is not original. The T<25 is the marking on the dial (tritium based lume). The original bracelet on these is a 93150 (no solid endlinks.)

[marcellomatt5]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

I think he meant that T<25 was a mismatch with SEL (not mismatched with the date of manufacture).

This. And you must correct me, but the 1987 subs don't have the step in the case to accommodate a SEL.

[boothus]

Originally Posted by faimag

For a 1987, which is the first year of production of 16610, and until about 1999, T<25 is correct. Open 6/9 datewheel is also correct for the first few years of 16610.

Seems to have a service insert (pointy rather than flat four). May also have a service dial and hands as there is no patina at all. (uniform color). All these during a service before 1998!

Case is polished (no bevels/chamfers) but still acceptable.

I won’t comment on the aftermarket bracelet.

Very interesting observations. How can you tell that replacement parts were done as part of a service before 1998? Purely from the service parts used?

Only sounds half bad altogether then... ignoring the bracelet that is.

[sillo]

Originally Posted by boothus

Very interesting observations. How can you tell that replacement parts were done as part of a service before 1998? Purely from the service parts used?

Only sounds half bad altogether then... ignoring the bracelet that is.

If it was serviced after ~1998 the replacement parts would be luminova and marked either SWISS or SWISS MADE at 6 on the dial.

Also another tip when looking, always ask for natural light photos. These white background photos are garbage and make it hard to see some of the finer details. Probably why dealers love to use them.

[sillo]

Originally Posted by faimag

Seems to have a service insert (pointy rather than flat four). May also have a service dial and hands as there is no patina at all. (uniform color). All these during a service before 1998!

I don't actually think that's a service insert. That style 4 was used during the 80's and the true pointed 4s from the 2000's are much pointier.

Here's the insert from my 16800 with a similar font. Also the earliest 16610s on HQ Milton's archive show the same font on the 4.



Compared to the pointed 4 on my F serial 16600



And just because here’s the flat 4 from my U serial 14060

[sillo]

double

[boothus]

Originally Posted by marcellomatt5

This. And you must correct me, but the 1987 subs don't have the step in the case to accommodate a SEL.

Couldn't it just be that this looks off because of the aftermarket bracelet that's on it?

[boothus]

Originally Posted by sillo38

If it was serviced after ~1998 the replacement parts would be luminova and marked either SWISS or SWISS MADE at 6 on the dial.

Also another tip when looking, always ask for natural light photos. These white background photos are garbage and make it hard to see some of the finer details. Probably why dealers love to use them.

Thanks, that's good to know. I'll drop them a line to see if I can get some natural light pictures... sounds like it's not as 'off' as originally assumed.

Ben

[sillo]

Originally Posted by boothus

sounds like it's not as 'off' as originally assumed.

Ben

If you remove the bracelet from the equation I think it's correct. I'm not an expert though.

[marcellomatt5]

Originally Posted by boothus

Couldn't it just be that this looks off because of the aftermarket bracelet that's on it?

I believe if that were the case the spring bars wouldn't match with the holes

[sillo]

Originally Posted by marcellomatt5

I believe if that were the case the spring bars wouldn't match with the holes

Just need different size spring bars, and anything is possible with an aftermarket part.

I think the bracelet should be removed from determining anything with this watch.

[faimag]

Originally Posted by sillo38

I don't actually think that's a service insert. That style 4 was used during the 80's and the true pointed 4s from the 2000's are much pointier.

Here's the insert from my 16800 with a similar font. Also the earliest 16610s on HQ Milton's archive show the same font on the 4.

Compared to the pointed 4 on my F serial 16600

And just because here’s the flat 4 from my U serial 14060

You are most likely right!

So it seems that bracelet aside, it's actually quite okay. Just a bit polished but then again, how many ~30 year-old watches aren't...

[boothus]

I have a quick follow-up question. I've been studying a fair few 16610 and 14060s recently – mostly from the late 80s into the mid 90s. Why is it that some seem to have a really matte looking bezel insert and others have an almost glossy finish to them (not glossy like the new ceramic bezel inserts but certainly not properly matte). is it just that they age differently and e.g. a shinier bezel insert would hint at a service replacement?
Thanks,
Ben

[boothus]

Hello, I have a quick follow up question: I've been studying quite a few 16610 and 14060s recently (mostly from the late 80s to mid 90s) and I've noticed that they often have quite a different finish on the bezel insert. Some are glossier, some matte, some sort of satin... what are they when new and does e.g. a glossier one on a older watch hint towards a service replacement?
Thanks,
Ben