GMT PEPSI new-126710 v. old-1675 Comparison and Vote Now

[RRGHOST1]

Newer version for me every time. I always thought my older Pepsi was too small.

[lhanddds]

As modern Rolex go, the new GMT is great. I happen to prefer vintage if a choice need to be made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chope Man]

Either one is a good choice.

I voted for the 1675. Less bulky, with the charm of the vintage.

I prefer the 4 digit (or 5, the same...) design of the case and lugs over the 6 digit design.

[1William]

I can appreciate the older version but the newer version would be my choice.

[HogwldFLTR]

126710, everything works. I love a working lume over a patina'd one. Better bracelet too! I do like the acrylic crystals however.

[Onequik135i]

That’s a tough choice between the 2, I love the robust newer 6 digit casings & modern bracelet design & especially the newer lume. But the 4 digit classic looks just as good in those pics.

[mailman]

I'd choose the 126710 all day long. It's a prefect modern take on a classic watch.

Once again Steve-O I'm very happy for you bro

[brandrea]

Steve, if you had to choose one which would it be?

Allow me to take the runner up off your hands

[jfoord27]

Aren't the older ones a bit tinney compared to the modern as the tech wasn't as advanced as it is now?

[lee fowler]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Steve, if you had to choose one which would it be?

Allow me to take the runner up off your hands

[ronricks]

One is an actual tool watch the other is essentially jewelry.

Would be interesting to see the weight differences between the two.

[fskywalker]

From those two 126710


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[travisb]

Dial and crystal of the 1675. Everything else to the 126710.
The modern for best overall for me.

[HL65]

Originally Posted by ronricks

One is an actual tool watch the other is essentially jewelry.

Would be interesting to see the weight differences between the two.

I don’t see how a 1675 does a better job for providing a professional pilot with multiple time zones than a 126710 does? After all that was the tool that Rolex designed the GMT for. So regardless if one likes a 4,5 or 6 digit one better they are all designed to perform and do the same exact thing.

PS I also don't think 99% of people who buy watches buy them for their intended purpose. Most Sub and SD owners aren't divers. Most GMT owners aren't pilots. Most Daytona owners aren't race car drivers. Most Milgauss owners aren't scientists. Most YM owners aren't boaters. Most Exp owners aren't explorers. Etc. Etc.

[fdm79]

Originally Posted by HL65

126710 for me is the perfect modern Rolex and for me it's a tough one to beat. Sure I have had my share of 1675's and 16750's etc but this one is perfect in every way! The new jubilee blows the old jubilee away and for me that alone makes it a more desirable watch. Of course the 4 vs 5 vs 6 digit debate will go on forever and each will have it's set of die hards!

Modern for me as well

[Cru Jones]

This really isn’t an “either or” for me... they could easily exist together in a collection.

If push came to shove, the new one, just because I would feel more comfortable wearing it everyday and not thinking about it. Plus, the bracelet.

I have to say, all this love for the modern Pepsi has got me dreaming more and more about this one.... I still think the black Daytona C remains my number one “maybe attainable grail”, but that could change.

[101031-28]

Even though I have a deep appreciation for the 1675, my vote goes to the 126710.

[037]

I love the 1675 and 16750 but voted modern purely due to practicality in daily wear. I can bang around a new watch without fear where vintage makes that more difficult.

Both would be the ideal answer.

[kneedeep]

My vote goes to the 216710.

[AndrewMayhem]

Originally Posted by sensui

The 126720 is not bad...but that 1675 is a work of art. No comparison for me....everything looks better on the 1675 from all angles.

100% This. The bezel font on the new version is really off putting to me, as is the bulkier size, the lack of open sixes and nines (a small but beautiful detail) and the WG surrounds. A 1675 or 16750 is my grail and hopefully one day I’ll attain one. If given the modern one for free, I’d sell it and put that toward a vintage example.

[voltc]

I would go with the vintage, anytime any day.

[SLS]

My vote would is for the 1675 as well.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by jfoord27

Aren't the older ones a bit tinney compared to the modern as the tech wasn't as advanced as it is now?

Tinny or tiny?

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by HL65

I don’t see how a 1675 does a better job for providing a professional pilot with multiple time zones than a 126710 does? After all that was the tool that Rolex designed the GMT for. So regardless if one likes a 4,5 or 6 digit one better they are all designed to perform and do the same exact thing.

PS I also don't think 99% of people who buy watches buy them for their intended purpose. Most Sub and SD owners aren't divers. Most GMT owners aren't pilots. Most Daytona owners aren't race car drivers. Most Milgauss owners aren't scientists. Most YM owners aren't boaters. Most Exp owners aren't explorers. Etc. Etc.

All true.

I'm thinking, the majority of Cellini 'moonphase' owners aren't astronomers either.

[FTX I]

There's no option to vote both so I was forced to choose one and I voted 1675.

[subtona]

They are both exquisite.

Are they each described as 40mm? Looks like someone is taking liberties with the specifications.

I generally prefer anything with lugholes but the lack of a quickset date (?) is a drag to me and the older jubilee never really appealed to me construction wise.

1675 is stunning with its perfect patina, desirable red and blue and matte dial and lack of bling around the hour plots and of course the tremendously practical lugholes.

The 126710 Pepsi brings a new movement with increased power reserve and a quickset date these things are significant improvements for me.

126710 also has a shiny ceramic bezel, that has weird colors and is darn expensive if replacement is needed... and it doesn’t have lugholes

Given the choice I will admire the 1675 from afar
I’ll take the 126710.


As far as anyone who believes this is less of a tool watch, I couldn’t disagree more, it is a more solid, stainless steel watch with an improved movement, triple sealed crown and more robust bracelet. The new gmt, like the old, can be put on the day you purchase it and find no excuse to be removed for the rest of the owners days (routine service aside). As completely capable as it’s predecessor.

As I said both amazing, unique and distinctive watches.
if I had a service person I could trust with a vintage watch I might have a different opinion but alas I do not.

[Vishy26]

Voted for 1675 due to the dial

[The Libertine]

Originally Posted by Soarer

The older version and the 16710 gets my full vote, anytime and everytime!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Absolutely. In fact, seeing the two watches side-by-side makes me even more resolute in my decision.

[AndrewMayhem]

I don’t understand the argument that the modern GMT is better because it’s more technologically advanced. By this logic, a modern G Shock trumps both of these. It is more accurate and indestructible, and it can tell the time in every time zone, not just two. The 1675, designed by hand, on a sketch pad, during the heyday of the brand, is a work of craftsmanship and beauty that speaks to a very specific era - the beginning of the jet age. Somehow these watches were made in such a special way that they grow to look even better over time, not worse. The modern GMT, designed on a computer, lacks the soul and inspiration of the original. It will never patinate. Sure, it’s bigger and blingier, but seeing them side by side just reassures me that less is usually more.

[The Libertine]

Originally Posted by AndrewMayhem

I don’t understand the argument that the modern GMT is better because it’s more technologically advanced. By this logic, a modern G Shock trumps both of these. It is more accurate and indestructible, and it can tell the time in every time zone, not just two. The 1675, designed by hand, on a sketch pad, during the heyday of the brand, is a work of craftsmanship and beauty that speaks to a very specific era - the beginning of the jet age. Somehow these watches were made in such a special way that they grow to look even better over time, not worse. The modern GMT, designed on a computer, lacks the soul and inspiration of the original. It will never patinate. Sure, it’s bigger and blingier, but seeing them side by side just reassures me that less is usually more.

Amen to that.