Sell AP 15703 for PP 5167?

[gmt3]

I have my AP 15703 for a good 5 or so years and i’m thinking of selling it to replace with a 5167. I think i’m not feeling the AP love anymore (i also sold my AP 15400 blue last year and AP ROO 26170ST last last year). Its been my trusted beater for so long so my hesitation is, will the 5167 be as good a daily watch as the 15703? Or should i just keep it for diversity? As per my other watches, i have a 5711 blue, Rolex Sub “Hulk” (birthyear of my son), a “Pepsi”, a BLNR “Batman”, and a Cartier Santos XL. Also, i’ve done some google search and can’t find a side-by-side pic of both 15703 and 5167. I haven’t seen a 5167 in the metal and would like to get an idea with its size and thickness compared to the 15703, so if anyone here has both, pics will be much appreciated. Thanks in advance!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[yoast]

I have owned both. Sold the 5167 within a month as it felt flimsy, boring and underwhelming to me. I'd say if you are used to the chunky diver, you will have a hard time adjusting to the 5167, so definitely try it on first.
I had to sell my diver because I wear my watches on my right hand wrist and the 2nd crown was digging into my ulna bone which became hurtful after a while. If it wasn't for this, i'd still own the diver.
Good luck

[2Redbulls]

I have a 15710 and a 5164 that I can take a side by side for you. The only caveat is that the 5164 is thicker (and .8 wider) then the 5167 so it's not a real apples to apples.

Because the 5167 is super thin the 40mm size seems smaller. I personally liked my 5167 very much. I think it's a great daily. That being said, it is extremely light which makes it VERY comfortable but some will be underwhelmed because it lacks heft. I find the dial on the 5167 beautiful and the watch was super accurate which is more then I can say for most of my AP's. All your other watches will have more mass, so the 5167 will feel like a feather and that may either be great or a turnoff.

Here's an old pic of my 5167 before I had the AP Diver.

[Hairdude1]

Originally Posted by 2Redbulls

I have a 15710 and a 5164 that I can take a side by side for you. The only caveat is that the 5164 is thicker (and .8 wider) then the 5167 so it's not a real apples to apples.

Because the 5167 is super thin the 40mm size seems smaller. I personally liked my 5167 very much. I think it's a great daily. That being said, it is extremely light which makes it VERY comfortable but some will be underwhelmed because it lacks heft. I find the dial on the 5167 beautiful and the watch was super accurate which is more then I can say for most of my AP's. All your other watches will have more mass, so the 5167 will feel like a feather and that may either be great or a turnoff.

Here's an old pic of my 5167 before I had the AP Diver.

Good pic

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by 2Redbulls

I have a 15710 and a 5164 that I can take a side by side for you. The only caveat is that the 5164 is thicker (and .8 wider) then the 5167 so it's not a real apples to apples.

Because the 5167 is super thin the 40mm size seems smaller. I personally liked my 5167 very much. I think it's a great daily. That being said, it is extremely light which makes it VERY comfortable but some will be underwhelmed because it lacks heft. I find the dial on the 5167 beautiful and the watch was super accurate which is more then I can say for most of my AP's. All your other watches will have more mass, so the 5167 will feel like a feather and that may either be great or a turnoff.

Here's an old pic of my 5167 before I had the AP Diver.

Perfect assessment as someone who has owned both

[wisguy]

I kinda did, did not sell the Diver to fund the Aquanaut but I owned the Diver at one point in time and I own the Aqunaut today.

Totally different watch, much different in size and feel. My taste has evolved from big and flashy to more smallish and under the radar.

I would do it again, just make sure you try it on before commiting.

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by yoast

I have owned both. Sold the 5167 within a month as it felt flimsy, boring and underwhelming to me. I'd say if you are used to the chunky diver, you will have a hard time adjusting to the 5167, so definitely try it on first.

Thanks for your reply. Actually, this is probably the reason why i’m attracted to the 5167. I guess i’ve gotten tired to “chunky” or big watches (whether its size dimensions -used to own 47mm Panerai 127 and 48mm IWC Big Pilot, or thickness -used to have Rolex Deepsea and AP Panda, both heavyweights! ). I just don’t know if its too delicate to wear daily, compared to the 15703.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by 2Redbulls

I have a 15710 and a 5164 that I can take a side by side for you. The only caveat is that the 5164 is thicker (and .8 wider) then the 5167 so it's not a real apples to apples.

Because the 5167 is super thin the 40mm size seems smaller. I personally liked my 5167 very much. I think it's a great daily. That being said, it is extremely light which makes it VERY comfortable but some will be underwhelmed because it lacks heft. I find the dial on the 5167 beautiful and the watch was super accurate which is more then I can say for most of my AP's. All your other watches will have more mass, so the 5167 will feel like a feather and that may either be great or a turnoff.

Here's an old pic of my 5167 before I had the AP Diver.

Thanks for your reply. I think the 5164 is a better comparison with the 15703 with regards to size, thickness & weight. Yes sir, if its not too much trouble, if you can take a pic of your 15710 and 5164 side-by-side.

My taste in watches has evolved overtime and nowadays i’m leaning towards sizes 40 & 41, that has thinner cases. I’m actually thinking of replacing the BLNR for the new Datejust 41 126344 blue stick dial with jubilee bracelet (i’m getting old). One watch at a time. Hehe. Thanks again!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by wisguy

My taste has evolved from big and flashy to more smallish and under the radar.

Exactly how mine has too!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2Redbulls]

Originally Posted by gmt3

Thanks for your reply. I think the 5164 is a better comparison with the 15703 with regards to size, thickness & weight. Yes sir, if its not too much trouble, if you can take a pic of your 15710 and 5164 side-by-side.

My taste in watches has evolved overtime and nowadays i’m leaning towards sizes 40 & 41, that has thinner cases. I’m actually thinking of replacing the BLNR for the new Datejust 41 126344 blue stick dial with jubilee bracelet (i’m getting old). One watch at a time. Hehe. Thanks again!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll post a pic tomorrow morning for you.

[traf]

Not sure this helps but I’ve had a deepsea and now have 5167.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AK797]

It wears very similar to your 5711 so you should know how much thinner and smaller it wears already. I'd probably keep the AP for diversity but if you're not feeling it any more then the 67 or ideally 64, wears a bit bigger, is a great choice.

[2Redbulls]

Here are some pics comparing the AP ROO Diver, Patek 5164 and FP Journe CB. The reason why I included the CB is because the height of the case is the same as the 5167. So you get a better sense of what a difference an 8mm height is compared to the others.













Looking at the pictures you might get the impression of how significant the difference will be between the 15710 Diver and a 5167 based on the height of that FPJ CB being the same height. It's pretty dramatic. I took a bunch of pics and only posted a few but I think you get the gist.

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by traf

Not sure this helps but I’ve had a deepsea and now have 5167.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It does, thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by AK797

It wears very similar to your 5711 so you should know how much thinner and smaller it wears already. I'd probably keep the AP for diversity but if you're not feeling it any more then the 67 or ideally 64, wears a bit bigger, is a great choice.

Love the 64, thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by 2Redbulls

Here are some pics comparing the AP ROO Diver, Patek 5164 and FP Journe CB. The reason why I included the CB is because the height of the case is the same as the 5167. So you get a better sense of what a difference an 8mm height is compared to the others.



























Looking at the pictures you might get the impression of how significant the difference will be between the 15710 Diver and a 5167 based on the height of that FPJ CB being the same height. It's pretty dramatic. I took a bunch of pics and only posted a few but I think you get the gist.

Thanks so much! Wonderful pictures everyone! Wow! Your 5164 and 15710 already has huge size difference! What more a 5167?!? Now it got me thinking... Maybe a 64 would be a better choice for a daily... Hmmmm... (And the search goes on...)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2Redbulls]

Haha...good luck in your quest. I think the search is the best part.

[Karbo]

Im 5164
But this can help
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=581744

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by gmt3

Thanks so much! Wonderful pictures everyone! Wow! Your 5164 and 15710 already has huge size difference! What more a 5167?!? Now it got me thinking... Maybe a 64 would be a better choice for a daily... Hmmmm... (And the search goes on...)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

64 is an easier transition for sure than a 67. I also use to have a 15710. I prefer the 64 to it by a huge margin. It did take a bit to get use to wearing smaller watches, but now 42mm would be the largest watch i would ever buy. Ive had several 44 and 46mm in the past.

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by Karbo

Im 5164
But this can help
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=581744

Wow! 5164 won by a landslide! Haha! Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gmt3]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

64 is an easier transition for sure than a 67. I also use to have a 15710. I prefer the 64 to it by a huge margin. It did take a bit to get use to wearing smaller watches, but now 42mm would be the largest watch i would ever buy. Ive had several 44 and 46mm in the past.

I guess you’re right. I like the simplicity of the 67 but it maybe is too small (and too delicate) for a daily beater? To be honest, i’ve never considered the 64 before (maybe i’m too infatuated with the 67) but i guess its time to reconsider....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk