Why are the numbers on the GMT so big?

[bluestreak]

I came to Rolex wanting a Pepsi, but in the end decided that it was too flashy for me and I looked at other models. When I thought about it though, the main reason I don’t like it is because the numbers on the bezel are too big (in my opinion). If the numbers were the same size as the numerals on the Sub, I think that would have been great. Any idea why they did that when they moved from 5 to 6 digit GMT? And for those that like it, would you like it as much on the submariner?

[Laostuh]

Having owned both sub and gmt still own the gmt, it honestly does not bother me. Fills out the bezel nicely and gives the watch good contrast.

[Roger Lococco]

Looks great to me.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PepsiBezel]

On the Sub, the numerals are thin, so the Cerachrom shines through and is the focus of the bezel.

On the GMT the numerals are large and bold, so the numerals shine and the cerachrom is secondary.

Not saying one is better than the other, but the cerachrom on a Sub really does stand out more than the GMT.

[bluestreak]

I want to make it clear I don’t think it’s bad, I just prefer the smaller numerals. I’m curious on why it changed.

[Stan Cooper]

I'm a fan of the big font on the ceramic bezel inserts. In fact, I fitted an aftermarket ceramic insert to my 16710. I still swap in the original anodized aluminum inserts about half the time.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

I came to Rolex wanting a Pepsi, but in the end decided that it was too flashy for me and I looked at other models. When I thought about it though, the main reason I don’t like it is because the numbers on the bezel are too big (in my opinion). If the numbers were the same size as the numerals on the Sub, I think that would have been great. Any idea why they did that when they moved from 5 to 6 digit GMT? And for those that like it, would you like it as much on the submariner?

I would prefer smaller numbers on my GMT bezel.
But it does make the watch look a bit more different than my Sub.
Otherwise, they look pretty much the same.

[noshame]

Funny enough, when I bought my 116610LN in 2017, there was an all black GMT in the display case. I asked my wife what she thought and she said the numbers were too big in the bezel. I agreed and chose the SubDate. No regrets.

A few years later I purchased a BLNR on jubilee. I still think the numerals are still slightly too big but I like how it differentiates itself from the Sub. Two similar watches but still very different.

[JRell]

I have never been a fan of the large numbers on the GMT in photos. I liked the blue on the BLNR so I wanted it. In person the numbers are not something that stands out to me. I do like the clean look of the sub better, but the numbers size are not a factor to me either way on the GMT.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

I came to Rolex wanting a Pepsi, but in the end decided that it was too flashy for me and I looked at other models. When I thought about it though, the main reason I don’t like it is because the numbers on the bezel are too big (in my opinion). If the numbers were the same size as the numerals on the Sub, I think that would have been great. Any idea why they did that when they moved from 5 to 6 digit GMT? And for those that like it, would you like it as much on the submariner?

The primary focus it seems on the 6 digit references was to increase wrist presence and the bling factor. I think Rolex knows well what they are doing and they are charging more for their watches and selling to folks who want the recognition that comes with what they are wearing and how much they spent. Subtlety and understated were associated with the 4/5 digit sport watch references, but those days are gone and those values no longer in vogue with a culture where people feel the need to stand out and be seen by others to truly feel they exist.

[steveclr]

Originally Posted by Chester01

The primary focus it seems on the 6 digit references was to increase wrist presence and the bling factor. I think Rolex knows well what they are doing and they are charging more for their watches and selling to folks who want the recognition that comes with what they are wearing and how much they spent. Subtlety and understated were associated with the 4/5 digit sport watch references, but those days are gone and those values no longer in vogue with a culture where people feel the need to stand out and be seen by others to truly feel they exist.

I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I sure hope that you are.

[John Sheridan]

Given the average wait time to acquire one I suspect most buyers eyes benefit from the larger size numerals.

[Watchsprings]

Originally Posted by John Sheridan

Given the average wait time to acquire one I suspect most buyers eyes benefit from the larger size numerals.

My eyes have gotten worse since I got on the list all those years ago! Still waiting….. me and the wait are getting old!

[Nova1]

Poor design in my opinion. Non cerachrome were perfect in text.

[George58]

Originally Posted by Nova1

Poor design in my opinion. Non cerachrome were perfect in text.

plus 1 it looks clownish and too flashy

[shedlock2000]

I’ve a feeling that they wanted to recapture the proportions of the 1675 bezel, which was wider than those on the 16700 and 16710. As a result, the numbers on the 1675 bezels were bigger than on the 16710 (especially on the fat-font bezel).

When Rolex upped the 5 digit to the maxi-case 6 digit, the dial, markers, and bezel sized all increased proportionally. This made the 116710 like a slightly bloated version of the 1675 but without some of the refinements. They kinda did it, but something of the grace was lost.

The 1675 is my favourite reference with the pot-less markers and matt dial, all it really needed was a 1mm size increase on the case and a larger crown.

(Middle two photos not mine; top and bottom, mine).







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chambers]

Originally Posted by Nova1

Poor design in my opinion. Non cerachrome were perfect in text.

I agree

[Harry-57]

They are made like that so I can read them easily.

[S.Explorer]

I like the GMT design. Bezel font was probably done to further differentiate from the Submariner and for legibility.

[HogwldFLTR]

In general, this type of watch choice falls into the hype category, imho. "I would buy a GMT if the numbers weren't so flashy." Personally, I'd buy a GMT if I needed the functionality that it provided. If I truly needed the function then it would matter little the size of the bezel engraving. Buying just because others have it makes little sense to me. I won't own a GMT due to not having a need for the function. A Sub on the other hand, I can use.

[4 Aussies]

Legibility is a good thing. The numbers are spot on, perfection on my wrist!!!

[brandrea]

I’d prefer if they had gone with a more understated size

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

In general, this type of watch choice falls into the hype category, imho. "I would buy a GMT if the numbers weren't so flashy." Personally, I'd buy a GMT if I needed the functionality that it provided. If I truly needed the function then it would matter little the size of the bezel engraving. Buying just because others have it makes little sense to me. I won't own a GMT due to not having a need for the function. A Sub on the other hand, I can use.

“Buying just because others have it?”
Huh?

Also, you realize other companies make GMT watches?

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

“Buying just because others have it?”
Huh?

Also, you realize other companies make GMT watches?

Do you really need an explanation?

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by George58

plus 1 it looks clownish and too flashy

The new references literally became caricatures of the older versions, blowing up and emphasizing some aspects and leaving others alone. Just like caricatures of people. There is a resemblance but aspects distorted and out of proportion.

[adawil2002]

As the Wolf disguised as Grandma said "Better to see you with, my dear."

Little Red Riding Hood was not impressed with the talking Wolf.

[samson66]

Check out the Tudor GMT. The bezel may be more to your liking. Definitely less flashy too.

[~JJ]

Totally agree and the font size used on the modern GMT bezels has been a blocker for me. It ruins the focus, your eyes are pulled out to the bezel on a quick glance. The focus should be on the dial which always displays local time.

[Calatrava r]

I find the color scheme of blue/red bezel to be flashier than the font size. I actually like the increased legibility and ease to set occasioned by the larger font. Would I wear, most likely not. I would love to see the all black model with green hand re-introduced.

[watchwatcher]

IMO, the GMT 2c design came at a time when Rolex was trying to make a clear break from the time of the 5 digits. A more aggressive one, if you will. Ceramic bezels were now the rage, along with the wider lugs of the sub-c, and of course, as you mention, the larger bezel numbers on the GMT.

As to whether I like it...yeah, I guess. It seems to go well with the shift toward the modern. For me, however, I think the older ones are cooler and give off a vibe the newer ones will never come close to.