[16610] Comparison of two different reps of the same watch

[The Chap In The Boot]

My new 16610 is arrived 10 minutes ago.

I took some shots of it beside the one I already had.
I don't have the genuine Rolex, so I cannot compare them with it.
Photos' quality is not very good, but I'm in a hurry. I'll do a more detailed report at the end of the next week or later. Monday I'll be in hospital and I dunno when I'll come back and whether I'll come back or not

Meanwhile here the two watches. I call them WATCH A and WATCH B.

WATCH A is on the left. WATCH B on the right.
WATCH B is slightly greater.
WATCH B has seconds' hand slightly smaller.
Another immediate difference is the date chraracters' format.
WATCH A has different and smaller characters
WATCH B HAS NOT the number well centered. For instance the bottom of the 9 touches the dial.


Another striking difference is the Rolex sign on the clasp.
Look at it.

WATCH A:

Now WATCH B:

Together, WATCH A on the left as usual, and WATCH B on the right. The difference is striking, isn't it:

What do you say ?

UPDATE:
I add the following shots of crystal heights, as requested.


WATCH A :

WATCH B :

..... without a camera, looking at them, it's very difficult to see the difference.



Eventually, the front of WATCH B, where the bottom of date number 9 touches the dial.

WATCH A:

FINAL UPDATE

The date font issue. As I told you, WATCH B has the problem that some characters are too low, and their bottom touches the dial. In the following shots you see it better.

WATCH B :

 

[JCM1662]

these type of side by shots are my fav to look at. If you could combine parts of wA with wB, you'd have a pretty awesome sub!

As is, I'd go w wA for one reason - the date mag on wB is too much for my liking.

Thanks for posting and good luck in the hospital Chap.

 

[bme]

I hope you just receivd watch A .....far superior.

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

Thank you JCM ....

About the watches. What strikes me is that sign on the clasp of WATCH B. It has not embossment at the base, no relief. Is it normal ?

About date's characters. I dunno how the gen is, I'll search. What a pity the allignement. As I told, the bottom of the character in WATCH B is very low touching the dial.

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

I hope you just receivd watch A .....far superior.

Many thanks for your opinion bme. It's important to me. I'd like to read the opionion of you all, guys.

I will tell you which one I've just received at the end

 

[ssalxpanerai]

Though I am not a Rolex guy but I think I would go the watch A.

 

[sub4me]

I perfer watch A myself. Watch B looks kinda funny.

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

This is becoming a overwhelmin plebiscite. Go on, pals, I take the count.

 

[vantri]

I'd go with watch A.
Do you guys prefer the Swiss Made to extend from the 29th to 31st minute marker as in Watch B or from the 28th minute marker to the 32nd as in Watch A?
I also like the larger second hand and the crown on the clasp of Watch A.
Gap between minute marker and rehaut is nicer on Watch A IMO.
I like the width of the 9 and 6 hour marker on Watch A too.
Rehaut not as pronounced on watch B....I have no preferance.
I prefer Watch B for the size and font of the 1000ft = 300m. Watch A font is smaller. Not sure if the 1000 should begin with a 1 or a l. Watch A has a 1 and Watch B has a l for the first digit in 1000ft.
If I were to have to choose between having the magnification be .5 smaller or bigger than gen, I would probably go with larger as in B (but photos of cyclops are difficult to judge).
Are both watches bezels 120 clicks?

Thanks for post and pics

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

I'd go with watch A.
Do you guys prefer the Swiss Made to extend from the 29th to 31st minute marker as in Watch B or from the 28th minute marker to the 32nd as in Watch A?

I didn't notice that. Congratulations

Not sure if the 1000 should begin with a 1 or a l. Watch A has a 1 and Watch B has a l for the first digit in 1000ft.

This is prolly due to the shots. Both have a 1, not a I. Watch's A font is slightly smaller.
I'll do better shots as soon as I can.

If I were to have to choose between having the magnification be .5 smaller or bigger than gen, I would probably go with larger as in B (but photos of cyclops are difficult to judge).

What bothers me about B's date is that some numbers (not all) are too low, not well centered, and the bottom's character touches the dial.
In any case Watch B's sign on the clasp is imho one the more noticeable things.

Are both watches bezels 120 clicks?

Yes ! Controlled. Both have 120 clicks.

Thanks Vantri for your opinion

Thanks for post and pics[/quote]

 

[Keyhole]

I say watch A is a Noobmariner and watch B is a VIPmariner

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

I say watch A is a Noobmariner and watch B is a VIPmariner

Wrong, sorry.
But I don't want say what they are now. I wanna before hear a lot of opinions about what is better.
At the end I'll tell who is who...

 

[CISO1969]

Keyhole wrote:
I say watch A is a Noobmariner and watch B is a VIPmariner

I suspect the other way around...A is the VIPMariner(AKA Neomariner) and B is the Noobmariner

The rehaut on VIPmariner is oddly conical(slanty--not sure how to describe) I think and the date is a bit too far over--fix these two issues and the watch would truly be awesome

CISO

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

I suspect the other way around...A is the VIPMariner(AKA Neomariner) and B is the Noobmariner

You both are wrong about both watches. I will tell you at the end.
It's quite surprising.
I my self was very surprised....

Now be patient. I'm receiving pvt msgs asking me shots of crystal height. I upload and show them.

 

[saskwatch]

My thoughts on the two 16610 reps:

Watch A is nice. Cant see much to critisize. :wink:

Watch B on the other hand OMFG !!! :shock: :shock: :shock:
What a piece of xxxx !

1. Writing on the dial is wrong, Font size & letters.
2. swiss made misplaced
3. pearl is horrible
4. the coronet on the bracelet..... the WORST I have ever seen. :shock:
5. the datemag and placing are BAD

Sorry chap!

You asked for an opinion..... just my 0.2 cents.

 

[d4m.test]

i differ. Watch B has much more potential with the right parts. looks like an older MBW actually. id bet it has the deeper rehaut too.

 

[ken1]

i think watch b is the mbw.. not sure about watch a..

 

[The Chap In The Boot]

UPDATE: NEW SHOTS added of crystal height and front of the watch, as requested. See the first post of this thread.

 

[crick]

i think watch b is the mbw.. not sure about watch a..

that's what i'm thinking.

Watch A looks more like my noobmariner cept for the Bezel pearl.

The embossing on my dad's gen Datejust clasp of the crown is much more closer to watch A, so i suspect that clasp is better. Watch A's mag is also pretty good while watch B's mag is too much.

i can't feel the watches, so i dont know which casing is better/more solid... nor do i know how smooth the movement runs or how the bezel clicks... but by looks alone, A's got a nicer touch.

Do you have comparison pics of profile? like which watch xstal is higher, which bezel is more close to gen, etc. (EDIT: dang that was fast! Only slight difference in the bezel, both lookin' good)

Tiem to do some mods!

Noobie from TTK... needs bezel pearl replacement. Less than steller date mag.:

 

[jkwhyd]

The suspense is getting to me. When are you going to tell us which is which?

jk