Rolex 16610 vs. Rolex 116610 Submariner Comparison Review - Old Pre Ceramic Vs New Ceramic

Rolex Submariner 16610 vs Rolex Submariner 116610. Today we are taking a look at two versions of the iconic stainless steel Submariner Date side-by-side: the Rolex Submariner 16610 vs Rolex Submariner 116610. Although these two Rolex divers may look very similar at a glance, there are indeed some significant differences to note.
Production Years: Rolex 16610 vs 116610
The Rolex Submariner 16610 made its debut in 1988, taking over from its predecessor the Submariner 16800. Rolex manufactured the Submariner 16610 for over two decades until the new-generation Submariner 116610 replaced it.
Rolex unveiled the Submariner 116610 at Baselworld 2010 as the steel edition to sit alongside the new gold and two-tone Submariner models released in 2008 and 2009. At the time of publishing, the 116610 is the latest steel Submariner Date you can get your hands on, still in production at Rolex.
Case, Bezel, and Dial Design: Rolex 16610 vs 116610
While both the 16610 and the 116610 sport 40mm stainless steel Oyster cases water-resistant to 300m, the watches are built slightly differently.
The newer Submariner 116610 features the Rolex “Super Case,” characterized by fatter lugs, stouter crown guards, a thicker profile, and a wider bezel. On the other hand, the Submariner 16610 wears and presents slightly smaller thanks to its slimmer profile, thinner lugs, sharper crown guards, and trimmer bezel.
One of the biggest differences between the Rolex Submariner 116610 vs 16610 is the material of the bezel insert. The older Submariner 16610 includes a black aluminum bezel insert. Conversely, the latest Submariner 116610 is fitted with a Cerachrom bezel insert-Rolex’s proprietary ceramic alloy that is scratch and fade resistant. Along with the extra durability, Cerachrom ceramic is also shinier than aluminum, which gives the 116610 a more luxurious look compared to the tool-watch vibes of the previous 16610.
Yet another notable difference between the Rolex 116610 vs 16610 is the dial execution. The glossy black dials across both models house the same date window at 3 o’clock, Mercedes-style center hands, and white gold surrounds framing the luminous indexes. However, the newer Submariner 116610 features the Rolex “Maxi Dial” with larger hour markers and therefore, more lume too. Plus, if you turn off the lights, you’ll note that the Submariner 116610 glows blue in the dark (Chromalight) while the Submariner 16610 shines green (Luminova/SuperLuminova).
Bracelets: Rolex 16610 vs 116610
Like all Submariner watches, the 16610 and the 116610 come with the famed Oyster bracelet. However, there are important variances across the bracelets when comparing Rolex 116610 vs 16610. For instance, the Submariner 16610 has hollow center links, which makes it noticeably lighter than the Submariner 116610’s bracelet with solid center links.
Moreover, the Submariner 16610 has the foldover clasp with the safety catch and the one-size-fits-all foldout diver’s extension. In contrast, the Submariner 116610 has the updated and more durable Oysterlock safety clasp, complete with the Glidelock diver’s extension system with micro-adjusting capabilities.
Caliber: Rolex Submariner 116610 vs 16610
When Rolex introduced the Submariner 16610 in the late 1980s, it equipped the dive watch with the then-new Caliber 3135 automatic movement. Caliber 3135 beats at a frequency of 28,800 bph, has a 48-hour power reserve, and supplies the watch with both the quickset date functionality and the hacking seconds.
The self-winding Caliber 3135 quickly became Rolex’s core time/date movement and the company continues to use it in today’s Submariner 116610. But Rolex did update the Caliber 3135 inside the 116610 with a Blue Parachrom Hairspring for better resistance to magnetic fields, shocks, and temperature swings.
Whether you're on the hunt for the classic Submariner 16610 or the modern Submariner 116610, check out Bob’s Watches where you’ll find fantastic examples of both Rolex dive watches.
Browse Rolex Submariner Collection: www.bobswatche...
Rolex 16610 Submariners: www.bobswatche...
Rolex 116610 Submariners: www.bobswatche...
Browse All Rolex Watches For Sale: www.bobswatche...
Rolex 116610 vs 16610 Comparison Review: www.bobswatche...

[@chateaubullion2560]

I have the 16610 and visually I think it's more pleasing to look at. The maxi case looks out of proportion and in this case bigger is certainly not better. However I do like the new 116610 bracelet.

[@michaelbishop9157]

Much prefer the look and character of the pre-ceramic, pre-maxi case submariners. Like the more understated and classic look of the older subs

[@Gogettor]

Michael Bishop more class.

[@muriloninja]

I think I like the original better as well.

[@mariosolomon2513]

Sorry to be off topic but does someone know of a trick to get back into an instagram account..? I stupidly forgot the account password. I love any tricks you can offer me.

[@yosefsimon4099]

@Mario Solomon Instablaster :)

[@mariosolomon2513]

@Yosef Simon thanks so much for your reply. I got to the site thru google and I'm in the hacking process now. I see it takes a while so I will reply here later with my results.

[@rockon21ful]

Classic case with new bracelet and clasp would be my perfect Sub🌟⭐️🌟⭐️🌟

[@alwong604]

trevor walker I did it mine, you won’t regret it

[@uzeyourillusion]

@@alwong604 did you buy the glide lock bracelet from Rolex ?

[@tidalchiang]

Are they competible?

[@AtilioEscobar]

So much anxiety, you using that metal tip strap tool.

[@bobswatches]

Hope your recovery was speedy!

[@imranbecks]

@@bobswatches "Speedy".. I see what you did there.. Lol...

[@mdaydj]

its only a watch

[@pintthereof4598]

mdaydj it’s only £6,000

[@Creativemnds]

It's a subby. They're masterpiece watches and robust as fuck. No issues handling it with care

[@timmanion7459]

I own both and although it's almost becoming popular to bash on the super case , I've come to really appreciate the robustness of it . And the braclet on the 116610LN is without a doubt the best in the business. Just my opinion, but after starting with my first Submariner a 5513 , in 1968 and buying a few different models as they came out , I've come to love my new one . And yes , I've kept them all in my collection.

[@nelsondav100]

I’ve worn mine daily since 1995 so I’m a bit partial to the older model.

[@oekon]

How is it now? No problems using it daily for so long? I'm thinking about buying a 1996 model because that's my date of birth.

[@nelsondav100]

Raffy it just keeps running and running. It’s been into Rolex once for cleaning and that’s it. Beautiful watch.

[@Creativemnds]

Mine is 1994 model. I wear it regularly. It looks like a new watch. Use toothpaste on the watch face and rub it in before you shower with it. The watch face comes out sparkling. Sensational watch

[@mossakassabi9870]

عندي.ساعات.قديمة.لبيع

[@Yakman18]

Wow, the the older model really has a much more elegant case and look.

[@boezinter7013]

Great comparison, well done guys, best one I have seen yet. I will be getting one of these watches someday. Really still liking the 16610 still.

[@bobswatches]

Glad you enjoyed it! The 16610 is still a solid piece.

[@mohawkman4506]

5 digit all the way ! I own both an the 5 digit are way more comfortable! Plus the 5 digit have more of a tool look 👀 as apposed to the 6 digit that a bit more flashy an dressy

[@jessedavis7555]

I love my 16610 🔥 Feels perfect with the right combination of weight and thickness under the cuff.

[@jaf6423]

I like the proportions of the 16610 better but the bracelet and bezel are way better on the new one. I would be very happy with either

[@andrewgiblin3468]

Love the old one as it has way better proportions IMO, I have a new one with the maxi case and prefer wearing my 39 mm Stienhart homage.

[@msbrownbeast]

I also prefer the older 16610. I still have mine - L series, 1st year it came out - the tritium lume no longer shines ( but doesn't matter). The current Sub case with the fat lugs is ugly. It adds unnecessary bulk and weight to an already heavy watch.

[@toddaod295]

I actually found a brand new original 97200 (glidelock) bracelet which fits the 16610 as if it was the original bracelet. 16610 no holes V2009 and 97200 bracelet...I have created my dream watch. Not only better proportioned but less glittery and shiny as with the ceramic bezel. Also the more aggressive, sharp teeth of the bezel on the newer 116610 would always "catch" clothes and whatever it comes in contact with and move around quite often. This doesn't happen nearly as much on the less aggressive classic 16610 bezel. I did wear the 116610 for about 1 year and "IMO" prefer the 16610.

[@duck853]

The supercase was the reason I passed on picking up a 116610 Submariner in 2010 as a retirement present to myself. There were no 16610 new old stock to be found at the time. Unfortunately the 126610/124060 doesn't look as though it did enough to return the gorgeous form to the Submariner. I'm going to an AD to see if there one in person to see (Japan has a couple places).

[@richarddawson5836]

Older version looks much better. Classier look. The maxi case looks clunky.

[@martin.B777]

16610 is in a CLASS of its own!🤑

[@Ninjadom]

Good video. The DJI Mic 2 does have Noise Reduction too. Quick Press the power button and the light turns green for Noise Reduction mode.

[@jimbojet8728]

A great vid. So clear and concise. My preference is the Ceramic version. I like the larger watch feel on my wrist. Thank you

[@PrBaLLaz123]

Always love your content. Which camera set up are you using? Such great lighting and very sharp clarity.

[@davewoo7114]

vote for 5 digits. always vinatge which classic. Just like a Classic sport car,

[@douglashodge7364]

Got a 2009 16110 and it cost the same as 2010 11610. I just think that the 16110 has much better style and in my humble opinion the best looking watch ever made

[@andrewwolkowich]

I like the older one better.

[@grozwano]

I have a 16610 with engraved rehaut. It is way better that the new one. But that’s ONLY my opinion

[@johntiscione7507]

I own a 114060 submariner..like the new style lugs and the glidelick bracelet is heads above the old clasp..i prefer the clean look of the no date..116610LN is still a beautiful watcj

[@bobswatches]

The updated bracelet really is a wonder isn't it? Thanks for checking out our video!

[@Thevoiceofreason84]

John Tiscione me too 👍

[@thelazyrouleur]

I feel that the 16610 feels a bit more discreet and subtle than the 116610. Will be my next purchase for sure!

[@bobswatches]

I agree @p.bathy... It definitley does not stand out as much as the 116610, I think it serves as an even better daily watch! Would you wear the 16610 daily or just on occasion?

[@thelazyrouleur]

@@bobswatches I have a few watches in my rotation but if I do purchase a 16610, it’ll certainly be worn as often as my Breitling Superocean 42!

[@CharlieHustle1687]

Pre-ceramic all the way, the ceramic isn’t a true sub to me, it’s bling.

[@icolater27]

Older is nicer. New one is to big and tacky.

[@tonielcock8891]

I like the 16610

[@nicholastesta5387]

What’s the better daily wearer for a 7.5 inch wrist? Looking to pick one of these up just can’t pick. It’d be great to get the 5 digit on a new bracelet.

[@alwong604]

I have a 16600 and 116660 and my favourite improvement is the bracelet and glidelock

[@Baztation]

yah yah Great video!.....I go for vintage all the way

[@carlosguilhermesilveiraped5017]

The new model is obviously a more "modern" watch with improvements over the older model. However, it is just too bulky/beefy. Unless you are 6'4" and 250 lb. it will just look too heavy (which it is) on a "normal" wrist. The case is uglier, square. The 16610 represents the "classic" submariner better. More discrete, just looks nicer.

[@ngtilui]

Agree

[@Agent-vj3ns]

126610 shits all over both

[@oldirtydave22]

Lmaoooo this aged well

[@michaelfleming8490]

9:09. Yeah, I had such a big dinner that my wrist is now fatter and I need to expand my watch bracelet lol. It’s more like if it’s a hot day (or a really cold day) and you need to fine tune your clasp.

[@davidnguyen1151]

Thank you for this video. I love the micro adjustments and the ceramic dial. So it’s the 116610 for me!

[@dutchdeno]

The 16610 have proven it self through time, now let’s see how the 116610 age with time.

[@bobswatches]

Only time will tell!

[@mathew3293]

I've owned both of these watches, and currently have the sub c date and no date in my collection. I always preferred the 116610 over the 16610, mainly because of the superior bracelet and clasp. I always felt the stamped steel clasp on the 16610 looked flimsy and felt cheaper than it should on such a prestigious watch. Additionally, the maxi dial is more modern and the thicker lugs gives the watch a more imposing look. Not to mention the ceramic on the bezel is very durable, ideal for someone who wears these watches daily. 16610 aluminum bezel was prone to fade

[@PK-mx7nf]

The old bracelets are terrible. It actually feels so cheap on the wrist, compared to the Sub C. Also glidelock is awesome obviously.

[@mathew3293]

@@PK-mx7nf 100% agreed. Glidelock on sub c is probably the best clasp system on any sports watch on the market.

[@jayden5718]

I have both, and I like them both in their own ways. I love the glidelock on de 116610

[@ngtilui]

I like chunky watches but feel that Submariner should remains at 40mm. That's much classier.

[@cfrincon]

The ceramic bezel just works so much more for me. Plus the 116610LN looks so much more beautifully proportioned.

[@bobswatches]

The ceramic bezel insert really turns the watch into a luxury piece.

[@Longshore79]

Bob's Watches exactly. You can dress up the ceramic Version.

[@cat1racer]

The older one looks better.

[@riverito911]

Got mine in 2003. Almost as daily driver, despite owning about 20 watches, most of them more expensive than the Sub.

[@mpfour4203]

The 16610 with a solid bracelet, and a double safety clasp. It is a divers watch, so the bracelet is a big thing for me. And a ceramic bezel would be a bonus, but not a dealbreaker.

[@armancz]

Vintage, all day every day.

[@bobswatches]

Ages like a fine wine. Thanks for checking out our video!

[@Baztation]

when is the last produce of 16610 before the change? is it 2009?

[@authorjohnwquinn]

Love the new one! Saving up my money for it.

[@bobswatches]

Glad you made a decision on the one you want! Thanks for stopping by our video comparison!

[@spalkin]

Just a couple of things, the lugs on the 11 aren't longer just fatter. Also the brushing on the lugs went to straight instead of circular. The watch wears bigger because the rehaut ring is steeper, therefore more open and the dial is larger in diameter. I can't stand the way they're going bigger and bigger. I hoped that androgynous dinner plates were going out. I would love the 16610 with satin ceramic.

[@Joe-zk7tm]

Thank you for this great video! Good Job!!

[@bobswatches]

Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!

[@BestCommentor17]

Why in the new one have blue light tint on the cyclops lens??

[@jeffp5162]

Just looking at the images. The earlier model looks much more classy, dare I say better quality.

[@Herman-zc7te]

The older one because it more subtle.

[@secondopinion6654]

*I got mad at Rolex for coming out with a ceramic insert without a retrofit after decades of putting a delicate wafer thin anodized aluminum ring on a SPORTS WATCH and doing lots of service work just from replacing their delicate aluminum ring. Ridiculous. So I took my 16610 and put a ceramic insert in it made for it's bezel. It's the best of all worlds. The delicate aluminum insert is put away for safe keeping so that no one can tap it too hard with, oh let's see, their finger nail and dent it/scratch it.*

[@randyvillanueva3875]

I enjoy my new style Sub, but I think the difference between the two make getting a “Kermit” easier to justify. Thanks for the video!

[@truxton1000]

I got a near unused 16610 from 2009, it's a marvel of a watch. The ceramic Sub is not as elegant and I much prefer the older model.

[@daytonadiscdriver]

Zoom in! The background is......neat, but I’m here for the visuals of the watch. Not the tools on the table.

[@fggfgffgfdgdfg7781]

i really like the old classic case size although the new bracelet and clasp is superior - Wearing the old one on a black rubber and the newest version with steel bracelet

[@brois841]

I'd take the 116610 in every way except the width of the lugs!

[@Baztation]

me2

[@eldiabolico3750]

You could have synchronized the two watches “Bob”...

[@bobswatches]

Should've. Would've. Could've. "Diablo"...

[@AZadeh-nd8vx]

The 116610 is actually a bigger watch. It measures 40.3mm whereas the 16610 measures 39.6mm - it's almost 1mm bigger. Also as you mention, the case is bigger and blockier - so it is a bigger watch

[@danbrennan153]

I'm thinking I would go post 2010 and get the upgraded solid bracelet with adjustable clasp (big improvements) and accept the ceramic bezel... Also my understanding is that due to the additional material on the supercase, affords potential additional polishings beyond a 5 digit model.???

[@Ahtche]

great video , im going to get the sub2020 im hesitating between the date or no date

[@FMK178]

For me especially the shiny look of the bezel is simply to ! much and to bold. It feels for me pretentious, hey, look at me, here I am. The maxi dial looks for me unbalanced in relation to the dial. For my very small wrist the especially the length of the lugs fit to big. Even the clasp feels for me much more small pretty and balanced to the bracelet. The new one has much improvement but the balance of all is definitely not mine. Motto: "Make it fat again", for me the new one reminds me close to brass knuckles in comparison to the older one. I own a Hulk and a 16610 from 2010. I prefer as a daily the 16610.

[@genedevilliers2503]

Hour hand on ceramic model is also “beefier’’.

[@hottubsgalore]

I've watched lots of comparison videos and not one of them mentions that the six-digit (116610) has "ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX" engraved along the interior perimeter. I love that little detail which I think makes it look more luxurious.

[@anima89x]

If you like that it’s worth that last 3 series of the 16610, released in its final 2-3 years, also had the engraved rehaut you mentioned.

[@2321654]

Does de ref 116610LN came with green lumen in certain years?..

[@phughes4224]

The bracelet on the newer model is MUCH better.

[@BossDD20]

Nice comparison. Still tied between the two. Probably will prefer the aluminum bezel for its more toolish design.

[@bobswatches]

Thanks!

[@RobertGeez]

The ceramic bezel insert is just too shiny. It looks horrible in daylight. It doesn’t look black. Much prefer the classic Sub with perfect proportions and Aluminium insert that always looks black.

[@rmoshammer]

I really have a problem with the ceramic bezel, it can break if I pop it off to remove a grain of sand furthermore the plastic ring underneath should be changed everytime…

[@skr1b]

Enjoy the video showing both of the watches but your bias for the new model is very clear and detracts from an objectionable viewpoint and true comparison.

[@garysteven9600]

Like the newer version much better, just wish i could find one.

[@TheCrackerman501]

I've had both but definitely prefer the Super C case. My first Sub was a 2007 and I upgraded to the new Sub with my 2007 trade. The biggest advantages is the glide lock for me. I don't baby my watches nor do I beat the shit out of them. So the ceramic bezel per say wasn't the selling point for me. The size of the newer Sub for me is much better and so is the weight. I also like that the newer Sub bracelet has solid center links. The old Sub worked and is a phenomenal watch but it had weak points for me. My 2007 Sub just felt too light like it has no substance for the price l paid. The new Super C Sub has no weak points and in my opinion the perfect dive watch.

[@bobmichals7651]

Does the new sub weigh more than previous model?

[@navegandolejanooriente6268]

I wish Rolex made the new 126610 the happy median of theses models but they went bigger :( the new submariner just doesn't wear as nice as the 16610 but imagine if they re issue the 16610 with the new movement and complete solid center links and on the fly adjustable clasp?

[@sachexplorer9500]

Old is gold....end of story 😊

[@007Chancellor]

I love every update EXCEPT the "maxi-case." It doesn't fit the watchface. The bracelet looks like something added on as there is no flow from the case to the bracelet.

[@redhatblacksfarmy1616]

Bit zoom in would have been good! Good Video though!

[@bobswatches]

Thanks!

[@ErikS-]

The glidelock is portrayed firstly as extension for divesuits... I honestly must say I use it mainly for doing adjustment for my wristsize. I use it often. I have a lot more watches and I dont think it can be compared to a “microadjustment”. The glidelock I use very often. Microadjustments on other watches I never ever use.

[@ahuramazda980]

The indices on the older model also look smaller in comparison.

[@patrickflynn8989]

I dont like the lugs on the new one and.. by the way....You would want your head examined if you decide to bring it saltwater diving when cheap digital dive watchs are better.

[@chongalawi6569]

Maybe this topic was raised before but I just noticed that some sub have the "300m" text on the dial written with a space between the "300" and the "m" and others don't have that space. Is this normal? I wanted to raise this topic because someone may think it is a fake watch (the one without space)

[@detonator2112]

The old one is just SO much better looking. It's like a fitness chick vs. an overweight chick with a huge waist. Sorry 116610 owners but that's the way it is.

[@alle1919]

detonator2112 I have both. I do not agree with your observation. And, I love both models. But, if you have a baby wrist then I can see your point.

[@986C]

Lol. Sure.. the old one is better. Sorry you can’t get one dude.

[@VergiliarEcaros]

But the bracelet of the old one is so cheap, like a steinhart bracelet

[@detonator2112]

@@VergiliarEcaros True. But it's part of the appeal. It's very comfortable bracelet. I briefly had a 116610 but traded it back to 16610 almost immediately. I just didn't like the "Breitlingsque" looks. The old one is perfect.

[@christophermills7304]

@@VergiliarEcarosthe bracelet on the later versions of the 16610 had the solid end links and screws so its only the clasp that differed from the new one.

[@rodolfogarcia-rq5xi]

I have a 16610 . Is it possible to change the bezel of a 116610 and place it on the 16610? Thank you!

[@ujjwalkarki5680]

no

[@johncorcoran2569]

Love the maxi dial.

[@RyzFragz34]

Love the ceramic. So glad I got the newer version.

[@jimbojet8728]

RyzFragz34 well done.

[@mitchd949]

The bracelet on the 116610 looks too narrow for the case.

[@poopscoopproductions3177]

How many Submariner owners does it take to change a lightbulb? Four. One to change it, and three to lament how much better the previous design was.

[@markstanton63]

Prefer the old one ... The ceramic version looks square & doesn't match the bracelet. On both versions, the hands look a little out of proportion.

[@nobletype]

How is the 6 digit sub able to have a bigger bezel but still stay the same size? Are they actually the same size? Doesn't seem like it

[@oldirtydave22]

116610 all day

[@yankeedoodle6293]

The maxi dial lost its charm.

[@XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXXxXxxccx]

😅 I definitely prefer the 116610 newer version. It has more pop more shine more verve.

[@michaeldgs]

Had the 6 digit - couldnt get used to those fat ass lugs. Sold it and bought a tritium 5 digit... much more charm and looks like a sub should - perfect. Good vid👍

[@dutchdeno]

Michael S 👍

[@ralphthebulldog5163]

Probably the only investment i made that's made money! paid £4750 back in 2014 for mine.

[@jessyfavor9593]

Great selection of watches ridiculous prices

[@tylerconlon1990]

The old is better but for the jingly jangly bracelet

[@shipmate3577]

I like the newer model more. The ceramic bezel, the bigger indices, the better crown, the better bracelet/clasp, the bluish lume > greenish lume, and I like the maxi-case as it seperates it for other regular cased watches... kind of squaring it off a bit.

[@gizamlukeable]

Now that the 2020 Sub is out. “Fixing” the fat maxi case, I’m having a hard time deciding between the classic 5 digit and latest.

[@thegorn]

Dude keep that scratchy strap tool away from the watches! The older one had a better size for sure.9:05 "had a big dinner and need more room". Dude it's a watch band, not a pants belt.

[@johnp9298]

Don't like the new version.