Rolex GMT Master 16700 Pepsi Review

[@JustBlueFish]

Join the Justbluefish Watch Club Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/JBFWC/

[@duncanrichardson6870]

As a pilot flying in a high g force environment until I retired 4 years ago I appreciated the light weight of the GMT Master and can understand why Rolex designed a lighter weight watch and bracelet. This was a watch designed initially for pilots. I purchased my GMT Master in late 1979 and it has stood the test of time under hard conditions.

[@ragetobe]

It was designed for Pam Am pilots taking people on holiday though not fighter jets, the cheaply made bracelet is by financial design not quality or design queues. The unfortunate part of the GMT master is that is was the cheaper option because it was made with cheaper components. The fact that it is not a proper GMT watch further infuses the fact that this is just a cheaper watch. By adding a ceramic bezel they have removed the ability to patina a watch which is a negative, however that was an innovation to move to a higher quality watch.

[@modernworldiscrap]

I knew a guy from Iowa during my second tour in Vietnam. He bought a gmt in a PX then put a nato on it. The last time I saw him he was still wearing his watch.

[@johnnyguitar6697]

Here is the sequence for GMT Master's / GMT Master's II: GMT Master evolution: 6542 (no crown guards / bakelite bezel / acrylic crystal) from 1954 till 1959 / 1675 (crown guards / aluminum bezel) from 1959 till 1980 / 16750 (quickset date) from 1981 till 1988 / 16700 (sapphire crystal) from 1989 till 1999 GMT Master II evolution: 16760 (fat case / independent hour setting) from 1983 till 1988 / 16710 (thinner case and movement) from 1989 till 2007 / 116710 (ceramic bezel / maxi case + indices + hands) since 2007 So yes, it's interesting that, for a period of about 16 years from 1983 until 1999, they had both a GMT Master with quickset date / no independent hour adjustment and a GMT Master II with independent hand adjustment / no quickset date available on the catalogue.

[@bernardmauge8613]

thanks this is gold, Icould never et that info anywhere.

[@4034miguel]

Hi Guy. I want to congratulate you of the solid credibility and reputation you have being building among the watch community allowing you have more access to interesting pieces to review. I fill a little ashamed of the humble contribution I am providing through Patreon. Keep up the excellent work. This is the GMT-Master review I was always waiting to see: detailed and honest and to the fact. Thanks!

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Miguel you are too kind, and your generosity is greatly appreciated.

[@MarcS4R]

i have been rocking a 16700 since about 10 years. probably my all time favorite rlx, i paid about 4 for a full set.

[@ralphplazachesmarhomes]

Is been almost two years since this great video was upload. I just bought a Pepsi Master II ref 16710 (2007) with the 3186 movement. Complete set box and papers. I had to paid $13,800. He did mentioned two years ago same reference were selling under $10K. I can't get my brain to pay $23K on a ceramic bezel Pepsi. I am happy with the purchase but is amazing how well the GMT Pepsi holds and increase his value in the last few years.

[@JustBlueFish]

Congrats on picking up the GMT I hope you enjoy it. And yes prices seem to keep going up.

[@TriforceRich]

I recently got a 16710 and it is an awesome watch. The price is ridiculous but the 16710 is my favorite GMT of all time and I knew I'd have to either get it now or just forget about the watch. I feel like the Super Case suits the Sub more than the GMT. The fit is just perfect. I have a SEL version, so helps a bit with the quality of the bracelet but at the price you are paying it really is laughable compared to a modern Rolex bracelet. The only thing I can say is that the bracelets have been proven to be reliable and they are super comfortable. I love the thin and smaller clasp. Also, the need for glidelock isn't as necessary as the hollow links expand with your wrist much better. As far as GMT Master vs Master II, I'm totally team Master II. You can get a watch with the GMT Master I functionality for $500. The GMT Master II "true GMT" function is only found on higher priced watches. One thing I'd definitely change, and many of the fans of this watch agree, is the crown should've been bigger. It is small, elegant, and well protected by the crown guards but even with my smaller hands it's annoying to handle. Plus, I've always found a charm to bigger crowns. I sold my Speedy to fund the 16710 and honestly I have no regrets. It's a special watch. It's a watch I can look at and say that it is the GMT I want over any other in the world. If you truly want the ceramic, then I'd just holdout and I'm sure you'll manage to source one in the next few years but if you want a classic then the 16710 is the only option for a blend of modern reliability and vintage charm.

[@JustBlueFish]

That’s awesome, I’d love to get a 16710. I think the prices have just gotten away from me, but I don’t think they are coming down. Good decision to get one now.

[@Juanpasilver]

Also an owner of a beautiful 16710. For me, also the 16710 is my favorite GMT of all - in fact I bought it recently in like new condition, with original papers and box, and paid almost as much as a ceramic one (proof that prices are climbing much higher on these classic pieces than on the newer ones). I got it for many reasons. First, because to me it has the perfect proportions, and it looks just right. Second, the aluminum bezel is more representative of a professional watch rather than a jewel - and for me a SS Rolex is exactly that, a long lasting and rough working piece. Third, it brings me nostalgia - I remember seeing it on very few people's wrists, especially jet pilots and frecquent travelers of the time, so in my head, it is a very exclusive piece. On the contrary, the ceramic version is widely worn by anybody - who can afford it of course, so to me it does not have the same personality. Fourth, the "Pepsi color" bezels are iconic to me, not matched by the ceramic ones. Lastly, I think it will age better than the 126710. Anyways, I guess this is al very subjective and personal. Each model represents the best of each time, and depnding on each person's age, experiences, and memories , it produces a different impact.

[@whizzmeluck]

I love my GMT 16700 with super luminova dial, its the transition piece between vintage GMT master and GMT master 2 with ceramic bezel.. also, I found out older bracelet is much more comfortable on my wrist and didnt diggin into my skin as much as the newer bracelet despite the rattle and stretches

[@blazinmark1]

Hey Guy! Hope all is well... You have one of the most thorough and descriptive Watch review channels on YT! Keep up the good work

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks buddy!

[@tuhkathri9126]

Excellent review. I’m glad you posted a video. There’s been a dearth of quality content lately within the watch community.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching. Glad to hear you liked it.

[@camarocarl7130]

Do you prefer Gloss Blue/Red Pepsi on an aluminum bezel or Matt purple/maroon on the newer models? I prefer the 16710 by a long shot.

[@BadgerJeff]

Great review as always. Love the old Rolex - back when they were still tool watches and not luxury. Prices have increased so much over the past decade

[@JustBlueFish]

I wish they were still affordable, I’d definitely get one. They are really cool.

[@rollywood2793]

The 16700 GMT master, also sometimes referred as the forgotten GMT. Prod. from 1988~1999, or 10 years run in the shadow of its more successful sister the 16710 GMT master II. A interesting watch that deserve some spot light, thank you for your review. It is interesting to notice that this one is with tritium dial, as for the majority of this serie that was always produced in smaller qty than the GMT master II, but during the last year production 98~99, we can notice that few of these watches had the "SWISS" at 6 a clock, marking the "Luminova dial". A watch that in my opinion has good "collecting potential", you should go for it Guy, as these aluminium bezels are fast moving into vintage status...

[@charlesflint9048]

I bought a 1998 GMT Master16700 seven years ago, and am so glad I did- I would not be able to afford the same watch today. I like the simplicity of the original function, just like the original models in the 1950s.

[@pauljackson6593]

Really good review as always. Thank you. Have been looking at this model and a lot of them I’ve seen have faded bezels. Has this bezel been replaced?

[@derekhicks8250]

Bought mine in 88 for 1750.00 cdn, sold it 20 years later for 3k.....wish I still had it. Just a gorgeous watch, wore it every day, no issues....ever.

[@JustBlueFish]

Wow imagine if you had that still how cool.

[@derekhicks8250]

I know.....I didn't miss it till about 4 years ago when the prices went crazy. The irony is that even if I hadn't sold it, I probably couldn't 'afford' to wear it today anyway. One failed spring bar away from disaster.

[@natben123]

I bought my 16700 also in 1988 but still have it. It is the oldest item I own and will never sell it despite adding a Submariner and a 36mm Datejust. The16700 is an absolute classic.

[@markthibault8579]

I thought that movement would allow the GMT hand to be independently adjusted like the ETA2893-2. Does the next iteration of the Rolex GMT movement allow for this? Or, did they go straight to the adjusting hour hand?

[@JustBlueFish]

To my knowledge there was never a Rolex GMT that let you adjust the GMT hand independently. It was either like this watch where the hands are all linked, or like the Master 2 where the regular hours hand is adjustable.

[@Redonepunch]

A much more elegant watch than the more aggressively designed modern GMT imo. Nice to see you really enjoying the watch.

[@JustBlueFish]

If it wasn’t so expensive I’d buy one today. I really did like it.

[@ddaley87]

Best watch context on yt. I have a new ceramic gmt2. 24 clicks not 48. Would love to get an old one one day with lug holes.

[@MrDucatiti]

Best explanation of the difference of end links from vintage to modern. I've read and watch dozens of video and never got it till now :) Thank you. Previous owner of a 16700 here for 25+ years, now just purchased a BLRO. Prefer the the modern in all aspects. Although I miss my old Pepsi, it was becoming a delicate piece with upcoming problems soon to come.

[@johnnyguitar6697]

One thing to mention about the specific watch you are showing is that the bracelet is unlikely to be the original one, if indeed the watch is from 1991 (X or N production code at 6 o'clock between the lugs). The bracelet you are showing appears to be a reference 93150 with a diver's extension, which would have been correct on a Submariner. It was made available as an option on the 16700 / 16710 / 16570 /14270, but only between 1994 and 1996 from what I know. A quick way to find out is to read the production code on the clasp. If it was produced in 1991, it would sport a code P, followed by a number between 1 and 12 to indicate the month of production.

[@pauljackson6593]

Johnny Guitare I thought didn’t seem right on the watch .

[@timmer92984]

The 93150 was definitely a bracelet option during the run of the 16700, even the dive extension; option 1 was the 78360 bracelet, option 2 was the jubilee bracelet, option 3 was the hollow end link 78790 bracelet, and option 4 (the more expensivd premium option) was the 93150 bracelet with dive extension.

[@MidAtlanticTV]

Nice review. This was a trip down memory lane for me. Back in the day this was my first GMT. After that model I had two GMT II watches one with a black bezel and Jubilee bracelet and one with the red and black bezel with the Oyster bracelet. They were all great heavy use watches.

[@tanyet]

Probably my favorite watch. I purchased mine around 3 years ago. I chose this reference because of it's thinness. I"m not aware of any modern sports Rolex as thin as this model. It's around 11.8mm. Maybe a Yachtmaster is close.

[@JustBlueFish]

Good choice wear it in good health and for years to come.

[@craig2100]

Master for it simpler elegance. But both are over priced imho. Feel like were getting back to tulips...old econ story. Great video and comparison. Love your channel. Thanks for sharing.

[@JustBlueFish]

I wish you could still get them all day long for under $6000.

[@craig2100]

@@JustBlueFish agreed, so please keep on working on the time machine...:-)

[@michaeldgs]

Pre-ceramic GMT master with quick set date - Pure class!

[@JustBlueFish]

Had not to love it.

[@michaeldgs]

I understand - I paid a fortune for mine last year, but its a 1997 and probably one of the last GMT Master’s (Not II) ever made and unpolished. I enjoy it on special occasions and wear it sparingly so hopefully it will atleast retain its value 🙂

[@danielmeier8321]

I like the supercase also better than the old one. One thing i have to add as a positive for the jumping hour hand on the modern gmt master 2: you can jump the date backwards if im not mistaken. nice vid as always

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching buddy.

[@BobBoyd1]

I like the ceramic bezel but I just can't do the thick modern lugs. I'm not sure Rolex is actually making a sport model I want right now - except the Explorer. If they came out with a ceramic sub with the older case, that would be hard for me to ignore.

[@JustBlueFish]

A lot of people are wishing for the same thing as you. It will be interesting to see what the next iteration of the Submariner looks like when they finally make one.

[@djunknwn]

There’s just nothing like the feeling of an older GMT master. It makes me flashback to the early 90s

[@RobertFalconer1967]

Personally I prefer the 16710 Pepsi GMT to the new ceramic Pepsi GMT; just has more character and feels more connected to the original Pan Am GMTs from whence they came. But I also think that if one wants that look and feel in a new watch, the Tudor Black Bay GMT offers the vibe of this 16700 but with a more up-to-date movement and metallurgy. I also find the more muted Tudor red and blue bezel looks a bit more "sophisticated"/elegant.

[@Impala-qp9cb]

I like the hollow end links and bracelet. Its one of the reasons besides the large lugs I don't buy newer rolexes. Slinky and light, not chunky and heavy.

[@alfovebraseth]

So much better looking than the newer chunky GMTs. I go with the original GMT, not GMT-II - it is slim and elegant

[@MarcelitoRecords]

Nice review as always pal Are you into Rolex only or are you dreamin about Patek too

[@JustBlueFish]

Patek has a few models I’d like but they are well out of my financial reach. Maybe one day.

[@chi-towncalifornia5916]

Super awesome video, Guy. For history’s sake, I believe that the first GMT Master II was the 1983-1987 16760 “Sophia Loren”, which was also the first to have the Coke bezel. According to an article I read, the 16700 came out in 1988, about the same time as the 16710 replaced the Sophia Loren. Respectfully, I have to differ from you on the Maxi Case. There is something so elegant and classic about that pre-ceramic slender case that just does it for me. Like a classic air cooled Porsche 911 compared to the overfed but technically better one.

[@JustBlueFish]

Cool thanks for the info didn’t realize there was a Master 2 that preceded the 16710.

[@traviswatts6661]

I have both a quick change date and independent hour/gmt hand on my Glycine Airman Base 22 GMT. Didn’t know the Rolex didn’t have both of these features. Thanks for sharing.

[@camarocarl7130]

I see you are a JAWS fan, are you getting a Jaws Alsta or Resco Hooper?

[@bloodymarvelous4790]

It's not like Rolex decided not to put the milled clasps and solid end and center links on the bracelet. They hadn't developed them yet, so I don't think you can bring that up as a negative. The bracelets have seen massive improvements in the 6-digit models, with the slide lock and quick adjust options, but the older versions have stood up to the test of time.

[@Matt-uq3in]

I have my dad's 16700 he bought it 1989 swiss t 25 dail, it has the single close clasp ❤️

[@EricSloferwatchreviews]

Great review Guy 👍 I'm going to Post my Pepsi Deep Blue video this week.

[@JustBlueFish]

Awesome I’ll be sure to check it out. Thanks buddy.

[@robertspinks835]

That clasp gap looked huge they have definitely stepped up in that area Great video as usual 👍

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@ragetobe]

Most people don’t realise that Rolex sold the GmT master and the GMT master 2 at the same time and the GMT was sold as the cheaper version, they phased out the GMT master because people were not buying the gmt master because it was more cheaply made ie: the bracelet is folded steel and not solid, the sels are hollow and not solid, the shape on the new shape is much nicer. The 126610LN has a more refined shape than the super case.

[@LS98]

Excellent review as always! Personally, I like the aluminum bezel, even though I know the ceramic is superior. That being said, I think the jumping hour hand on the Master II works better for a GMT watch.

[@JustBlueFish]

I don’t know, I like them both a lot. Aluminum insert does look nice and super classic, ceramic looks good too and is super durable. Hard for me to pick.

[@teamhonn]

So the red gmt hand is always 3 hours ahead of current time? What if you want it 4 hours to match the time zone difference? Do I have that correct? I must have it wrong.

[@AndyGarton]

For me this one is over polished, although I appreciate why you can't really say that in this case. On the bezel - the modern GMTs have 24 clicks, not 48. Convenient for time zone switching, but not able to be used for minute timing, unlike the older GMT like this one. Final point - I find the date switching on the Master 2 plenty fast enough, certainly not long and tedious - turn the crown faster maybe!

[@JustBlueFish]

I thought I recall it having quarter hour clicks for some reason. It’s been a while since playing with one.

[@AndyGarton]

@@JustBlueFish It's definitely every half hour, or in other words full hour on the 24 hour clock, for obvious reasons.

[@mastermachetier5594]

I’d go with the new one either Batman or Pepsi mostly cuz of the quality for the bracelet

[@JustBlueFish]

It’s hard to be the modern manufacturing and quality. For the price, as much as I love the classic watches like this, I just don’t think I can justify it.

[@rollywood2793]

@@JustBlueFish It's like classic cars, or antiques, you are not buying performance but rather something historic. It's a different set of mind. I like & can justify both purchase personally. (But I cannot pay double price for a modern piece... this is too much, I cannot justify that.)

[@privateinfo4820]

Great watch - not a fan of the pre-ceramic models however, awesome job man!!

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Jeff.

[@blueshirtbuddah1665]

Another fantastic video Guy. I agree with you about the Pepsi, it’s an absolutely beautiful watch. I too prefer the newer Master II with the ceramic bezel. Though the original Masters have a charm of their own. Keep the great videos coming.

[@DrFernandoHidalgo]

Big fan of your reviews Guy, you are the man,thanks for getting me into the world of horology, greetings from Mexico

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks buddy!

[@timmer92984]

For the bezel, new old stock bezels for the five digit sub/gmt master I and II do have aggressive knurling. The thing with five digits is they are the last of the "tool watch" rolex watches where they got used for everything.

[@klasredin2660]

The first ref.number for the gmt master II is 16760 ”fat lady” or ”Sophia Loren”. Produced from 1983 to 1988. First gmt with independent adjustable gmt hand, first with sapphire crystal, first with white gold around the index, first with 100m water resistence.

[@moosehak]

Beautiful watch but (like you) I would never purchase one of these for current prices given you can purchase a brand new ceramic GMT with the maxi case and the modern movement/case and bracelet materials for a cheaper price. It's a no brainer (if you can get the new one from an AD). Great review as always

[@maitrehg]

moosehak The modern one is a better watch, no doubt about it. But is it prettier? Nothing is less sure ...

[@moosehak]

@@maitrehg in the eye of the beholder (as they say)

[@JustBlueFish]

I like them both, a lot, but prices in these vintage watches have gotten out of hand. I can’t justify it.

[@watchrolex]

I like the 16700 with Serif font bezel better than San Serif (one you reviewed).

[@mihamoto]

I think you like the pepsi version because you are a very patriotic person...:). Great review, as usual! Cheers, Valerio

[@JustBlueFish]

That could be, I don’t know.

[@ipadasher]

The Pepsi 16700 and the recent root beer are my favorite gmt's

[@TheWayofGrace89]

Lovely piece, total classic

[@JustBlueFish]

It’s awesome.

[@JBGLX]

Could that be that , that oyster bracelet doesn’t correspond to a GMT Master , but to a pre-ceramic five digit submariner ?The size of the clasp in a GMT is smaller than the one here . I have an Explorer II 16570 , that has the same bracelet that the GMT , and as I say is smaller .

[@timmer92984]

The 93150 bracelet that this one has was a premium bracelet option during the run of the 16700.

[@KyleJett]

I can't wait until Rolex redesigns the Sub and hopefully ditches the maxi case. Then it will be slim and also have the ceramic bezel. Please!

[@daletaylorjr.4786]

I’m with you on getting new.

[@JustBlueFish]

Do it!

[@daletaylorjr.4786]

JustBlueFish Watch Reviews pay off house first. 😉 #goalsvsprioritys

[@rob1058]

Great review! Very informative. Thanks!!!

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks

[@nachovalenti]

I prefer GMT Master over GMT Master II. Aluminium bezel looks much better in my opinion and is full of character.

[@tkc324]

So the gmt hand can’t adjust and is always 12 hours away from current time... that’s kinda odd

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@thewatchloungechris]

Another great review Guy

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks buddy

[@leeallen8840]

Nice video as always. That GMT looks over polished. No sharpness at all. Not worth the silly price the market will dictate.

[@JustBlueFish]

I was looking at a crisp minty GMT 16710 and the asking price was $13k dollars... one like this example in the video is probably more like $9k dollars. You pay a TON of a premium for sharp edges.

[@mrbacchus6127]

That polished/over polished question is always tricky

[@JustBlueFish]

Almost all these older watches are polished to some degree. What is considered over polished will differ from one person to the next. I think the example I had here was acceptable, but obviously polished.

[@kevorknourian5442]

Great video Guy

[@JustBlueFish]

Thank you sir!

[@jasonlaw888]

I thought 16760 was the first GM2, I regretted that I sold mine four years ago for only 5k USD

[@JustBlueFish]

Someone else mentioned that. I thought the 16710 was but I’m honestly far from an vintage expert when it comes to the history of these models.

[@david.9633]

Great review

[@22Phanatic]

Beautiful watches ! I’do prefer your Sub though , the bracelet alone is far superior and wearable imo ! Investment wise the GMT would be my choice then as they probably won’t be going anywhere but up?! Good one Guy

[@JustBlueFish]

Thank you sir!

[@steveperez7746]

Great video. Thanks man!

[@Eric_Nielsen]

Service bezel insert.

[@JustBlueFish]

Yes most likely.

[@pauljackson6593]

Eric Nielsen that’s exactly what I thought. You answered my question. Thanks

[@chasekemp4982]

I would love to get a Pepsi 16750 from my birth year❤

[@SylvainDuford]

I think it's grossly overpriced given the lesser movement, bezel and bracelet...

[@JustBlueFish]

The prices have gotten out of hand.

[@rollywood2793]

@@JustBlueFish Daytona's, Sub's and GMT are Rolex hottest watches by far, they have a huge fan base and collector market, which is driving the desirability and with it, the price. As much as we might see some price adjustments on the grey market for newer pieces at some point. I doubt very much that these pre-ceramic ever come down in value. If you have the Dollars, I think it's time to get those while they are still "limit affordable"...

[@baldilocks1914]

Love the five digits over any of the new crap! The new stuff is for posers.

[@jamesmoninger1982]

So-o-o tired of hearing about the Rolex "Pepsi." Aren't there any other Rolex brands worth reviewing?

[@phmwu7368]

Relax it's a Rolex !

[@derekshearer9049]

24 clicks on the bezel...

[@JustBlueFish]

I thought I recall it having quarter hour clicks for some reason. It’s been a while since playing with one.

[@derekshearer9049]

@@JustBlueFish. I have a Green Arrow Master ll 116710LN. Only 24 clicks....

[@franciscodelaconcha6400]

Lo podrás traducir 🙏al Español buendia

Hay que estar loco para pagar tanto dinero por este reloj, a sabienda lo único que él hará por mi.

[@JustBlueFish]

It is expensive.

[@MerlintheMaineCoon]

I had a beaten up overpolished N-Series with service dial and hands that I bought used for 1800 Swiss francs. Nevertheless, I found a newbi who paid 12k for it in 2022! 😂😂😂

[@Ferien7]

There is no waiting list. They are just discriminating against poor/working class commoners. If you're rich and famous, there is no wait to get Rolex watches.

[@310taylor]

Ugh that watch.

[@24hourgmtchannel64]

The 16760 was the first GMT Master II. It is often referred to as the "fat lady" Not the 16710.

[@BiffTannenBTTF]

Seriously how many ads are you going to swamp your videos with? Kinda ridiculous.

[@JustBlueFish]

Well it’s a 30 minute long video, and yet quite a lot fewer than you’d find in a 30 minute long television broadcast.