Rolex Submariner 16610 Review | The Last Classic Rolex?

[@ShahLusso]

**Correction** - Apparently Rolex don't replace the hairspring with a Parachrom Bleu one on a service unless it was one of the rare ones near the end of the run that came with one out of the factory. Special thanks to CoolhandLuke 2019 for checking it out directly with a Rolex AD & Service Center in the UK.

[@odarpxela]

Thanks for the info, loved the vid and I love my 16610. Would you know which models have the Parachrom hairspring? I have a late V serial sub (2009) with the engraved rehaut, so if it does come with the new hairspring, it's definitely a pleasant surprise :P

[@RobertGeez]

@@odarpxela none of the 16610 references came with the parachrom balance spring.

[@nenadcubric2663]

@@RobertGeez correct

[@Birdylockso]

If Ref. 1680 was made between 1969-1979, and the Ref. 16610 was made between 1988-2010, what happened between 1979 and 1988? Was there no new Rolex Submariner made?

[@bcove2010]

I purchased my Submariner new in 1989 and it has been my everyday watch ever since. No issues with the “flimsy“ bracelet or anything else with the watch. It’s been flawless.

[@detonator2112]

After owning 15 Rolex watches Submariner 16610 remains my favorite Rolex model ever. The size is perfect, the look is perfect... it's just THE quintessential Rolex. Period. The best.

[@ShahLusso]

Got to agree, it’s just THE Rolex that comes to mind when you think of the brand, only model that perhaps could rival it in that department would perhaps be a gold day-date but even then it’s tough competition

[@albertorreyes]

I have a 2008 model, this is the quintessential watch. Mine lasted from 2009 to 2022 without servicing. It’s now being serviced. Anyhow, I’m 5’7 and 160 pounds. The new version looks chunky to me, I think the “old” is perfect and the most versatile diver sub. I can wear it 90% of the time and looks perfect. I wouldn’t change for any watch. Was a gift from my mom in graduation and paid only 3k in a box and with papers.

[@tracywilkinson1820]

I have a 16610 from 2001. My buddy has a 2019 bluesy and while his is gorgeous, mine is far more elegant and sublime. It does not yell at you, it's quiet and understated yet completely present. make sense? I absolutely adore it. :)

[@ShahLusso]

I know exactly what you mean, that case shape and the slimmer lugs makes it that little bit more discreet and understated. Keep enjoying your 16610! Did you buy it in 2001 or its an 01' model you bought pre-owned, what's ownership been like in terms of servicing & reliability?

[@tracywilkinson1820]

Oh preowned, 2 years ago. I bought it from a reputable jeweler, not an AD. I’ve not need it serviced but they’ve been nothing but amazing after the sale.

[@DeeKay1911]

Tracy Wilkinson Looking to purchase a great condition 2001 16610... The current sub is undoubtedly a great watch, but to be honest I just don’t like the design.

[@marktownsend4582]

Hello Tracy. I too have the 2001. Bought it off a mate some time ago. He has the the new version. We both prefer mine (yours). It's far more elegant and stylish. I get offered strong money for it regularly, but the boy ain't selling....I just love the bloody thing :>)

[@ABCdotcom]

Any rolex expert / collector / enthusiast will never turn their nose up at a 1980s 16610 - despite its shortcomings!

[@vrilatorepsilon9931]

I've got a 16610 for about ten years and I never knew about the extension function. Thanks vor your video!

[@carlosguilhermesilveiraped5017]

Great video. I have a 16610, bought new from an AD in 2002. Would not trade for a brand new 2020 model. I agree with everything you said.

[@ShahLusso]

For sure, the 2020 Submariner may be more advanced in terms of movement & the ceramic bezel, but even with the slimmer lugs compared to the 116610 I'd still say the 16610 is a much better looking watch

[@jakesebas]

The best Rolex submariner review ever thank you!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! I'm glad you liked it, I had a lot of fun making this one - especially learning about all the history & variants of it. Any parts of it particular stand out to you from this video?

[@jakesebas]

@@ShahLusso You are very welcome. I owned a 2001 (16610 ) and sold it about 2yrs ago.. I have missed it ever since. It's one of those you wished you have kept but C'est la vie, we live and learn and yes the part where you mentioned the bracelet was right on the money, mine being a 2001 had the better bracelet of course as it relates to the vintage look nothing compared to the ceramic version of course. I'm actually in the hunt for a 2008 version with full box and papers... not that papers matter much to me but it would be nice as I have a son who was born in 2008... Thanks again for an amazing and very informative video.

[@ShahLusso]

Oh very nice! It’d make a great gift to pass down from generation to generation. Out of curiosity why did you end up selling the 2001 model?

[@jakesebas]

@@ShahLusso it was sheer stupidity that I sold that watch.... I actually got tired of Rolex and I had a incoming watch on the way a Tudor black bay 58 which for some reason has become the only watch I wear.

[@jport74]

I have just put down a deposit on a Rolex Sumariner from around 2008/2009. I have done a lot of thinking about which one to buy, and decided that I wanted an older model, but with some of the modern things like an etched crown, no holes on the side of the case and the engraved rehaut. Yes, the watch isn't vintage yet, but still has the vintage feel. The newest model looks very chunky, and not as slender on my wrist. I tried both models on, and in the end, the model 16610 was just a better looking watch to my eye. Great review.

[@ShahLusso]

Glad you liked the video & congrats on the new watch! One of the best things about this reference is that you can get so many of the modern refinements of the current generation but without having to go for the chunky supercase design on the 116610LN. Great choice & enjoy your new Submariner :)

[@msbrownbeast]

There is nothing wrong with the older Rolex bracelets. As "rickety" as they may seem, and so many viewers have expressed this point, the fact of the matter is that this "cheap looking" bracelet will easily outlast the watch. There are advantages to the hollow links and stamped steel clasps - they are much lighter and more comfortable to wear on the wrist. When you wear a Rolex on your wrist, no one looks at the bracelet, they all look at the 5-point crowned watch head.

[@ShahLusso]

You make a good point about it being lighter on the wrist with the hollower links, I’ll be sure to include that on any future older/vintage watches I review because I imagine you’re not alone in finding it more comfortable with the lighter bracelet Thanks for commenting :)

[@glisse_1]

@@ShahLusso It's the clasp that may seem rickety compared to a new Oyster bracelet clasp. But the band itself is very robust and feels luxurious to wear.

[@kostasp1137]

Wow, you’re taking your videos to the next level. I do prefer the slimmer case of the older sub. On the other hand I like the newer bracelet and ceramic bezel of the current generation. I think my choice would be the Kermit as I like the maxi dial with slimmer case. It took me a while to appreciate this watch.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! It took me a while to finish this one up just because there was so much different information out there about this reference, but I got there in the end :D I couldn't agree more about the bracelet on the current generation, holding the two together you could really tell the difference in the bracelet quality & that's where this watch really showed its age, but for everything else I was surprised how modern it felt - the model I had in the video was a 2009 model so one of the last ones, but still not bad for a 10-year-old watch.

[@LlyleHunter]

Mine is from 2004. The black dial Submariner is for men, the equivalent of what the “perfect little black designer dress’ is for a woman. Timeless and can be worn anywhere.

[@ShahLusso]

So true, I think the pre-ceramic sub is one of the most versatile watches made, the 6 digit references lose some of that elegance with their chunkier cases IMO

[@yeheinnaing3520]

Thanks for your marvelous review. I really love having 16610 probably produced in 2010 which has rehaut, laser enchanting crown, AR coating and scrambled serials in mint condition. It charged me about 12,000 US$. No matter what how much it’s expensive, I love it very much because it is my first Rolex sport model and has everything of current model except ceramic bezel.

[@ABCdotcom]

Great review! 16610s are creeping ever closer to 116610LN prices (July 2021). There is a certain charm to the rattlesnake bracelet and hollow end links as it kept the watch light. For me, the sweetspot is to have the holes case but with the SEL bracelet.

[@ShahLusso]

Yeah, I think now that the 126110 is out, the 116610 is in kind of a no man's land - not as charming as the 5 digit, but not as advanced compared to the 126110 so i'm not surprised at the 16610 creeping up. I have to agree about the charm on the bracelet, it's been nearly 2 years since I did this review and I was pretty early into watches back then so since then i've tried a few more older watches and even bought a vintage style bracelet for my Seamaster 300M and I've come to appreciate how they're lighter and more comfortable compared to the more solidly built bracelets we're used to today. I do agree though that a great medium would be the SEL bracelet with the holes so that it's easier to do changes, these 5 digit subs look great on straps!

[@ABCdotcom]

@@ShahLusso Great points. I also think almost nobody in the horology world would look down on any 16610 piece from it's early to final years of production.

[@maiden4605]

Thats what I have, 2002 model. Perfection!

[@user-tk7km1sr7e]

Great review Shah. I love the use of many B rolls in your videos and not just a talking head. I own a W serial number 16610 I believe it is circa 1995. I agree with all that you mentioned in your review. I absolutely love this watch and I will pass it down to my son.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you liked the video and great to hear your 16610 is going to end up being a watch passed down to the next generation. I don’t think Rolex will ever step back and make something quite like this again so it’ll always be something special :)

[@detonator2112]

Thanks for the great review. 16610 is the best Rolex ever made. Period. It's THE Rolex.

[@ShahLusso]

💯

[@huged7452]

I understand 60% of the video. My english its not so good but learn english with my passion (watches) its so nice.

[@ShahLusso]

That's great & thanks for watching to help with learning your English! Watching something you like is (in my opinion) one of the best ways to learn a language when I was in school & learned German I used to watch car videos & shows in German to learn more. What's your native language? Looking forward to seeing you in the comments in future videos too :)

[@huged7452]

@@ShahLusso Absolutely, its a great way to learn a new language. My native languaje is spanish, im mexican. Around to 3 or 4 months ago, i discovered to your channel and i see the videos in both languages. In my country its to dificult have to access of this type of pieces at least in my social circle so, youtube is the only way. Great content and good explications. Your omega seamaster is amazing! Regards Shah!

[@ShahLusso]

Fenomenal! Me alegro que te gusta el canal :) Aqui tienes la version en español para que entienes el otro 40% del video - kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3ise4KXmq1rsJI

[@sorrybook4207]

The ginault ocean rover bracelet (very similar to modern Rolex glide lock) fits the 16610 sub perfectly. Hope this helps some of you guys out

[@ShahLusso]

Ooh great tip! 👍🏼

[@amiranhassan2407]

Wow great tip!!

[@ccw5886]

I had a 14060 two liner T. sold it and regret it bitterly . I am now going to get a 16610. I love this Sub and to be honest, as long as you do your due diligence a 1998 opposed to a 2010 model? I think as long as the watch is genuine you cant go wrong. I love the lug holes and the tritium and the final iteration in 2010. Either way with careful selection and good servicing you are getting a daily driver that will be a friend and classy companion for life.

[@chrissetian]

I really love the 16610 especially the version that you have 2008-2010, found one but without box or papers and it’s a bit beaten up, not sure if it’s a good buy for me.

[@akamano5]

great vid. I like my 16610... were it every day...also, i SCUBA dive with it..as a note..dont use the bracelet extension over your wetsuit...wetsuits compress with pressure... you might find you Rolex in 3000 feet of water..sometimes i put a cinch strap around the band just in case..mine has come loose before..

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks for the comment & for the insight on how it performs as a proper dive watch! Have you had the watch serviced often? Any issues over time with the water resistance? I never realized that wetsuits compress as you go down, makes total sense though that a full flip out extension would probably cause more problems than it solves, by the sound of it the best clasp system would be something that auto-adjusts like the spring loaded clasp on the Tudor Pelagos.

[@timmcdonald5335]

Also it depends how deep you are diving before there is much compression with the wetsuit.

[@WatchSociety]

Fantastic review, well done.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks :)

[@ccw5886]

Just purchased a 1993 refernce with tritium dial and drilled case . Its hardly been worn and is in superb condition with box and papers also warrantied for two years. It still cost me £10,500. Sold my 14060 and regretted bitterly. Will be great to get another subby on my wrist

[@mathewnaden1875]

Great video. Just ordered my 2004 model

[@ShahLusso]

Nice! 👍 Hope you enjoy it for years to come :)

[@past-hb2iu]

I purchased a F series 16570 polar no box or papers in 2017 for 3k. Traded that + 500 USD towards this very watch, all original R serial. The hour markers are creamy, nearly pumpkin as is the pearl at 12. Couldn’t be happier with that deal.

[@ShahLusso]

congratulations & definitely a great deal! enjoy your new sub!

[@joelsmith9311]

After trying and failing to secure a new Submariner Date, I got lucky and scored a 2004 pre-ceramic version. And you know what? I think I prefer it. It’s perfect for every occasion - and although I have a small collection of watches, I happily wear my Submariner the most. It really is “the little black dress” of watches and I love it.

[@ShahLusso]

Couldn’t agree more with you - especially with a later model one like that where it’s mechanically almost the same as the 116610, really the 5 digit one is more versatile IMO too. Hope you enjoy it for years to come :)

[@ocklind]

A really good, detailed and well thought through video. Thank you!

[@ShahLusso]

Glad you liked it & thanks for watching & commenting :)

[@jessedavis7555]

I got the 2009 V serial and I picked it over the ceramic because I wanted the old with a little new Engraved Rehaut. I have had it since 2020 and I still feel like I made the right choice.Thanks for the video!👍

[@ShahLusso]

Great pick & couldn’t agree more - the 16610 being around for so long means it offers such a great balance of that old mixed with new. Thanks for watching!😀

[@derekflannagan9102]

I have a 16610 in my small Rolex collection I purchased it in 1997 I love the watch

[@underdog5081]

I am a proud owner of 1999 “Swiss” only Submariner. It is still probably my most versatile watch and wear it more than any other watch in my collection.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks for sharing, and especially for confirming the versatility too! Have you had to service it much since owning it?

[@underdog5081]

Shah Lusso so I bought it pre owned about 8 years ago. Had it serviced once and works like charm. It runs about 2-3 second slow, which is in COSC specs. Truly a comfortable watch to wear.

[@underdog5081]

Shah Lusso wish you luck on your channel. I’ve subscribed and will follow. I’ll spread the word to my friends here in Dallas

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks so much, I really appreciate it! Looking forward to seeing you in the comments on future videos & have a great Xmas!

[@underdog5081]

Shah Lusso Happy Everything!

[@SoCalWatchReviews]

What a great review my brother! You know that the sub is one of my grails!! Congrats on the almost 1K subs!!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks man! It’s a great watch & handling this one really helps you appreciate why it’s the classic it is today

[@CoolhandLuke-mo2zl]

Not true. They dont update the old with a new parachrome hairspring. I spoke with AD and Rolex Service centre uk. They wont update to parachrome as it's not original to that piece. It's just a marketing thing, an in house main spring (parachrome) rather than their previous sourced hairspring which does the same iv heard.

[@ShahLusso]

I did come across a few forums saying they did - though if you heard it from a Rolex Service Centre then I'd say that holds more weight. Thanks for checking it out direct with them & letting me know :) I wonder why they wouldn't replace it (if one was willing to pay for it) considering they'll happily replace dials and hands etc without thinking twice.

[@TheGunDude]

I got the 16610 from my birth year because it’s modern vintage. I love the sleek case of the 5 digit reference and the patina of the tritium and aluminum bezel. I want my watch to eventually show character. The new ones won’t do that.

[@ShahLusso]

Very true, while a lot of the newer Rolex innovations are good for preventing scratches and imperfections due to aging...it also makes them a bit sterile especially when they're older they don't get that same character that aged lume or faded bezels show & I'm 100% with you on the sleeker case, even with the new, more refined super-case on the 126610 it still doesn't quite have that elegance of the 5 digit ones

[@Laguna2013]

that couch though

[@ShahLusso]

😂

[@WarHammer2-1]

How durable are they?

[@msbrownbeast]

The early bracelet #93150 may be rickety but they are much lighter than the current solid link bracelets, and would likely last as long as the watch itself. My early 1989 sub weighs only 125 grams on the scale.

[@timchan334]

One of the best youtube videos on the 16610…good job!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you liked it :)

[@arqjavierobregon]

I just watched a video of a Rolex 14060 2007-2009 no date hole case but what they say on this video is the big F or long F in the abbreviation feet. Is this normal or very rare? Do you know anything about this?

[@ShahLusso]

If i'm honest I'm not an expert on the specifics, but I do know that especially with models like this that had such long production lives and covered so many different changes, there are certain dial configurations that are more rare and sought after. Usually these represented transitions between different versions of the same reference (i.e switching from Tritium to Luminova to Superluminova there were lots of changes to the Swiss Made at the 6 o'clock) So most likely this long F may be one of those dial variations, but as to whether that variant is the rarer or more common one for that time period I'm not sure. Best bet would be to seek out the Rolex forums or Rolex centric Facebook groups where you'll find people that dedicate themselves to knowing each and every variant. Hope that helps :)

[@harmeetmalhi3746]

I don't mind lack of AR coating, add character to the watch. Some of omegas seem like they have no crystal and it just looks wrong, imho!

[@biblebound4981]

Great review! Informative, to the point, easy to understand and lots of research documentation to support his pros & cons of the classic best dive watch on the market. There is only one word that I can yse to describe his review...Phenominal!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Appreciate the support & its always great to hear from another satisfied viewer :) The 16610 is a great watch so i wanted to make sure i really did it justice with this video.

[@Inuah85]

I‘m lucky owning a 16610 with a swiss only dial. I did a lot of researches but the elegance of 16610 was the key for me. Thank you for sharing this video, it helped in my decision.

[@ShahLusso]

Glad I could help & congrats on the new watch :) Hope you enjoy it for years to come!

[@Inuah85]

@@ShahLusso thank you trully for this great explanation. It‘s rare to find a good video, where they compare the Subs, I subscibed your channel. Thank you very much, enjoying watching your Videos. The 16610 it‘s such a big pleasure and now with 36 I got one. Milestone since i was 17 :). All the best to you and all fellas in this channel.

[@brucelee9941]

I'm thinking of buying a Rolex Submariner from a lady that found a watch at the movie theater she took the proper precautions by taking it to the police department they held it for 6 months cuz they couldn't find the owner so the police department give her the watch back now she's trying to sell it to me for 5,000 cash with no paperwork or box do you think it's worth it?

[@ShahLusso]

If possible, try see if you can get a watchmaker to open it up to check the movement and confirm it's legit - that's the most secure way of verifying that it's real. While the police may have verified it wasn't stolen and no one tried to recover it, they probably didn't check it for if it was fake or not. If it's a 16610 like the one in this video then here are a few things you can check for: 1. If it still has the drilled lug holes (removed in 2003) then it shouldn't have the engraved rehaut (introduced 2007) 2. If it has "Swiss - T < 25" it's a tritium dial so the indices should have started to go a brownish color (unless it's been serviced and had the indices replaced) 3. If she'll let you, wind it up, synch it to a reference time on your phone (including seconds) and come back the next day to see if it's still synchronized - it should only be off by +/- 2 seconds (if its off by too much either the movement's fake or is in need of a service) 4. Check for the dive extension (shown around 3:51) it's an easy detail for fakers to skip Those checks should at least help determine if it's real or not, but the most secure is having a watchmaker check it out. From there, if you're confident that it's real then yeah 5k is a good deal for a Submariner, but only if you're 100% (or as close to as possible) that you're getting the real thing. Hope that helps & let me know how it goes :)

[@defenstrator4660]

I received my 16610 as a combination birthday, Christmas, graduation gift in 1991. It has been my do everything watch, and is still holding up. It cost $3000 CAD, which is about $4700 in todays dollars. A far cry from the 9 grand + they ask for now.

[@ShahLusso]

Oh wow! Have you had it serviced since then? It'd be great to hear what the experience was like, did they give you the option to keep everything original? I've read mixed stories on people sometimes getting updated dials & hands without being asked first, and others where they were able to bring down their service cost by deleting certain replacements & keeping everything original.

[@defenstrator4660]

@@ShahLusso I've had it serviced a few times. I just had it done recently as it needed a new main spring. There are local jewelers who have the equipment where I live so it hasn't been a problem. Still not cheap though. When getting it done locally as opposed to through Rolex they only replace things if you specifically ask for it.

[@22sound]

Another great review. Sound quality has improved a ton and is now very consistent - something I appreciate very much. Thanks for the great review mate! 👍👍

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks man! That lavalier mic made a world of difference soon as I started using it :)

[@jaf6423]

Just bought one. Ultimately, the decision between this and the 6 digits ended up coming down to finding this one for a better price. However, i absolutely love the vintage feel of it. You get throwback style with modern tech

[@ShahLusso]

For sure, it definitely hits that sweet spot between old and new with very little compromise :) hope you enjoy yours for years to come!

[@Mark..P]

Great review and use of graphics. 👏

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! :)

[@goodwrench838]

Thinking about selling my 214270 mk2 to get one these. Thoughts?

[@ShahLusso]

It's a tough call because the Explorer's still a solid watch (aesthetically not my personal taste but i'll try keep any bias out). I think a lot will have to come down to how much you like the 16610 because there are a few tradeoffs in switching from a current production Rolex to a discontinued one. On a technical front they both use very similar movements (especially if you get a later year 16610) but where you'll notice the biggest difference is in the build quality - later Subs will have solid endlinks but still have the hollow bracelet & skimpy clasp while your Explorer has a much better feeling bracelet & clasp. On the other hand the Sub has the dive bezel & date which both make it more useful (I'd add the water resistance too, but that's relative to how often your watch goes underwater & also older versions might have lost some of that WR over time) Another thing to consider is recognition - the Explorer can still fly under the radar when not around watch people, whereas the 16610 can be spotted as a Rolex from a mile away by pretty much anyone. So if safety or discretion are a concern then the Explorer is better off. In terms of resale/value retention, the price ranges of 16610 vs 213270 have a decent amount of overlap (though depends on the year & condition of the Sub) but in general I'd say it'll always be easier to sell a Submariner vs an Explorer I down the line just because its got a wider appeal. The last thing is, I know a lot of people always wanted a Submariner but went for other models as a temporary solution before finding the right example or one for the right price etc, so if that's relevant to your case then definitely go for the Sub if you've always wanted one. (Putting bias back in) I like the look for the Submariner more, it's a design classic & an icon so on that basis I'd go for the Sub too. Probably a lot to unpack there ^ but hopefully that helps. The short version of my advice is always to just go with which one you like more & logic be damned. Let me know which one you end up going for & feel free to comment or msg me on IG if you have any more questions :)

[@goodwrench838]

@@ShahLusso thanks so much for the reply! I will be sure shoot you a message on IG and give to a follow! I think for me the best thing to do is just to be patient and save up so I can have both!

[@ShahLusso]

Best of both worlds! 👍🏼

[@RobertGeez]

The last of the 16610’s G and and random serials have the AR coating under the cyclops. If you have your crystal replaced now you will also have the latest fitted.

[@ShahLusso]

Ohh interesting & thanks for sharing! It's amazing how many different varieties and updates went into this reference over the course of its production run

[@msbrownbeast]

What's more desirable? Lug holes or no lug holes?

[@geovargas3097]

Found your channel after seeing Mr. B’s video. Great video. 👍🏼

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks & welcome to the channel! :)

[@robynsjp]

Mine is a tritium 1967 5513. Breathtaking, extraordinary. No need to swim with it. Spending 10K or more to go swim or dive now and then is preposterous. You don't need a Rolex for that.

[@maiden4605]

I have owned a couple of six digit subs and now own a five digit gold and a 16610 2002 model. SEL and lug holes. Perfection. This is when Rolex made gorgeous looking toolwatches that were luxury as well. Now its the other way around!

[@ShahLusso]

I've got to agree, IMO the last 5 digit Rolexes were the best versions of most of their models (movement evolutions aside)

[@purrfect-ones]

great video, thanks. I just bought my first Rolex last week, Sub circa 1989. I LOVE IT. You're right about the bracelet.

[@ShahLusso]

Congrats on the new watch! Hope you enjoy it and it’s everything you wanted it to be :)

[@CharlieHustle1687]

Very well done. Highly informative

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! :)

[@TheRamonio]

Extraordinary comparison review of Rolex’s most iconic watch over time. Definitely, this review has helped me to decide on purchasing again a Sub, however, a pre-ceramic version. Sub-date: would be a 1973 red liner (prices are extremely high though) to honor my birth year. Sub-no date: already looking for a M series 2 liner of mid 90s with a “starting patina dial” to experience the remaining transition of the color. Thanks and cheers!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! i'm glad this inspired your next purchase - you've got your work cut out for you finding such a specific one but the hunt is half of the fun when buying watches :)

[@MrVoayer]

Affectionate but honest review if this highly coveted Rolex Submariner 16610 ! Great job ! Well done !!!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed the video and thanks for commenting :)

[@gastondesimone9656]

Very nice review of this iconic watch! (and I´ve seen a lot of reviews...). Personally, I completely love this particular model. In fact, after ten years of dreaming of having a 16610, I was able to buy one (2005 D series) back in January 2017. I paid 5400 USD for it and I everytime I check Chrono24 site, I´m surprised to see higher prices for that same model today!. When looking at the 116610, the only thing missing in my 16610 (as you pretty clearly stated in this review) is a more robust bracelet and clasp. Even when I have started to digest the bigger case on the new 116610, I choose the slimmer case of the 16610.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you liked the review, it's always a good feeling when someone who owns the watch approves of the review :) It really is a great example of the Submariner and in my view its got more "classic" status vs the current model, that might be something that changes when they discontinue the 116610, but even then I'd still pick the 16610 over it any day. If only Rolex offered the modern bracelet as a purchasable accessory for the 5 digit reference, then it'd be perfect.

[@RSSpec]

AR coating means Jack!! I can read mine with no issues!

[@p-squared1662]

Great video and content. Keep it up!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks :)

[@RossWristWatchLove]

Great video bro!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks man! :)

[@suws315]

Really thorough, great presentation - new subscriber here and hello from NYC!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks & welcome to the channel! What's the watch scene like in NY? I'd imagine there must be some pretty nice watches to see there apart from the usual Steel Rolex/Patek/AP that seem to be hot everywhere

[@suws315]

Shah Lusso The NYC watch scene is pretty great! The steel shortage is the same here as anywhere ... but there’s still quite a concentration of amazing pieces found both in the boutiques and in the wild (yup, on the subway too!). You definitely should come experience it!

[@ShahLusso]

@@suws315 Nice! Yeah I'd love to go see what it's like there, I've never been to NY so I'd want to check it out in genral, but I had a feeling there would be some great watches to be found there too :D

[@greatchalla3799]

Great review, I own several Rolex watches. However .... for what ever reason, I love the vintage bracelet over the newer years version. Maybe it’s the fact I’m older and it’s what was mostly around during the seventies and eighties when I first acquired a Sub. I’m now considering a 2010 Sub with the rehaut and newest movement.

[@u.u.u9969]

Compare this to the seamster 300M same year

[@ShahLusso]

been waiting for years to get a late model 16610 and a pre-2012 Omega Seamaster 300M side by side for a shoot, hopefully this is the year I manage to make it happen!

[@rsb__]

Amazing review and video, this watch is pure class

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you liked the video :)

[@FUNZO1975]

The Submariner is the Porsche 911 of watches.

[@ShahLusso]

💯

[@ngtilui]

Initially i wanted to trade my 16610 for a 116610LN. But didn't cos the smaller bezel really appeal to me and the maxi case was a turn off.

[@ruben619448]

Do I sell my Tudor black bay 58 for a 16610 from 2004?

[@ShahLusso]

Ufff that's a tough call, the 58's a great watch & with a much more modern movement & build quality but the 16610 is a classic. A lot would have to go into why you want the 16610 & why you got the BB58 - Did you originally want the 16610 and just got the 58 first? - Does resale value or investment play a big role in your buying decision - Are you after something that's lighter & has more of a vintage feel - Are you after an upgrade in brand status/hold Rolex in particularly high regard vs Tudor I'd say if the answer to any of those questions is a yes then you should consider switching (especially the 1st one IMO) otherwise I'd say keep the 58 - it's a good looking watch, unlike the other BBs its not that thick, it's versatile, still has that classic look and the 58's doing quite strong in terms of resale value in it's own right. Hopefully that helps, & let me know what you end up deciding on :)

[@ruben619448]

@@ShahLusso I ended up keeping the Tudor. Mainly for its more vintage design. But I always wanted a Rolex. But the more I wore it the more my love for it showed. It is by far my favorite watch. But what I wanted more than an Rolex or Tudor was a speedmaster. I love nasa and I love that time in history when we achieved such greatness. So what I did was I kept the Tudor and got a speedmaster too. I could sell both to get a Rolex but I think I am really happy with this collection.

[@rockon21ful]

If you’re going after the 16610 might as well get the newest or one of the last serials to be sold. First off let’s be honest here and how much sexier that classic case is compared to a damn brick 🧱 of a watch on the maxi case pieces, big ass fat lugs just to make the 40mm case look bigger is a joke and just not a good look. Only good think about a 6 digit Sub is the bracelet and that amazing glidelock clasp, it’s stunning and the fact you can adjust it on the fly during summer months when your wrist expands in the heat is brilliant. The prefect Sub would be that classic case of the 16610 on a new bracelet and clasp, to go even farther down the rabbit hole would be the classic case with maxi dial and sword style hands from the mil-subs of the 70’s on the new bracelet and clasp😉🌟⭐️🌟⭐️🌟Since we’re talking the 16610 the perfect piece for me would be in the early 2000’s while they still had drilled lugs while also having solid end links & Swiss Made at 6 o’clock to indicate Super Luminova.. now that would be the ticket but while talking lume we might as well get the facts, from august of 97 through 1998 & part of 1999 SWISS dials which was a transitional dial using Luminova for a 1 1/2 to 2 years or so and let’s be clear Luminova and Super Luminova are the same exact material, after Rolex and pretty much the rest of the watch world dumped Tritium in the beginning after the world found out Radium was radioactive as hell and companies started to use a still radioactive but much less by marking the dials T SWISS T to the last few years using tritium with even less radioactive material the dial marked SWISS T

[@ShahLusso]

Way more than I was expecting, but so welcome! Its great getting all that detailed insight on this reference, and there's so much to cove this video was a barely scratching the surface intro to the 16610. I wish one day I could get all the different variations together and compare them, or at least get a few to show all those minor changes on camera. I agree with your pick on the ultimate Sub would be a 16610 with the 6 digit bracelet & glidelock, though I'd still personally opt for the non-maxi dial, only thing is i do like the hands on the maxi dial - just that little bit thicker. Thanks so much for your comment & all your insights! :)

[@rockon21ful]

@@ShahLusso thank you, it was like 1:30am out here on the Coast of California and I couldn't sleep, just kept typing away to the point I felt that your beautiful thread had been hijacked by me.. I feel much better knowing you were ok with it and I will subscribe to your channel as I really enjoy what you've got going on.. Thanks again, Trevor

[@ShahLusso]

​@@rockon21ful Feel free to hijack my comments any time especially if it's going to be anywhere near that detailed :) this channel's as much about me being able to learn as it it is about making content for everyone else to learn and enjoy this great hobby so i really appreciate you sharing your knowledge this video in particular was special to me because it was my first time reviewing a vintage watch so i realized how much more goes into researching and understanding the nuances of references that spanned so long and were from before the days where you could find all the details you need on a manufacturer's official site. i've got a video of the sea dweller 16660 that I'm doing some research for so if you have any insights on that do let me know so I can try include them in the video

[@rockon21ful]

Shah Lusso can’t wait, love the Sea Dweller and there are a couple models that will appreciate much faster than others models in the same lineup.. 😊👍 Can’t wait to see this video and sure you’ll do an outstanding job on the real Rolex dive workhorse 🌟⭐️🌟⭐️🌟

[@JF-cn1mv]

Shah, I enjoyed your video and found it interesting, informative and true. i currently have a Rolex Sub 16610M model. Manufactured in 2007/2008, purchased new in New York in April 2009. with box & papers. i purchased the watch pre-owned, and i'm very attached to this watch to say the least! It was a 50th Birthday gift to myself, and worn on the job for many years as a Homicide Investigator in Southern California. It wore well with a suit and tie as it did with jeans and a t-shirt. The Sub held up well on the job and my days off as well. Here's my dilemma, I really like the new 41mm Sub 2020 and thinking of trading mine in, preferably sell private party, to purchase the new 41mm Sub. I know I should keep my current model, since its gained $3,500 in value since 2014. However, would like to minimize out of pocket cost on the 41mm despite easily having the money to pay in full for the new model and keeping the above 16610M. Your thoughts and what's your subscriber's/reader's opinion? Am i crazy to trade up? Should I purchase the new 41mm and keep both watches, 16610M as an investment watch. Thanks for your time!

[@ShahLusso]

Ufff that's a tough one. I'll preface this by saying that I don't look at watches as investments so bear that in mind as you read my recommendations. Also for the purpose of this I'm going to assume you mean the 126610LN not the Cermit/Starbucks as the market on the green one is a different beast compared to the black bezel. My initial advice would be to keep your 16610M - from an investment perspective the 16610M is one of the rarer variants within the 16610 reference and the fact its now two generations discontinued means its a very safe bet to keep increasing in value. But (in my opinion) much more important is the history and sentiment attached to the watch, both as a way to celebrate your 50th, and all the memories it would have attached to it from your time as a homocide investigator, and in general the memories that it must have been a part of in the last 11 years you've owned it for. IMO the new Sub will feel a bit cold compared to that, moreso if purchased just as an investment. Also another thing to bear in mind is the buy-in price for the new Submariner. Given the whole investment angle, a lot depends on whether you're able to buy the new Submariner at retail ($9,150) or whether you'll have to join in the gray market where it's going for anywhere from 13k to 19k. Buying in on the latter range you need to ask yourself how much higher will it go - and crucially, for it to count as an investment it needs to come with the intent to sell it at some point. So my recomendation would come in parts: 1. Keep the 16610M regardlesss of whether 2.0 or 2.1 apply : For its sentimental value, and for its longer term desirability as it slips into vintage, this will be a solid invest should you ever need to sell it and the long you hold on to it the more that profit margin will increase. 2.0 If you have the money to get it, and can purchase it at the retail price then by all means get it, at least for the next few years if you buy it at retail you're almost certain to turn a profit and since it would carry less sentimental value it'll be easier to part with the watch. *or* 2.1 If you have to get it at gray market, I'd say wait a bit for the market to cool down - the 126610 is still very new so prices are quite inflated so you might risk a smaller margin or even a loss if you have to buy in on current gray market prices.I'm basing this on the market pattern seen with the 126710BLNR where average price (on Chrono24) was $21k in Jul '19 when it came out, and by Jul '20 average price had dropped to $16.7k, and currently its at an avg price of $17.4k. Point being that in the 1st year its likely to start high then normalize over the course of its first year of production and then from there the market will decide when, if and how fast it'll rise up again from there. Sorry for the long response but hopefully it helps & gives plenty of context :)

[@JF-cn1mv]

Shah, Thank you for your opinion!!! I think I will keep my 16610M and purchase the new Sub at my AD...take care!

[@secondopinion6654]

@@JF-cn1mv Or give Rolex the finger and remove your aluminum insert for safekeeping and put a non-Rolex ceramic insert in your 16610. I know people who have done it. They resent Rolex for putting a thin aluminum insert on a sports watch all these years and then making an entire other series for the ceramic.

[@JF-cn1mv]

@@secondopinion6654 Hahahah thank you for input…The bezel on my 16610M is free from scuffs and scratches. If you know the answer to this question, great. Is it possible to put a newer oyster bracelet with glidelock clasp? Thank you for your input!

[@Baztation]

This is awesome knowledege!

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you liked the video :)

[@ccw5886]

Strongly agree with all comments. Nice summary

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks :)

[@FMK178]

Super. ! Three thumbs up. Best review ! I wonder what makes the difference in weight of both watches, the bracelet more than the body, hight and diameter being the same, only the lugs and crown-guards more fat. Excuse my poor english, I am no native speaker.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Glad you liked it, and your English is great don't worry - out of curiosity what's your native language? The difference in weight between the modern & vintage ones is mostly down to the bracelet - the links in the center on the older ones are hollowed out so there's less metal to add weight, on the modern ones all the links are solid metal so that adds more weight and also helps reduce that rickety feeling that you get on the vintage bracelets.

[@FMK178]

@@ShahLusso Thanks for answering. I absolutely prefer the older 16620. 007-watch :-)) . I own the Hulk and a 2010 16620. The older one looks much more dressy and elegant for me. Less weight is more comfortable. For my small wrist the shorter lugs fit much better. The maxi dial looks for me too packed. In addition the bezel looks much too shiny and bigheaded, look at me !!! The new one, sorry, reminds me more brass knuckles.

[@mohawkman4506]

I just picked up both 16610 an 14060M both M series an I have to say they are more comfortable than the 6 digit references ! Of which I own several . I find the 5 digit reference are more elegant an really have that tool purpose look . The 6 digit Rolex proportion are off ! I find the 6 digit more dressy an an refined! For me the 5 digit reference all day as my daily wear an when I wanna add some flair i put on a 6 digit fir going out !

[@ShahLusso]

Great position to be in having the best of both worlds! But if you had to pick just one or the other (5 digit vs 6) which would you pick?

[@mohawkman4506]

Shah Lusso 5 digit no holes case 5 digit

[@tristar333333]

Great video. Thanks!

[@ShahLusso]

You're welcome! Glad you liked it :)

[@glisse_1]

Thank you Shah, great video with lots of information. Who can tell me about my 1988 R serial number Sub Datejust? I received the timepiece brand new as a college grad gift, and it remains completely original, in mint condition, and as a full-set including both boxes, anchor, tags, polishing cloth, booklets and warranty card stamped with jeweler name, but I never filled out the card with my own name. It's the first year with the new stainless, has the Tritium dial, first production year with the letter prefix, and first production year with the 3135 movement as well. I've read my watch is very collectible. Any additional info about my Sub including value would be much appreciated.

[@ShahLusso]

My pleasure, it was great learning about this reference while i made the video & I'm glad it helped with giving you some more info on your watch. I'm sure some of the people in the comments can give you more specifics on your watch & its value (especially with all those original extras you have with it in addition to having it in mint condition).

[@RobertGeez]

Did you sell it yet?

[@glisse_1]

@@RobertGeez No.

[@frankyf8439]

I’m weird but love the bracelet

[@ShahLusso]

At the time I did this video, I probably would have called it weird too, but tbh in the years since I made it I’ve tried and owned more watches and come to understand the appeal of an older bracelet - primarily to do with comfort. The ricketier bracelets may not feel as bulletproof as the modern ones but they’re also lighter on the wrist and can really change the feel for the better, so I can get the appeal :)

[@johnaplease3474]

See how Rolex F it up with the new bezel? majority at the comment prefer the pre-ceramic model. so am i. Just purchased is while ago the 89', flawless just the loom is dead overall superb quality.

[@stevoteo8180]

I would definitely go for a tritium one

[@ShahLusso]

great choice, some of them look really nice when they have the original tritium hands and indices

[@timmcdonald5335]

Great review of a great watch. IMO the modern Rolex Sub supercase is a fail. So I would definately go with a 2010 model Sub which has most of the modern upgrades but with the classic design.

[@ShahLusso]

Thanks! Completely agree, I think the style & proportions on the pre-supercase are much better looking, I just wish you could get a modern, more solid bracelet on it - but who knows maybe Rolex is listening & will give us the best of both worlds with the next sub :)

[@Lion-qi8ej]

I have a 2001 16610. It’s losing 10-12 minutes a day. Would anyone recommend servicing it or trading it in for the latest model? Also, does the Rolex Certified refurbish take any value or performance from the watch? It’s never been serviced. Meant to add I wear the watch every day. Even doing yard work. It’s truly indestructible. So many compliments on it. Just wondering if I should get it serviced or sell it.

[@ShahLusso]

If it's losing 10-12 minutes per day it definitely needs a service. Getting it done by Rolex will definitely improve the performance, as for value, from what I understand, a lot depends on whether they replace things like the dial, lume etc. Different service centers give more leeway as to whether they let you keep everything original - others don't really give you a choice and replace everything and for the most part the market tends to favor original parts especially as the watch gets older and slips into vintage. Hope that helps & i'm sure some of the other 16610 owners will chime in and give some more precise insight :)

[@Lion-qi8ej]

@@ShahLusso thank you so much ! My AD suggested I trade it for a new model before servicing it. I guess the market is very hot. What is your opinion on that? Would you trade it in for the new version? I know mine is a great design.

[@davidofglenbrook4487]

I prefer the 116610LN

[@ShahLusso]

They’re both great watches (though I personally prefer the pre-ceramic), out of curiosity what do you prefer about the 116610LN?

[@meteor1237]

Got to add 16800

[@kyoshokev]

Haha just found out about the dive extension 😂

[@ShahLusso]

TBH I didn't even know about it when I first filmed this watch - I was telling a friend about having filmed it and they asked me "what did you think of that dive extension?" I ended up having to call up the store and ask if I could come back and film it again just so I could get footage of the extension 😂

[@christianortner3921]

Me too😂

[@RobinDaelman]

Thanks for the video. My 2 cents on the bracelet. Saying that this a shitty bracelet from the 80’s... hmmm. You are looking like a young guy diving in the history of this watch on the internet but didn’t experienced the evolution in that period when it came out. I did and so did my father. This bracelet made a clear distinction between a classic date perpetual rolex and the diver watch. Same Tudor did at that time. Today that distinction is gone and besides that diver extension it all looks the same. Again when you experienced that evolution yourself you just smile and let it go.... .

[@b.peppercorn739]

too much hand movement , I am real dizzy now.....

[@ShahLusso]

Don’t worry, just sit down for a minute or two and the dizziness will pass :)

[@AceHardy]

📝

[@nenadcubric2663]

I own a 2003 Y 16610,i would never sell it

[@ShahLusso]

It's a great watch, & I hope you continue to enjoy it for years to come :)

[@nenadcubric2663]

@@ShahLusso thanks

[@davidofglenbrook4487]

Oh yes...the one with the cheap, tinny bracelet and the aluminum bezel that scratches on a whim. No thanks...I’ll take the 116610LN please.

[@ShahLusso]

The bezel i don't take too much issue with, but i couldn't agree more about the bracelet, Rolex should just start switching them out for current-gen bracelets whenever they come in for service

[@jamesg.hromnak2333]

👍

[@ShahLusso]

🙏🏼

[@sergio5304]

Spanish?

[@ShahLusso]

con suerte lo subiria este fin de semana :)

[@ShahLusso]

Aqui lo tienes compadre, disculpa por el atraso: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3ise4KXmq1rsJI

[@sergio5304]

@@ShahLusso buen canal, y gracias. Atento a los proximos.

[@grandsicko8580]

Well, it has a date. So... its not a classic Sub.

[@ShahLusso]

Correction: Classic Submariner Date That being said, there are plenty of parallels between this and the 14060 of the same time period, and you could draw a lot of the same conclusions about it too since they’re so similar. The only difference would be that in 1998 Rolex did make an amendment to the reference number when they changed the movement (14060M)

[@tim4380]

You lost me at possible fakes. Never been fooled at all , old fakes , modern fakes none are even close. So your point on this is just dumb.

[@ShahLusso]

It's good that you haven't encountered/been fooled by any - though for potential buyers it's a valid concern with all Rolexes, especially ones that have been around for so long. With a nearly 20 year production run that's 20 years+ for fakers to master their efforts at making copies of it and some are disturbingly accurate. The fact that Rolex themselves saw the need to add additional security features over the course of its production means they realized that too. I can agree that's not technically a fault of the watch itself, but still something to be wary of from a buying perspective - how much weight or priority you give to it is totally subjective though of course.

[@yusakufudo367]

No matter how good Is the Rolex in my opinion is still too overprice compared to omega

[@ShahLusso]

True Omegas will almost always offer better value given the speculation & markups that the market has on Rolex, though as far as Rolex pricing goes this generation can still be had for around the retail of the current 116610LN so that’s still in my opinion decent value given it’s iconic status and the fact it’s a discontinued model...markups on current production models continue to baffle me

[@thegorn]

Chinsy bracelet, no AR coating underside, design is a yawnfest. I'd rather get something cool and modern like a Formex Reef or Oris Aquis. But that's just me. For some strage reason people like to fawn over old subs. Makes them feel special.

[@michaelgoff5231]

My 2003 y 16610 the last of the drilled luggs is a truly beautiful timepiece. The supercace models today look way too bling and quite vulgar

[@ShahLusso]

Great example, and the 16610 looks great on straps too. Definitely agree with you on the supercase, IMO it lost alot of the sleek elegance that the 5 digit version had.