Reply With Quoteone would be daft to sell a LV sub imo.
will the Daytona rocket up ! the ceramic are dropping and will do for the next 3 years as the market gets flooded, which will force the 116520 to drop imo.
Only ones going up are older 16520 models.
Evening all,
Yes its another one of those "what shall I buy" / Rolex threads.
I've got some thinking to do over the next few days as I consider an opportunity to pick up a lovely 2009 116520 Daytona in Mint condition (white face). The downside is that for financial reasons I would need to trade my 2007 LV Submariner. Obviously it would need some cash as well.
I have a 1999 GMT Master II to give me that classic Rolex sports watch 'hit' and wonder whether the Daytona & GMT combo might be better and offer me more options in terms of looks and complications.
LV Submariner has been motoring in terms of value recently but I do wonder how far it can go. Probably same story for the 116520 so 'like for like' I'm probably not missing out on a generic 'they don't make those anymore' based increases.
But of course that's not what its about. So trying to ignore the financial aspect which two do you prefer and would you trade LV Sub?
Cheers.
(No photos needed as you all know what they look like)
Chris
one would be daft to sell a LV sub imo.
will the Daytona rocket up ! the ceramic are dropping and will do for the next 3 years as the market gets flooded, which will force the 116520 to drop imo.
Only ones going up are older 16520 models.
I own both - my Daytona is even a white dial. Watches aren't about what's going to be worth more in 10 years for me, so keep that in mind.
The Daytona is a "better watch", with the solid bracelet and clasp. It feels like a vastly more expensive watch as well. On the other hand, it wears surprisingly small in a way that doesn't show up in photographs. Have you tried one on for an extended amount of time? The case is small and the bezel is wide, leading to a small dial. I'm definitely more careful when I wear the Daytona.
Thanks for that. Interesting perspective and just the kind of thing that would make me wary.
I've only tried one on briefly a few in a few years ago and recall thinking, "that's smaller than I expected".
But I wasn't really in a position to purchase then so didn't take it too seriously.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
I have a tiny wrist, so it wasn't a problem for me. However, when I pulled it out of the box for the first time my first thought was "I see why everyone complains about the size". The Daytona gives off a decidedly similar feeling to me as the Sea Dweller 16600. Chunky bezel, but with small dial. I was surprised that readability was totally fine. I have zero idea why people complain about that. I've never once had a problem reading anything off the dial. It's also shiny. Very shiny.Originally Posted by smokey99
I also have both and has been said before it wears a lot smaller than it looks.
I always go back to my LV as the lack of date on the Daytona can be annoying.
I wouldn't swap.
I own all the three watches mentioned i.e. LV Sub, GMT Master II and white face 116520 Daytona. In addition I have black face SS Daytona 116520, Steel and Gold Black face Daytona 116520, Black Face new Ceramic Daytona.
IMHO there is no way I would swap a Sub LV for 116520 white face Daytona, the Sub LV is a better all round watch. The Daytona is flawed as a watch with readability issues in all it's versions (and no I do not wear glasses or need to go to specsavers) the Daytona wears small and the steel bezel and PCLs show scuffs/scratches. In contrast the Sub LV is easily readable, does not have PCLs, is less prone to scratches and is not as bling as the Daytona. Resale wise the Sub LV is probably the better bet too.
I have the gmt2 as well. It's a compelling alternative to the LV and Daytona. Though the maxi dial/hand is nice.
So you're not sure then? 😀 All fair points and on balance it's were I was heading instinctively.....But I just keep see those photos and it's just calling me...
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using TZ-UK mobile app
I'm going to go against the grain here and say I'd probably make the flip....
While the LV Sub is undoubtedly a great watch, you've said that you're keeping your GMT (i.e.: you've already got your favourite Sports Rolex) and I think a white faced Daytona would make any even better and more varied pairing.
And I never could stand the old Rolex clasps to be honest, thye used to disappoint me every time I put on my ('old style') Explorer II and Datejust.
Good luck either way mate....
I absolutely hate green but think the Daytona is a beautiful piece of design. So I'd prefer the Daytona.
But the LV will become increasingly sought after IMO, and prices will be at parity with that model Daytona soon ish.
Last edited by Plake; 25th January 2017 at 22:28.
Get rid of the GMT.....easy decision for me, can`t stand GMT watches with that extra hand.
For what it's worth, I'd buy the Daytona and get rid of both the LV and GMT. Then I`d look for the best 16610 or 14060 I could find. I guess the 16610 makes more sense because it's got a date function, but I think trying to rationalise the decision in terms of 'functionality' is futile so I`d probably opt for the 14060 sans Cyclops and date to clutter it up. That's the classic pair IMO, no gimmicky green bezel and no superfluous 3rd hand cluttering the dial.
Much of the 'Rolex Rolex' hype goes over my head, but I have to admit to liking the 'old' Daytona and the old Sub. If I was looking to own two Rolex sports that would definitely be my choice.
I don`t believe in buying watches in the hope that they'll make money, I`m happy if they hold their value.
Paul
Daytona is a great watch but LV is greater
Ha. Sounds like a clever bit of marketing from the LV Appreciation Society.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Paul, That's spookily close to exactly what I was thinking.
I've also spotted a well priced 14060 and whilst the aggregate price is more than I'd like due to trading in two watches.....there's no doubt it would be a great pair.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Maybe. I have both and would sell the Daytona first
Dig deep and keep them all. In 5 years time you will look back and realise that this is shrewd advice, and you won't have any regrets about selling anything.
I would say Daytona if you have smallish wrists. Mine just feels great and I have sold my SubC and the BLNR is going as well.
I was lucky enough to own an LV a few years back and I just could't get on with the green bezel (I wear my watches and don't regard them as investments).......it didn't go with anything!! Mine was sold and the money put towards a 116520. I have absolutely no regrets. All I would say is that I personally don't find that the watch wears "small"......I think it is an ideal size. As for your GMT I have owned three of those and never got on with them. I would agree with an earlier poster and would also move that on and replace it with a 14060M.......great watch.
lovely watches, how comes your selling?I would say Daytona if you have smallish wrists. Mine just feels great and I have sold my SubC and the BLNR is going as well.
Personally i would gett he Daytona as to me they always have been one of the 'grail' watches and less common (in my eyes see them being worn less) than Subs
Thanks .poza
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Not that's it's a great barometer of pricing but I'm see the opposite. On Watchfinder, the have a new ceramic Daytona at over £16k! And another in the high 15s.
I would keep your LV. I love the daytona. I think save till you can keep all 3?
Daytona has the edge here.
Aris
It is not getting any wrist time and I have really gone off the supercase. And to think I even had it put on a SubC brushed bracelet too!
Posting Permissions
