WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I am thinking of buying a 126600. Is it the same height as the 16600? I have looked all over the web, but can't get a clear answer. If anyone has both and can compare and let me know I would appreciate it.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
It's not particularly tall in my experience but because the watch is 43mm it carries more wrist presence and depending on your wrist size along with the overall size of your hand it might make the watch appear to sit higher if you're on the smaller side.

I've often said that you can absolutely get away wearing it on a wrist as small as 6.5". Here's a comparison with a submariner ceramic. I have 6.5" for reference. You can see the depth difference

20200321_004443_1586300694755.jpg

20200321_004433_1586300743707.jpg
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,871 Posts





Although I’ve never tried on or even seen a 126600 SD43, I did save comparative pictures of my 116600 SD4K and my 114060 SubC, the SubC having the exact same dimensions as MeiXiang’s 116613 TT Submariner. Although my wrist is 7”, I wear my watches behind the prominence of my wrist bone where the measurement is 6.5”.

Like MeiXiang I suspect I would also be able to wear a 126600 SD43 because of its ideal dimensions of thickness/diameter, likely better proportioned than my SD4K. Although I sold my SubC not too long ago, I still have my SD4K with no plans to sell. I will say when I rotated my SD4K and SubC, I could discern little, if any, difference between the two in the way in which each one wore on my wrist.

Since the OP wanted a comparison between a 116600 and 126600, perhaps he can use my information coupled with that of MeiXiang as the dimensions of our scrawny wrists are similar!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
691 Posts
At that thickness, try it on before you buy. If you can't find a 16600, you can look at Omega ADs for a 39.5mm Planet Ocean, which will be a similar thickness.

Personally for me 14.6 would probably be too thick; my Planet Ocean is 14.2 and that's the thickest I can comfortably wear on my 7" wrist.

I tried a PO 8500 at 15.something mm and it was laughably huge. Made choosing the 2201.50 even easier; the looks already had me sold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roningrad

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I have been wearing a 16600 for the past couple of years, and have no problem with the height, but I would like to get a new diver and since I have an 8" wrist, the 43" SD is on my list. Local AD called to tell me they have one, but didn't get in to try it on before they closed the showroom, so now I am trying to figure out how it would wear, and I keep thinking about it. That wrist shots were very helpful. Thanks for the responses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
I have the SD43 and it wears great as my daily on my 7.75” wrist.

I previously had a 45.5 mm Planet Ocean 8500, so the downsize feels much more appropriate and comfortable for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,979 Posts
At that thickness, try it on before you buy. If you can't find a 16600, you can look at Omega ADs for a 39.5mm Planet Ocean, which will be a similar thickness.

Personally for me 14.6 would probably be too thick; my Planet Ocean is 14.2 and that's the thickest I can comfortably wear on my 7" wrist.

I tried a PO 8500 at 15.something mm and it was laughably huge. Made choosing the 2201.50 even easier; the looks already had me sold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How is this post relevant on a Rolex thread asking about thickness between 2 models of Rolex?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,979 Posts
The watch wears big compared to 40’s that’s for sure. Height wise I wouldn’t be too concerned. It’s more about if your wrist suits the size. It also depends on where you wear your watches. The bigger Rolex divers do feel heavy to those that wear them over the wrist knuckle toward the hand or wear them loose. I’ve worn a 16600 and it can seem tall due to being 40 and thick whereas the 43 spreads that thickness a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Hey OP,

I've just woken up in the morning so I can take better pictures as compared to a ceramic sub date. Sorry, they're not the best.

20200408_080426_1586329680324.jpg

20200408_080430_1586329696477.jpg

20200408_080529_1586329719887.jpg

20200408_081035_1586329882113.jpg 20200408_081046_1586329901814.jpg

20200408_080642_1586329776314.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,979 Posts
And for no other reason than because, it’s turned into a 126600 vs bluesy fest.....
Can someone lend Bro Jman or Bro Gun a 43 and wrap this up?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
691 Posts
How is this post relevant on a Rolex thread asking about thickness between 2 models of Rolex?
He's clearly considering thickness as a relevant data point about the watch. It can be difficult to find specific Rolex models to try at ADs so I was suggesting a close analogue he could try as an alternative since watch thickness does make a large difference in wearability. Not sure what about that post merits the rude response but ok.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top