Comments:
Rolex Daytona 6263, 16520 and 116500 Black: A Trio of Black Daytona.
I could see a nice Daytona 6263 today in a shop in Paris,
And yesterday night, a 16520 Black:
And now, the 116500, for the comparison.
And yesterday night, a 16520 Black:
And now, the 116500, for the comparison.
37 mm ( 6263 ) versus 40 mm,
Manual winding movement ( 6263 ) versus automatic ( Zenith for the 16520 / Rolex for the 116500 ).
Bakelite and ceramic against steel bezel.
Screw in pushers for everybody.
What's your favorite?
Best,
Nicolas.
Without any price consideration I think I’ll go for the Rolex 6263 [nt]
No message body
Yes , the tiercé is in order of your présentation, Nicolas
And the photo of the 116500 confirm that i don't like the ceramic bezel ; it look like a tire too thick !!
The 6263 is splendid !!!
The 6263 is splendid !!!
Well, the 16520 still has my preference because of the feeling / perception of quality for me. But some will prefer the charm of the vintage, indeed. [nt]
No message body
6263, no doubt.
Between the 16520 and the 116500, I'd need to see them side by side and try them on to decide. I liked the white dial 16520.
Best,
Vte
6263 by a mile for me
I like the 6263 then 16520 tritium dial then the new ceramic. On the new ceramic I like the white dial better.
I wish they made the modern panda dial in steel - now it is only in gold. That comes close to 6263. I know they would never do that.
Also I like plain subdials better rather than the concentric dials in zenith models onwards.
Just my feelings..
Partha
I wish they made the modern panda dial in steel - now it is only in gold. That comes close to 6263. I know they would never do that.
Also I like plain subdials better rather than the concentric dials in zenith models onwards.
Just my feelings..
Partha
Thanks for sharing this elaborated answer, Partha. Very interesting. [nt]
No message body
I share your preference. For me, the 16520 is a kind of best of both words. [nt]
No message body
Because of the bakelite and the ceramic, which you prefer over the steel tachy? [nt]
No message body
Vintage always first
But I was never a big fan of the black dialled 16520 or the next model
But the new Daytona does sing out to me
Would be interesting to do the same comparison with white dials
Thanks nico
J
But the new Daytona does sing out to me
Would be interesting to do the same comparison with white dials
Thanks nico
J
As soon as I have the possibility, I will do it. Thanks, Julian. [nt]
No message body
It seems that it is a clear winner. Thanks for sharing your preference, my friend. [nt]
No message body
There’s a reason why Rolex didn’t recreate the 6263 in modern times ...
For me, owning both the 116520 which I think appearance-wise is similar to the 16520 except for the movement, the bracelet and the hour markers and the 116500,I would still go for the modern ceramic version for the improvements made on the bezel which also highlighted the modern look. The 40mm size is also perfect.
In-house movement automatic put the watch ahead of the Speedy IMHO. The 6263 doesn’t do it for me.
In-house movement automatic put the watch ahead of the Speedy IMHO. The 6263 doesn’t do it for me.
I own the 16520 and love it, but I am also strongly attracted by the 116500, which I find very cool looking and well made. Less by the 6263, but I am not a Daytona Fan... [nt]
No message body
My friend all great in their own ways.
It would be 6263 and 16520 for me first.
M.
This is my version but in white dials.
M.
This is my version but in white dials.
Wow, too good to have the three of them! Thanks, Miles for this collage. [nt]
No message body
The white dial of the 116500 is very nice ...
But why this so thick céramic bézel ??? A little bit thinner and the modern Daytona can become quasi perfect ....
I will have to check that. I didn't pay attention to the thickness of the ceramic bezel. [nt]
No message body
I like the thicker Ceramic bezel on the modern pieces.
The Platinum version works so well I think and the steel also agrees with me. To me it’s done just to let us know that it is a modern watch.
M.
M.
Perfect! Thank you. It doesn't look that thick, on this picture. [nt]
No message body