patekova
1424
I am thrilled to admit I was mistaken. I adhered to the general (mis)conception that the black dials on 116500 and 116520 are exactly the same. Not true!
Nov 25, 2018,07:29 AM
When the 116500 ceramic steel Daytona was introduced in 2016 I was thunderstruck by its beauty. For me it was the absolutely perfect modern sports Rolex and a very worthy heir to the 6263. However, one thing bothered me a lot. I thought, couldn’t Rolex have bothered to make a least some changes to the black dial to differentiate it from the 116520? The white dial version was markedly different (although obviously having somewhat similar DNA to the 16520 white dial).
Recently however, I noticed clear differences between the 116520 and 116500 black dials.
The 2 most signicant differences being: 1) the circles in the registers are more gray in the 116520 and more silver in the 116500; and 2) the writing in the 5 lines starting with “Rolex”
has thicker lettering which also appears to be a more bold and brighter white. These differences for me give the 116500 dial a more vibrant and legible appearance. Simply put I much prefer the 116500 black dial compare to the 116520 black, especially as it combines with the ceramic bezel.
Other more subtle differences: SWISS MADE has a longer signature on the 116500; the spacing of the 5 lines is slightly different; and the hash marks between 5 and 7 PM are different. Seems like each time I compare I notice something different.
I wonder if the somewhat greater love that many have for the white dial and the somewhat lower price on the secondary for the black is based on the common misperception that the black dial on the 116500 is exactly the same as on the 116520.
As for my preference between 116500 black and 116500 white, they have a very different character and I have come to like the black at least as much as the white. “Love” would be
the more accurate term to describe my feelings than “like”.
I will be interested in reading your thoughts.
Best, patekova