Rolex

… but I must choose one. The one on the right is a Cermit that I bought new from an AD a couple of years ago. The one on the left is a circa 1984 16660 that I have proposed to buy as part of a trade for the Cermit. The Cermit is one of the most comfortabl...  

the two go for your perfect vintage Sub.

If you don't need red text on the dial, those older Sea Dwellers are relatively good value, and I find the high domed plexi *extremely* charming. They are thick by the numbers, but so much lighter than later models with sapphire that I find them to wear r... 

… but hunt for the vintage Sub you love.

Loved my 16660 at the time but the world has moved on and I'm not a vintage guy so maybe a one sided opinion but I appreciate the build quality of the modern watches, happy to leave the old hollow endlinks and stamped clasps to the vintage collectors.... ... 

Seems you are used to the cermit’s larger dial and lume. The 16660 will seems small and no lume at might would be an inconvenience to you. I would agree to go with the vintage 1665 if you wanna dive into the vintage world.

A few additional thoughts: 1. The smaller apparent diameter of the vintage Rolex models is actually an advantage for me: I have very thin wrists (see photo). 2. I have owned many new-model Rolexes and have sold most of them. I have never owned a vintage R...  

Instead, create your own vintage by wearing your watches all day long and mark your own stories on them…🥂

Thanks for all the great responses. I decided not to buy the triple six, mainly because, as a Sea Dweller, it’s thick and sat too high on my thin wrist. I’m now looking at a good condition 16800 (mid 80s): same cool vintage vibe, lower wrist profile. This...