16700 vs 16710

Sorry to derail thread immediately but: are you saying you were born in 1990??

No offense intended, just that something about your posts (and handle) always smelled of boomer 😁 ... and here I am finding out I could be your poppa 😗

Anyway, back to the Rolex discussion at hand ...

No, more like at some point you were yelling for someone to get off your lawn and to go back to their “own country”** and I got a grandpa vibe

**never actually happened

Damned millennials seeming like damned boomers is damn conundrum for us damned gen-X’ers

I have a 16710 from 2004 ( my sons birth year) love it.

Both watches where being sold on 1990, so you’re good there. The 16700 carries a higher premium.

if it’s a watch you’ll wear on rotation the quick set date will come handy, really handy.

Other than that, assuming both are 1990 versions there’s not that much difference between them.

The 16710 does give you the option of the coke bezel, which I love. You can source a coke a Pepsi and a black bezel straight from Rolex under 100 bucks with a 16710, but they will only give you a Pepsi ( and I think black) with the 16700. This only matters if you’re the type of person that likes to change things around.... and if you want an fairly inexpensive original bezel right from Rolex. I got a coke bezel at Rolex center in 5th Avenue and kept the original Pepsi. All while I waited. ( the new one went to my brother in law in exchange for his original 2004 coke.

Other than those two things ( bezel option and quick date versus quick hand set) I would only look for price points to guide your purchase.

good luck.

There is not a lot of difference between these two models. The choice comes down to those few differences that best meet your need.

The case size and appearance were very similar between the GMT 16700 and 16710. The GMT 16700 was produced from 1988 to around 1999. The movement was a Caliber 3175, and had a quick-set date feature and one alternative time zone. There were two available bezels. One was the Blue/Red "Pepsi" and the other was the black. The GMTII 16710 was produced from 1989 to 2007. This one has a caliber 3185 and 2 additional time zones by using an independent hour hand but it does not have the quick set date feature. The 16710 had 3 bezel options with the "Pepsi", black and the Black/Red "Coke." Any of these bezels can be used on the 16700 and 16710.

Despite the long run of the GMT 16700, I've read it was produced in smaller quantities than the GMT II 16710 counterpart, and the 16700 was sold at a lower price. Fewer produced watches may factor into future valuations. There's a lot of variables that go into current pricing for both models. I suggest to pay attention to condition, condition, condition and look for a full set. That may be very difficult to find when adding your desire for a birth year 1990 model.

A while ago I asked myself the same question of which model as you and determined the quick set date feature best met my needs since the watch would be in rotation and it would be a rare occasion that I would need to track 3 time zones.

Agree with both of the above gents. For me I went with the 16710, no holes. Just a personal preference.

the lack of quick date didn’t bother me. It’s very quick to whizz through the quick hour hand to roll fwd so never any issues.

It’s a great watch in either configuration. Go for it 👍

16700 is a true GMT like a 1675 or 16750. By the way, if you need it for trip you have to do hacking for a local time setting.

I would go for the best example you can find of either, especially if you're looking for a specific year of production. Given the choice between perfect examples of both, I would lean towards the 16700 with it being the last of the GMT Master (rather than II). The 16700 also has a fractionally thinner case, though it's almost imperceptible.

And you’re suggesting the 16710 isn’t a true GMT based on it having/not having what?

While we’re accounting for 16700 vs 16710 can we lard in the vs 16750?

That's what I was saying!

An interesting one the 16750. It’s the actual Magnum PI model. To me it makes sense to go with this reference (which is transitional) if you catch the earlier ones with the Matte dial. Otherwise I like the 16700 better. The latter glossy 16750 with it’s famous flaw of the lacquer breaking into a spider Webb pattern is just BS in my opinion. It’s a cracked dial. I don’t see spider webbing as a good thing on my window, my watch or my wall. (Just me)

As mentioned before (and I’m kind of ashamed for not noting it myself) the 16700 is the last of the master line. With the 16710 (technically really the 16760 first) starting the master II line. The 16700 is like the equivalent to the 14060M on the sub no date line. The last reference to carry the original pin hole small cased DNA following the 5512 and 5513. While the 16710 (60) starts the modern lines of GMT Masters. Actually you could argue timeline - wise it is more like the 5513 with the 14060 starting the modern line.

Anyway, I’m confusing things by adding the sub line to the conversation but it’s just to draw a reference with a more familiar line to most.

Going back to the GMT line. The 16760 (first coke, Fat Lady or Sophia Loren GMT) did have a small change on case size, further making them a step into the modern GMT master line (the master II). This was to house the new movement (can’t remember the actual movement #) I believe the case was brought back to dimension on the 16710. If you can find a 16760 take it. They’re lovely watches. No Pepsi though, just coke.

The 16710 line is so big on constant changes that it really is a “choose your piece” type of reference. Tritium no tritium, Luminova, súper luminova, this, that and the other. The advantage of this is that you can still find them at a good price. I love mine from 2004 but it’s not a specially valuable watch all things taken into consideration.

There are some deeper factors in terms of movements or leading hand etc through all these references from the end of the 1675 to the end of the 16710 but, to be honest, I’m not really versed to that depth and any research I can do on my end is the same anyone else can.

It could have been sold in 1990 even if produced earlier.