Why no love...

Posts
2,844
Likes
2,437
For a 168000 Submariner?
My understanding is that these were the shortest run of the Submariners, but not very desired.
Thanz for helping my Rolex learning curve. Miki
 
Posts
821
Likes
1,415
Where do you see proof that there is "no love" for these?

They are going for over 10k on secondary with full sets. Not sure where you're getting this information from...
 
Posts
2,844
Likes
2,437
They are going for over 10k on secondary with full sets. Not sure where you're getting this information from...
Considering that almost any 30 year old+ Sub full set sells for at least 10k, that make these 168000 just another 30 year old+ Sub.
Edited:
 
Posts
2,171
Likes
15,474
Most peopoe probably doesn’t see any benifit with the 168000 compared to other references. If you want a more modern safir sub there is newer better references. If you want a more vintage feel and matte dial there is older ”better” references.

The 168000 is just an inbetweener I think!
 
Posts
2,844
Likes
2,437
Most peopoe probably doesn’t see any benifit with the 168000 compared to other references. If you want a more modern safir sub there is newer better references. If you want a more vintage feel and matte dial there is older ”better” references.

The 168000 is just an inbetweener I think!
This all makes sense!
 
Posts
1,605
Likes
6,475
I think the lack of a matte dial also hurts it. It's a bit too "modern" to get the bonus from the relative rarity
 
Posts
1,258
Likes
2,728
I think the lack of a matte dial also hurts it. It's a bit too "modern" to get the bonus from the relative rarity
Hows about a 5513 with White gold surround? Last of the plexi but most people just want to have a matte dial
 
Posts
2,844
Likes
2,437
Hows about a 5513 with White gold surround? Last of the plexi but most people just want to have a matte dial
I have to agree. Unfortunately I sold a really nice 16800 with a beautiful matte dial and would prefer that to my 168000.