Sub date vs no-date

[Serif]

I own 2 Tudor date subs a 14060 Sub, BB58 and an Explorer II. In my watch rotation I find the date versions are used more frequently- I like to check the date, like the cyclops and like to hear the date change if I’m up late🙂.
When not in use the no dates are easier to get going as well so they tend to stay off my wrist longer than the date versions.

[StanCho]

Over time, I found that my preference is to keep things simple. So, comparing the ND with either Exp2 or GMT II as these are the only ones I have alongside the Sub, the answer is simple...

[ocb]

Originally Posted by majidessa

You got this wrong

The term Sub is used for the no ND version (OG), and then you have the Sub Date.

They are both just Subs but no date is far less popular so it deserves the qualifier.

[london_v]

ND all day long :)

[majidessa]

Originally Posted by ocb

They are both just Subs but no date is far less popular so it deserves the qualifier.

In fact the Sub is more popular among watch collectors and afficionados since it is more symmetrical and a diver. As for the Sub Date, it might be more useful for people with the need for such complication or if it is their only watch.

[Jefferyasher]

I think Rolex did a tremendous service by increasing the no-date models when they added the OP line. Prior to, most people had two realistic options - Explorer and sub (one look and model) as the Daytona was relatively expensive and unavailable. I think people are now more accepting of no-date models.

[Jonny8]

Was always the Sub for me. Now I have a Sub date and have to say I think I prefer it. It has a little more visual interest and another really useful complication.

[ocb]

Originally Posted by majidessa

In fact the Sub is more popular among watch collectors and afficionados since it is more symmetrical and a diver. As for the Sub Date, it might be more useful for people with the need for such complication or if it is their only watch.

That’s only your opinion, as you’re simply calling those with the no date version aficionados and collectors.

[davek35]

Submariner

[Texasjim]

Like em both… If I HAD to choose, it would be a no date.

[spinnaker226]

“No date”
The only sub I like with the date complication is the Starbucks, but it really comes down to personal preference.

[Kenny G]

Love them both but prefer the sub (no date).

[ltmgeller]

I’m mental so id say 1 of each. I know I’m obsessed.

[Zach69SS]

My 2nd reason for the for the No Date, is I don’t worry about the date anymore, if the watch I’m wearing has a date complication great ? If not that’s fine too.

The only other one for me would be the LV or LB green or blue bezels because of the contrast with the black dial.

Cheers,

[jb335]

Like many people, when I bought my first Rolex it was a Sub Date (116610LN, gone but not forgotten). I thought it was going to be my one and only nice watch (lololol) so I decided I needed a date and I thought the cyclops would give the full Rolex experience.

Now that I am a watch fiend, I would only own a Sub without a date. I have my GMTs and others for when I want a watch with a date.

The Sub does look best sans date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jb335]

Originally Posted by JRell

1 Rolex watch - sub date. 2 + Rolex watches - sub and others with the cyclops date. Gotta have at least one with the cyclops, it is what makes Rolex iconic.

What he said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr. Superlative]

I prefer the Submariner to the Sub date. There is something about the balance and symmetry of that dial that makes that piece incredibly appealing and versatile. If you don’t require to know what the date is every time you look at your wrist, I’d opt for thr Submariner.

[Mick_Tock]

I'm puzzled. So many on this thread say they prefer the Sub, yet we are told the Sub date outsells it by 10 to 1. Is it because there's a difference between the average Rolex buyer and us forum members?
As for the OP, you don't need the date so get the Sub.

[NigeG]

Originally Posted by Mick_Tock

I'm puzzled. So many on this thread say they prefer the Sub, yet we are told the Sub date outsells it by 10 to 1. Is it because there's a difference between the average Rolex buyer and us forum members?
As for the OP, you don't need the date so get the Sub.

Probably because there are so many variations of Sub Date vs one Sub

It would be interesting to know how many 126610LN gets sold vs 124060.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StanCho]

Forgot to add the photo up there ;)

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by NigeG

Probably because there are so many variations of Sub Date vs one Sub

It would be interesting to know how many 126610LN gets sold vs 124060.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Steel Sub 126610
Production 2020-2023 - 177,328 watches

Steel Sub No Date 124060
Production 2020-2023 - 82,382 watches

Starbucks or Cermit 103,584 watches

Actual data from Rolex Submariner Book

Ratio 10 Date vs 4.65 ND so 2 to 1 approximately

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by 60sec

Hi guys. Looking for some help. I have no need for a date on my watch so just asking purely on esthetics and resale is not important. Which do you prefer, Sub date or no-date? I’m having a hard time decided and curious to hear some different lines of reasoning. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sub No Date. If you want a date then an SD43 as it's much nicer than a Black Sub if you have a 6.5 flat wrist or above in my opinion.

[Deppe]

Originally Posted by ocb

They are both just Subs but no date is far less popular so it deserves the qualifier.

No, they are both not just subs - there are the Submariner and there are the Submariner Date. Don’t believe me? Well, ask Rolex then.

[cop414]

I definitely prefer the Submariner

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Jefferyasher

I think Rolex did a tremendous service by increasing the no-date models when they added the OP line. Prior to, most people had two realistic options - Explorer and sub (one look and model) as the Daytona was relatively expensive and unavailable. I think people are now more accepting of no-date models.

Air King and Milgauss

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Mick_Tock

I'm puzzled. So many on this thread say they prefer the Sub, yet we are told the Sub date outsells it by 10 to 1. Is it because there's a difference between the average Rolex buyer and us forum members?
As for the OP, you don't need the date so get the Sub.

Don't believe everything you read or on forums. Actual data is officially out from Rolex.

[Mick_Tock]

So out of all variations of subs sold over this period (363,294) only 82,382 were no dates. I make that 4.4 to 1 in favour of the date version.
I'm not trying to start an argument and I don't doubt your figures. The 10:1 that I quoted is just what I've heard anecdotally. My point still stands - many people profess to prefer the no date, but more buy the sub date.

[PepsiBezel]

Originally Posted by NigeG

Probably because there are so many variations of Sub Date vs one Sub

It would be interesting to know how many 126610LN gets sold vs 124060.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

126610LV Submariner Date 103,584
126610LN Submariner Date 177,328

124060 Submariner 82,382

From the Rolex Submariner book. Still haven’t seen a screen shot with the numbers for the 126613 and 126619 Submariner Dates.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by cop414

I definitely prefer the Submariner

Great picture Tim

[PepsiBezel]

Originally Posted by Manamana

Steel Sub 126610
Production 2020-2023 - 177,328 watches

Steel Sub No Date 124060
Production 2020-2023 - 82,382 watches

Starbucks or Cermit 103,584 watches

Actual data from Rolex Submariner Book

Ratio 10 Date vs 4.65 ND so 2 to 1 approximately

Is this just the ratio of 124060 to 126610LN (I.e. not including 126610LV)?