Help me pick - 14060m or 16570 Polar

[tymonster]

Hey all. I am looking to rejoin the 5 digit club. I previously had a 14060 T<25 that I bought years ago for $4800 (the good 'ol days) and sold it to get my SD4K. I am missing the 5 digit footprint and I can't decide between the Sub or ExpII. As things are moving North I want to get back into one before they're stupid expensive.

I don't need nor would I really use the GMT movement, I just appreciate the watch for what it is and like that it's a little more under the radar (these days) with the steel bezel. Would be holes case with SELs. I am not interested in a black dial 16570, just the Polar.

I already have a diver in the SD4K but it's not a daily piece. And the Sub is its own watch anyway so not worried about repeat style watches in a small collection. Whichever I go with will be the new daily driver. I wear scrubs to work so not concerned with versatility.

Assume numbers are the same in terms of price, along with condition of the watch and complete set, etc.

Thanks.

[subtona]

These two go hand in hand and are my two favorite Rolex. Each have been in collection longer than all the rest.

Cant go wrong.

Since you have a diver, I would go with the polar. It is truly a most perfect travel watch. And it can sometimes be used as a compass when you get turned around.

[Cru Jones]

With an SD, I wouldn’t go with either. I’d instead pick up a 5-digit GMT with SEL/lug holes.

Ignoring the SD, I would go with the Sub. I used to own the 16570 Polar and the bezel scratches annoyed me on the finely brushed SS. YMMV.