Gold Submariner - why all the love?

[Maverick686]

I may catch a lot of heat for this comment. However, I'd like to preface this by saying I do love Rolex and they are fine time pieces.

However, I don't understand the popularity of the Gold Submariner. Do people take them diving? The submariner is probably my least favorite Rolex, unless used as an actual dive watch.

What am I missing? There are many other gold watches I'd prefer before the Submariner.

[iLLGT2]

And there are many other gold watches that you prefer however not others? Pretty self explanatory, preference :)

But to answer your question, Sub is iconic, point blank.

[Runnin' Rebel]

Merry Christmas

[chieftd]

Originally Posted by Runnin' Rebel

Merry Christmas

Very nice photos, I especially like the cuff shot. Excellent play with light on the bezel. Aloha

[AgentHsu]

Because I like me nipples.

[vman]

There is nothing rational about high-end watches.

[GoldenSub]

The Gold Sub is the Ultimate Watch!

[Muzz]

If you want some blue on your Submariner it is the only way that it is going to happen. Personal preference.

[LuminousMaximus]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

I may catch a lot of heat for this comment. However, I'd like to preface this by saying I do love Rolex and they are fine time pieces.

However, I don't understand the popularity of the Gold Submariner. Do people take them diving? The submariner is probably my least favorite Rolex, unless used as an actual dive watch.

What am I missing? There are many other gold watches I'd prefer before the Submariner.

First, you should give specific reasons why you don't like the Submariner...

1.

2.

3.

4.

and so on...

[LuminousMaximus]

oops, I forgot the obligatory, $36,800.00 Retail Gold Sub pic's...

[Runnin' Rebel]

Originally Posted by LuminousMaximus

oops, I forgot the obligatory, $36,800.00 Retail Gold Sub pic's...

[Maverick686]

Originally Posted by LuminousMaximus

First, you should give specific reasons why you don't like the Submariner...

1.

2.

3.

4.

and so on...

Sure...

1. Most popular, Go-To Rolex Watch particularly for people who don't know anything about watches but have a little bit of money

2. I hate the Raised White Dot on the dial (minor, but it annoys me)

3. Everyone and his mom has a Submariner

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary.

5. I travel constantly, so a GMT watch fits my needs perfect and is water resistant to 100m. Realistically, most divers, even advanced, don't go much beyond 30 meters.

I'm not knocking the people who own them, it's a personal preference.

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

[japenney]

The sub is an amazing watch. It is the only gold rolex with a glide lock adjustment which is especially useful for comfort with heavy gold watches. It also looks great and makes me happy to look at it. I could have chose any gold rolex after flipping 10+ rolex this year but I picked this one for so many reasons.

Some people go through a phase were they don't want to wear iconic watches because too many people wear them. Some day you realize that they are popular for a good reason and you are missing out just because you want to be unique.

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by japenney

The sub is an amazing watch. It is the only gold rolex with a glide lock adjustment which is especially useful for comfort with heavy gold watches. It also looks great and makes me happy to look at it. I could have chose any gold rolex after flipping 10+ rolex this year but I picked this one for so many reasons.

Some people go through a phase were they don't want to wear iconic watches because too many people wear them. Some day you realize that they are popular for a good reason and you are missing out just because you want to be unique.

Nice Josh!

[520Matt]

I personally love the look of the yellow gold blue sub.

[TG3N]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

Sure...

1. Most popular, Go-To Rolex Watch particularly for people who don't know anything about watches but have a little bit of money

2. I hate the Raised White Dot on the dial (minor, but it annoys me)

3. Everyone and his mom has a Submariner

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary.

5. I travel constantly, so a GMT watch fits my needs perfect and is water resistant to 100m. Realistically, most divers, even advanced, don't go much beyond 30 meters.

I'm not knocking the people who own them, it's a personal preference.

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

Fair enough, you don't like them, that's absolutely fine, but your explanatory logic is a bit questionable perhaps:

1) The Datejust is a bigger seller than the Sub, and for those with cash to spunk, I bet they bet buy more precious metal Datejusts than Subs.

2) 'Raised White Dot' - do you mean the deep-filled lume markers, or the bezel pip? Either way, as you are a Diver, I'd have assumed either feature would be quite useful, and that you would know what they are called.

3) Yeah, you're correct there - a sub is pretty ubiquitous, which isn't for everyone. I'd argue a gold Sub is lesser-spotted beast though.

4) I agree that Rolex moved away from pure Tool watches some time ago - give me a Seiko for that - but the thing I admire about Subs is that, if you want, you can still use them for that purpose, even a gold one, if so desired. Rolex don't mess-about with Trip-Lock crown technology, Oyster cases & wet-testing QC for fun. Secondly, for diving, isn't it best practice to use a watch alongside a dive computer for redundancy/malfunction reasons. For regular divers, I'd imagine a watch, or Sub, is complimentary to the computer, rather than a replacement? Thirdly, people wear sports shoes & drive sports cars - it doesn't make them athletes or racing drivers. Sometimes a little reassuring over-performance is a god thing to possess...

5) Agreed, the GMT is plenty water-resistant for most, but again, I'd have thought the Sub would be more useful to a diver. Leaving aside the greater depth rating - which I agree is inapplicable for most - the wet-suit/Glidelock extension and elapsed time bezel are features lacking from the GMT, and whilst not critical all the time, would be handy sometimes.

I'm not 'having a go' by the way - I actually agree with you that the Yellow Gold Sub is not to my taste either (though the bluesy above is just gorgeous), and nor would I dive with a gold Sub, but your rationales just intrigued me.

[Maverick686]

Originally Posted by TG3N

Fair enough, you don't like them, that's absolutely fine, but your explanatory logic is a bit questionable perhaps:

1) The Datejust is a bigger seller than the Sub, and for those with cash to spunk, I bet they bet buy more precious metal Datejusts than Subs.

2) 'Raised White Dot' - do you mean the deep-filled lume markers, or the bezel pip? Either way, as you are a Diver, I'd have assumed either feature would be quite useful, and that you would know what they are called.

3) Yeah, you're correct there - a sub is pretty ubiquitous, which isn't for everyone. I'd argue a gold Sub is lesser-spotted beast though.

4) I agree that Rolex moved away from pure Tool watches some time ago - give me a Seiko for that - but the thing I admire about Subs is that, if you want, you can still use them for that purpose, even a gold one, if so desired. Rolex don't mess-about with Trip-Lock crown technology, Oyster cases & wet-testing QC for fun. Secondly, for diving, isn't it best practice to use a watch alongside a dive computer for redundancy/malfunction reasons. For regular divers, I'd imagine a watch, or Sub, is complimentary to the computer, rather than a replacement? Thirdly, people wear sports shoes & drive sports cars - it doesn't make them athletes or racing drivers. Sometimes a little reassuring over-performance is a god thing to possess...

5) Agreed, the GMT is plenty water-resistant for most, but again, I'd have thought the Sub would be more useful to a diver. Leaving aside the greater depth rating - which I agree is inapplicable for most - the wet-suit/Glidelock extension and elapsed time bezel are features lacking from the GMT, and whilst not critical all the time, would be handy sometimes.

I'm not 'having a go' by the way - I actually agree with you that the Yellow Gold Sub is not to my taste either (though the bluesy above is just gorgeous), and nor would I dive with a gold Sub, but your rationales just intrigued me.

I agree, the Bluesy above is a pretty watch. You do make interesting points, which leads to interesting discussions. :)

1) Correct. I should have mentioned that the Sub is the biggest seller from Rolex's "sport" watch line

2) I mean the bezel pip. We used dive computers for our drive training, we never used a sport watch for driving. I had no idea the 'raised white dot' on the bezel was called. Thanks

3) Correct, Gold Submariners are area. I was hoping someone would post a photo of them diving with their gold sub. Hehe

4) Fair point. I'm actually looking at Seiko dive watch for a beater (something $2k or less). Typically, when diving, you always have a partner so a dive watch wouldn't be a necessary back up to a dive computer. However, some advanced divers do go out a lone (risky and dangerous IMO) so it would make sense in that case. I tend to agree over performance is never a bad thing, and I absolutely recognize Rolex uses the Sub's 300m depth rating to differentiate from other Oyster cases. Indeed, mostly marketing, but understandably so. I would bet the sales of the GMT would be higher than they are now if it also had a 300m resistance rating.

5) Agreed, again. In fact, in a perfect world, I would love to have the GMT on a glide lock bracelet. Not sure I want to spend $2k on just a bracelet, though.

Maybe after more time on this forum I'll be swayed. The WG Blue Watch is a beauty. YG has a long way to grow on me!

[TG3N]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

I agree, the Bluesy above is a pretty watch. You do make interesting points, which leads to interesting discussions. :)

1) Correct. I should have mentioned that the Sub is the biggest seller from Rolex's "sport" watch line

2) I mean the bezel pip. We used dive computers for our drive training, we never used a sport watch for driving. I had no idea the 'raised white dot' on the bezel was called. Thanks

3) Correct, Gold Submariners are area. I was hoping someone would post a photo of them diving with their gold sub. Hehe

4) Fair point. I'm actually looking at Seiko dive watch for a beater (something $2k or less). Typically, when diving, you always have a partner so a dive watch wouldn't be a necessary back up to a dive computer. However, some advanced divers do go out a lone (risky and dangerous IMO) so it would make sense in that case. I tend to agree over performance is never a bad thing, and I absolutely recognize Rolex uses the Sub's 300m depth rating to differentiate from other Oyster cases. Indeed, mostly marketing, but understandably so. I would bet the sales of the GMT would be higher than they are now if it also had a 300m resistance rating.

5) Agreed, again. In fact, in a perfect world, I would love to have the GMT on a glide lock bracelet. Not sure I want to spend $2k on just a bracelet, though.

Maybe after more time on this forum I'll be swayed. The WG Blue Watch is a beauty. YG has a long way to grow on me!

Thanks for the comprehensive response - and most interesting on the Diving aspects (I'm not a Diver, so I'll absolutely defer to you on those points).

Yep, I totally agree with you that despite the slightly thinner case, I bet the GMT is well capable of more than 100m water resistance, but as you say, Rolex needs some sort of arbitrary differentiator for retail pricing & model distinction purposes, otherwise everybody might just buy a GMT, as it's a great watch, sufficient for most people's needs in water also.

Hard to look past Seiko for a dive watch (or any sort of watch) - in-house movements, rock-solid, ISO rated, heritage & stupendous value for money.

Don't get me started on Rolex & what they charge for bracelets & links - great, well-made products, but extortionately over-priced. For the amounts used, 904L steel isn't that much more expensive than 316L, they have had the machinery & tools for forever, and they probably bang-out over 750k bracelets a year, yet they charge $75 for a single Oyster link?! Ludicrous. That's an old price too, it's probably dearer now. Never mind a full Gildelock bracelet alone costing as much as most luxury watches. Of course, Rolex aren't alone in gouging customers for OEM bracelets, but it's over-charging to my mind.

[cataby]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

watch for a beater (something $2k or less). Typically, when diving, you always have a partner so a dive watch wouldn't be a necessary back up to a dive computer. However, some advanced divers do go out a lone (risky and dangerous IMO) so it would make sense in that case.

That would be me. I have logged about 4 months TT underwater (adding up all the dives over the years together) and my latest (and last) wife does not dive. I also freedive. In both instances I use my sea dweller (not a sub, but same same for all purposes).

It is "somewhat" more risky, but that is also "somewhat" mitigated by experience.

I seriously consider it more "safe" for me to be diving solo than two 30 hour divers diving together.

[kilyung]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

... if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

Have you priced gold watches by any other high end brands? They're usually more expensive than Rolex with worse resale values. Rolex PM is the best value in PM watches.

[Kippers]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

Sure...

1. Most popular, Go-To Rolex Watch particularly for people who don't know anything about watches but have a little bit of money

2. I hate the Raised White Dot on the dial (minor, but it annoys me)

3. Everyone and his mom has a Submariner

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary.

5. I travel constantly, so a GMT watch fits my needs perfect and is water resistant to 100m. Realistically, most divers, even advanced, don't go much beyond 30 meters.

I'm not knocking the people who own them, it's a personal preference.

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

To your point, you're stating that you don't need a solid gold dive watch to go diving.

You also don't need a Rolex or a high-end watch to tell the time.........

To each their own my friend.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

[Ruud Van Driver]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

Sure...

1. Most popular, Go-To Rolex Watch particularly for people who don't know anything about watches but have a little bit of money

2. I hate the Raised White Dot on the dial (minor, but it annoys me)

3. Everyone and his mom has a Submariner

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary.

5. I travel constantly, so a GMT watch fits my needs perfect and is water resistant to 100m. Realistically, most divers, even advanced, don't go much beyond 30 meters.

I'm not knocking the people who own them, it's a personal preference.

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

You don't like the YG Sub and I'm ok with that. I'm not a fan either but only because YG doesn't suit me and it's a bit too loud for my taste. However, I don't knock the watch.

For me, it would have to be the WG Sub if I went down the PM route but I prefer to have a small collection of SS.

Saying you hate the 'raised white dot' makes you sound like little more than a petulant child. Oh, and my mother doesn't own one either.

It's a matter of personal preference, that's all. To each his own.

[DKRanger22]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

Sure...

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary...

By this logic, modern day cell phones have rendered watches obsolete. Time to shut down the forum.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

I take it you mean on straps here. In which case these are quite dressy and not really comparable to a sporty sub and have a totally different feel. If you mean a Nautilus on bracelet, they sure are nice but are at a different price point.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by AK797

I take it you mean on straps here. In which case these are quite dressy and not really comparable to a sporty sub and have a totally different feel. If you mean a Nautilus on bracelet, they sure are nice but are at a different price point.

Yeah...totally agree with Neil.

But, I fully admit, my tastes tend to run toward more sportier watches on metal, so I am clearly biased. The sub and GMT line...that's what gets my motor running.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

Sure...

1. Most popular, Go-To Rolex Watch particularly for people who don't know anything about watches but have a little bit of money

2. I hate the Raised White Dot on the dial (minor, but it annoys me)

3. Everyone and his mom has a Submariner

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary.

5. I travel constantly, so a GMT watch fits my needs perfect and is water resistant to 100m. Realistically, most divers, even advanced, don't go much beyond 30 meters.

I'm not knocking the people who own them, it's a personal preference.

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

This seems like a bunch of hogwash. Why do you care so much for 1., but more importantly why do you think a gold Submariner has to be used diving. It's not like you would take your gold PP Aquanaut or gold PP Nautilus diving or even your SS for that matter. That argument doesn't really make sense. I wouldn't take my 116610 as my first dive choice either, so it's a moot point.

As far as other brands go, I don't think IWC or JLC are quite at the quality level Rolex is. PP, VC, AL&S, AP, most if not all perhaps, but IWC or JLC (I appreciate both BTW), not so much. As far as movements go, the YM2 and SkyDweller bezel enabled movements (although not Subs, still Rolex for this argument) are much more advanced than what you typically see out of others for like pricing, especially the new SS (or technically Rolesor) Sky Ds

I'd rather see a thread about a watch you truly appreciate, rather than one for what you don't (which is your opinion and right, but kind of irrelevant to the rest of us).

[miles813]

Originally Posted by Maverick686

Sure...

1. Most popular, Go-To Rolex Watch particularly for people who don't know anything about watches but have a little bit of money

2. I hate the Raised White Dot on the dial (minor, but it annoys me)

3. Everyone and his mom has a Submariner

4. It's fist and foremost a dive watch. I dive, and IMHO, should consider a dive watch if you're actually going to use it for its intended purpose. With the modern day dive computer, it's not really necessary.

5. I travel constantly, so a GMT watch fits my needs perfect and is water resistant to 100m. Realistically, most divers, even advanced, don't go much beyond 30 meters.

I'm not knocking the people who own them, it's a personal preference.

But if I were looking for a gold watch, it would be a, IWC, Patek, or Jaeger-LeCoultre...

Lol you can't subtract hours, you need a GMT? Sounds like you are just rationalizing your decision, while bashing others. The sub bezel is way more useful than the GMT function. With the production of the BLNR, everyone and their mother has a GMT. So like others have said, it is a personal preference. If you want function go buy a Gshock.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Old Expat Beast]

I've noticed a couple of people here quoting the first gold Sub release in the late 1960s as marking the early beginnings of the Rolex transition to purveyor of overpriced jewellery watches. Not sure if I agree, but it's an interesting talking point.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I've noticed a couple of people here quoting the first gold Sub release in the late 1960s as marking the early beginnings of the Rolex transition to purveyor of overpriced jewellery watches. Not sure if I agree, but it's an interesting talking point.

Beast, I know your quote was 6 months ago, but that is an interesting talking point.

If Rolex did NOT make that transition to purveyor of overpriced jewelry watches, then what watch would they be selling and how much would/should it cost? (And maybe the Tudor Heritage Black Bay Steel for $3,800 or the Pelagos for $4,400 are those watches? Who else makes watches at that price with that quality?)

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I've noticed a couple of people here quoting the first gold Sub release in the late 1960s as marking the early beginnings of the Rolex transition to purveyor of overpriced jewellery watches. Not sure if I agree, but it's an interesting talking point.

I'm pretty sure that I agree.