Once Again, Submariner vs GMT Master

[Aces Full]

I'm sure there have been countless debates about this subject, but my take is this:
For every serious diver, there are thousands of travelers. For anyone who travels and wants to monitor the time at their destination, and the time at their home base, the GMT Master is a very useful tool.

Unless you are a serious diver, why would you rather have the Submariner than a GMT Master.

I just don't get it. The fact that a Submariner is certifiec to a vast distance underwater benefits WHO, and HOW???

[dmash]

That's your opinion.

IMO the GMT bezel looks cluttered and I think it's incredibly overrated. Unless you need to know on a whim for business related tasks, my brain is fully capable of knowing my home time within a few seconds if I'm on vacation (which be realistic, how often do you really care to know). Seriously think it's quite silly when people say they NEED this feature if they're just a normal traveler. Honestly, for what?. Because you can't subtract/add 6 hours to know home time for a Skype call? and you are purchasing a watch solely for that purpose? Right...

I'd much rather have a graduated bezel for timing things. Once you use, it's pretty handy. Lastly, GMT has PCLs.

[Jack T]

Originally Posted by dmash

Lastly, GMT has PCLs.

Lastly, but not in the least, those PCL's, I do wish they were brushed.

[OasisMS]

The primary function of a watch is to tell the time in one time zone. Both do that.

Other than that aesthetic preference and that's it really.

[Chinese_Mantis]

Originally Posted by OasisMS

The primary function of a watch is to tell the time in one time zone. Both do that.

Other than that aesthetic preference and that's it really.

This


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ap1]

Is bezel choice really

Simpler sub

Busy gmt

I like both

[swish77]

Two very different looking and "feeling" watches. Both fantastic. I'd choose a Sub between the two just because it's cleaner looking, especially the bezel insert.

Keep in mind that the actual function of a watch is only part of it. I like knowing that my SD can go deeper in the sea than most fish, even though it rarely will go lower than 10 feet.

[droptopman]

Personally prefer the looks of the Sub. Always have. I have had my share of GMT's too, but mostly vintage. One thing I do like more about the GMT is the flatter case back. It sits a little lower on my wrist, but generally still wear Subs more often.

[sager]

I love them both but the GMT has the edge for me. I kind of like the cluttered bezel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BiH115]

You plan on diving below 300 feet? If so, go for the Sub, it's pretty plain and simple.

Otherwise, it's nice to be able to reference time without pulling your phone out. Some people love the look, some don't.

Subjective as F.

[brandrea]

I've had both and although I think the GMT complication is incredibly useful and cool, I just cant seem to hang on to them .... I guess I prefer divers for the above mentioned reasons

[Jack T]

For those who suggest they can recall the time at a remote location in just a few seconds, the same can be said of the date feature.
I do like the bezel on the Sub a bit more, and can not comment on the flatter case and back of the GMT, but the functionality of the GMT, for me, gets the nod.

[dmash]

Originally Posted by Jack T

For those who suggest they can recall the time at a remote location in just a few seconds, the same can be said of the date feature.
I do like the bezel on the Sub a bit more, and can not comment on the flatter case and back of the GMT, but the functionality of the GMT, for me, gets the nod.

Can completely agree with you friend. Except that it's not comparable to a date feature. You have to actively use some other device to grab a date. I can calculate another time zone within seconds in my head, nothing else necessary.

GMT is nice perk if the watch you like already has it, would never argue that. I was speaking more of the people that state things like 'I travel a few times a year, therefore I NEED a GMT function'. That's just incredible overkill IMO. This logic of course doesn't apply to any businessmen who frequently fly or speak with clients in different cities regularly.



I'll still be picking up a SS Coke GMT if Rolex ever releases it though

[Xxmikeyb]

Originally Posted by dmash

Can completely agree with you friend. Except that it's not comparable to a date feature. You have to actively use some other device to grab a date. I can calculate another time zone within seconds in my head, nothing else necessary.

GMT is nice perk if the watch you like already has it, would never argue that. I was speaking more of the people that state things like 'I travel a few times a year, therefore I NEED a GMT function'. That's just incredible overkill IMO. This logic of course doesn't apply to any businessmen who frequently fly or speak with clients in different cities regularly.



I'll still be picking up a SS Coke GMT if Rolex ever releases it though

I'd agree that anyone can subtract or add hours depending on which countries you wish to track. I live in NZ and am constantly in touch with people in the UK. I can never actually remember the time difference. NZ can be anything from +13 to +11 gmt. So once my GMT hand is set I know the time in the UK.

[ramili]

The GMT hand does it for me.

[peterskinner]

Let's be honest; they are both expensive toys. Choose the toy you like best. It's a treat to ourselves.

[BLNR Nairobi]

I own a BLNR, and before it a GMT from another watch house (Longines). Thus I am fully a fan of the GMT function. I also fly across the world chasing PE opportunities, thus I genuinely need the GMT function.

However, with that said, there is something about the Submariner Date that I really like and makes it quite likely to be my next Rolex. Maybe even scratching the date version and opting for the Submariner.

While the depth function of the Submariner, at 300 meters, is deeper than 99.9% of SCUBA divers could ever dive (let alone would - could), and the GMT II's 100 meters is good enough for virtually all-but-a-select-few divers, the Submariner is still an exceptionally elegant timepiece that I pray to God to someday have.

It's a classic.

With that said, the GMT is a classic as well, and in terms of functionality it is significantly more helpful to me than a Submariner ever could be.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Aces Full

I'm sure there have been countless debates about this subject, but my take is this:
For every serious diver, there are thousands of travelers. For anyone who travels and wants to monitor the time at their destination, and the time at their home base, the GMT Master is a very useful tool.

Unless you are a serious diver, why would you rather have the Submariner than a GMT Master.

I just don't get it. The fact that a Submariner is certifiec to a vast distance underwater benefits WHO, and HOW???

You're taking a very narrow view point.

Remember

1. The Glidelock feature is very useful for many people

2. The Sub's timing bezel can find more use than the GMT bezel/function for many owners

3. It's the only (grouping Rolex divers together for this purpose) ceramic professional Rolex that doesn't have PCLs

[warrior]

I've always found that I use the timing bezel of the Sub waaaaaaay more than the GMT bezel. Plus, the GMT bezel,
especially on the ceramics, is too cluttered and loud imo. i would tire of the ceramic gmt bezel after awhile; thats not the case with the sub bezel.

Originally Posted by 904VT

You're taking a very narrow view point.

Remember

1. The Glidelock feature is very useful for many people

2. The Sub's timing bezel can find more use than the GMT bezel/function for many owners

3. It's the only (grouping Rolex divers together for this purpose) ceramic professional Rolex that doesn't have PCLs

[904VT]

Originally Posted by warrior

I've always found that I use the timing bezel of the Sub waaaaaaay more than the GMT bezel. Plus, the GMT bezel,
especially on the ceramics, is too cluttered and loud imo. i would tire of the ceramic gmt bezel after awhile; thats not the case with the sub bezel.

Agreed the Sub certainly has a little less distracting bezel than the GMT Master

BLRO is still on my very short list though.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by 904VT

You're taking a very narrow view point.

Remember

1. The Glidelock feature is very useful for many people

2. The Sub's timing bezel can find more use than the GMT bezel/function for many owners

3. It's the only (grouping Rolex divers together for this purpose) ceramic professional Rolex that doesn't have PCLs

^^^Bingo^^^

Timed my wife's contractions with both my kids with my Submariner bezel. Its the simplest and most effective timing system under stressful conditions. I time everything from cooking to company meetings with my Sub bezel. Its a lifestyle for me after 20 years and I would miss it in and out of the water.

[Thuilln]

I have both and like both equally. Different function, same great feeling when I strap them to my wrist.
I go to work mostly with the GMT and I do use the GMT feature daily.
I go to the pool/beach with the Sub on Nato and it's the perfect watch for that.

[beshannon]

I have both, I like both

[Colin10101]

In reality, both the depth rating and extra time zone are a bit excessive for my needs. All i really want and need in a watch is time and date. So it comes down to aesthetics; I prefer the Sub> GMT in the 6 digit models, and the GMT>Sub in the 5 digit models.

[Mirx]

5 digit prefer the Sub
6 digit prefer the GMT

[nikesupremedunk]

The right answer is always BOTH. Strictly speaking on the 6 digits, both models couldn't be more different than they are similar. GMT is more dressy while Sub is more of a every day tool watch. I've used the GMT function ONCE so far and loved it, but the timer on the Sub would be far more useful to me. I also want a every day watch that I can beat around a little without having to worry so much as I do w/ the PCL on my GMT. That's why I'm going to add a sub next.

That's why to me, one isn't better than the other...it just depends on your needs.

[abs82]

Originally Posted by nikesupremedunk

The right answer is always BOTH. Strictly speaking on the 6 digits, both models couldn't be more different than they are similar. GMT is more dressy while Sub is more of a every day tool watch. I've used the GMT function ONCE so far and loved it, but the timer on the Sub would be far more useful to me. I also want a every day watch that I can beat around a little without having to worry so much as I do w/ the PCL on my GMT. That's why I'm going to add a sub next.

That's why to me, one isn't better than the other...it just depends on your needs.

Totally agree with "both"! The great thing about collecting is that having one doesn't exclude you from having or appreciating another. Hell I have a SubC-ND and a 16600 which from afar could be said to be very similar and while I won't be diving anywhere near deep enough to test the limits of either I love them both for their small differences. It's all about what makes you happy!

[Ferdelious]

A watch's primary function is to tell time which is what most consumers use one for. After that it usually comes down to aesthetics, I prefer the Sub over GMT even though I don't dive but travel occasionally.

[CPRWATCH]

Get both , it's like sibling rivalry . Couldn't choose between either so bought both .

[Quicksilver]

I love both and they both scratch different itches.

I agree theGMT is the most useful but Subs are probably just a little more handsome.