New Yachtmaster vs Submariner

[rootbeer7]

I don’t own either & this is purely my opinion based on owning various Rolex models over the last 25 years. I currently own 3 Panerai & a Tudor Jumbo Date-Day.
The new Yachtmaster in titanium looks to me like the Submariner should, based on its history as a diving tool watch. The Submariner is now blingy, bloated & much less tool.
Interestingly, it was the Yachtmaster that was to be the ‘dressy’ waterproof dive watch & was literally a re-bodied and dialled Submariner with no significant technical improvement over it.
I’m not a fan of titanium watches (not sure why!), but if I was the Yachtmaster interests me far more than a Sub.
I’d be really interested in others’ thoughts.

[Cru Jones]

Not to be a fanboy, but I think the latest Submariner is exactly what a new Sub should be while having a clear link to the past.

The new Ti YM is nice, but it has no link to YMs of the past. YMs, for better or worse, are shiny and/or PM. The new YM also is, IMHO, a bit dull, with Ti finishing that pales in comparison to Grand Seiko. I find the Pelagos 39 to be a bit sharper.

Personally, I would have liked to see the Sea-Dweller in Ti with the red text.

[Watchsama]

Glidelock >>> Easylink

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Watchsama

Glidelock >>> Easylink

There's this. Also, how easy is the bezel to read in diving conditions?

If the Sub is bloated at 41mm, what does that make the 42mm YM?

It's nice to have variety and the YM is an interesting and beautiful watch. In the fit for purpose stakes it lacks a role. While the Sub (like the Daytona and GMT Master) retains relevant and useful utility in line with its original core (if seldom used) function, what exactly is the YM supposed to do apart from look nice and time things in perfect lighting conditions?

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by Harry-57

There's this. Also, how easy is the bezel to read in diving conditions?

If the Sub is bloated at 41mm, what does that make the 42mm YM?

It's nice to have variety and the YM is an interesting and beautiful watch. In the fit for purpose stakes it lacks a role. While the Sub (like the Daytona and GMT Master) retains relevant and useful utility in line with its original core (if seldom used) function, what exactly is the YM supposed to do apart from look nice and time things in perfect lighting conditions?

The YM is not a dive watch. Who cares how easy it is to read in diving conditions?

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

The YM is not a dive watch. Who cares how easy it is to read in diving conditions?

I drive to the office early in the morning before sunrise and I use the rotating bezel to time the commute. Same on the way back and it gets pretty dark in fall/winter. In those conditions, an all-black bezel would be useless.

If you're going to use the thing, it might as well be easy to read.

[Tony-GB]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

I drive to the office early in the morning before sunrise and I use the rotating bezel to time the commute. Same on the way back and it gets pretty dark in fall/winter. In those conditions, an all-black bezel would be useless.

If you're going to use the thing, it might as well be easy to read.

Doesn't your car have a clock?

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

I drive to the office early in the morning before sunrise and I use the rotating bezel to time the commute. Same on the way back and it gets pretty dark in fall/winter. In those conditions, an all-black bezel would be useless.

If you're going to use the thing, it might as well be easy to read.

They are balancing aesthetics with visibility. Plus that bezel is not new. It’s been used in the YM for a while.

But again, why knock the watch for not having features that it doesn’t need to have. It’s a YACHT-master. It’s supposed to be used on a boat in daylight. Why does it need low light readability? If this feature is essential there are plenty of watches that will provide this.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

I drive to the office early in the morning before sunrise and I use the rotating bezel to time the commute. Same on the way back and it gets pretty dark in fall/winter. In those conditions, an all-black bezel would be useless.

If you're going to use the thing, it might as well be easy to read.

If you are using the example of using a dive watch to time your commute to work in low light in your car as to why said dive watch is better than another watch, its hardly a convincing argument.

My phone has a stopwatch. Its also fully illuminated. My car also has a lap timer/stopwatch built into its display.

Sounds like you need a Daytona

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by Harry-57

There's this. Also, how easy is the bezel to read in diving conditions?

If the Sub is bloated at 41mm, what does that make the 42mm YM?

It's nice to have variety and the YM is an interesting and beautiful watch. In the fit for purpose stakes it lacks a role. While the Sub (like the Daytona and GMT Master) retains relevant and useful utility in line with its original core (if seldom used) function, what exactly is the YM supposed to do apart from look nice and time things in perfect lighting conditions?

The bezel is bidirectional on the YM and so should NEVER be used for diving.
Unfortunately I don't own a yacht but I'm assuming that the colour/finish on the YM is that so it doesn't dazzle and reflect in sunlight. Apart from the strap and the date it's very similar to that worn by Sir Ainslie

[EEpro]

Yachtmaster with turned down lugs wears flatter and better than a submariner for me on 7.25" wrist.

I've always wanted a YM42 in full white gold bracelet vs oyster flex but we got this Ti instead. I'd have to see it as I don't generally care for the dark metal look.

[alphadweller]

A step in the wrong direction for the YM. Dull titanium doesn't suit its nature. This metal should have been used in the Sub, a true diver.

I love the YM in general for what it's always been, an interesting upmarket alternative to the Sub. I equally love the Sub for its rugged nature and utilitarian look. Both have their place in a collection, to me at least. I own a YM 116622 and the Sub's big brother SD43.

Rolex have blured the lines with the new Ti YM42. No luxurious case finishing, no precious metal either, but somehow they think they can charge $14k for one. The 10k SS Sub41 and 13k SD43 are superior watches in all respects and they look so much better to me. At least with other YMs, you knew you were paying extra for a reason. We'll see how the market responds to that.

If I was into titanium and really wanted a Ti watesports watch, I'd pick a 5k Pelagos (before discount), which is arguably a better watch than this Ti YM42 in the utilitarian looking category.

[HogwldFLTR]

Unidirectional vs bidirectional; imho, bi is best!

[JRell]

The 126610LN is the best version of the most iconic watch ever.

[mikkey]

126610LN is my best

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

I don’t own either & this is purely my opinion based on owning various Rolex models over the last 25 years. I currently own 3 Panerai & a Tudor Jumbo Date-Day.
The new Yachtmaster in titanium looks to me like the Submariner should, based on its history as a diving tool watch. The Submariner is now blingy, bloated & much less tool.
Interestingly, it was the Yachtmaster that was to be the ‘dressy’ waterproof dive watch & was literally a re-bodied and dialled Submariner with no significant technical improvement over it.
I’m not a fan of titanium watches (not sure why!), but if I was the Yachtmaster interests me far more than a Sub.
I’d be really interested in others’ thoughts.

a dive watch has to have a lume pip on the bezel to be a dive watch.....

[rootbeer7]

Thanks for all the comments. It’s good to hear different points of view.

[douglasf13]

I’d argue the Pelagos might be what the Submariner “should be” for the past decade.

[Mystro]

Unidirectional bezel aside, IF the new TiYM42 had a glidelock then it would poach potential Submariner orders. The Sub is a Rolex institution so Rolex won’t let any other model really evolve enough to compete with it. Think of the Sub like a 911 and the TiYM42 a Cayman/Boxster. Regardless how good the Cayman/Boxster is, Porsche will never let it evolve to be a direct competitor to their flagship and iconic 911. I myself see the TiYM42 a niche watch that appeals to me even though I have a Sub. It’s different enough to coexist in a collection with a sub or other dive watch.

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Unidirectional bezel aside, IF the new TiYM42 had a glidelock then it would poach potential Submariner orders. The Sub is a Rolex institution so Rolex won’t let any other model really evolve enough to compete with it. Think of the Sub like a 911 and the TiYM42 a Cayman/Boxster. Regardless how good the Cayman/Boxster is, Porsche will never let it evolve to be a direct competitor to their flagship and iconic 911. I myself see the TiYM42 a niche watch that appeals to me even though I have a Sub. It’s different enough to coexist in a collection with a sub or other dive watch.

Agree. I have a sub but still want the YM

Btw, if the sub is the 911 then what's the SD43?

[clubrcr]

Originally Posted by SamArj

Agree. I have a sub but still want the YM

Btw, if the sub is the 911 then what's the SD43?

Cayenne turbo

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Unidirectional bezel aside, IF the new TiYM42 had a glidelock then it would poach potential Submariner orders. The Sub is a Rolex institution so Rolex won’t let any other model really evolve enough to compete with it. Think of the Sub like a 911 and the TiYM42 a Cayman/Boxster. Regardless how good the Cayman/Boxster is, Porsche will never let it evolve to be a direct competitor to their flagship and iconic 911. I myself see the TiYM42 a niche watch that appeals to me even though I have a Sub. It’s different enough to coexist in a collection with a sub or other dive watch.

There are some that may argue that the Cayman GT4 RS is better than the 911 with which it shares its engine, irrespective of where Porsche wants it to be.

Perhaps even because of that your analogy might just be perfect

[Agamemnon]

The new Ti YM is not for diving, as it is only resistant to 100 meters.
It's a way of saying that the divers are no longer needed for what they were made for and to open the doors to titanium on other models in the future as well.

[clubrcr]

I don't know why everyone is comparing this to a Sub. The people who are fans of the Sub will find fault in this new watch. Let us hear from the YM fan club.

This watch needs to stand on its own. I applaud Rolex for going outside the box on a watch that is currently not as popular as the Sub. If you don't like the new YM because of the aesthetics, the titanium, the size, the technology, etc., so be it.

I don't think Rolex introduced this new YM to get people to quit buying the Sub.

This reminds me of what rolex did with the Day Date Tridor. The welding of PM metals was revolutionary at the time, but the buying public didn't like it, and such they quit making it. Will this watch be the same, I don't know, but I put my name on the list to get new YM. I think it will be a great new addition.

[JRell]

Originally Posted by clubrcr

I don't know why everyone is comparing this to a Sub. The people who are fans of the Sub will find fault in this new watch. Let us hear from the YM fan club.

This watch needs to stand on its own. I applaud Rolex for going outside the box on a watch that is currently not as popular as the Sub. If you don't like the new YM because of the aesthetics, the titanium, the size, the technology, etc., so be it.

I don't think Rolex introduced this new YM to get people to quit buying the Sub.

This reminds me of what rolex did with the Day Date Tridor. The welding of PM metals was revolutionary at the time, but the buying public didn't like it, and such they quit making it. Will this watch be the same, I don't know, but I put my name on the list to get new YM. I think it will be a great new addition.

Very good points. They just look similar so people naturally compare them, but hearing from the YM fans would be interesting.

[RTG]

Originally Posted by clubrcr

I don't know why everyone is comparing this to a Sub. The people who are fans of the Sub will find fault in this new watch. Let us hear from the YM fan club.

This watch needs to stand on its own. I applaud Rolex for going outside the box on a watch that is currently not as popular as the Sub. If you don't like the new YM because of the aesthetics, the titanium, the size, the technology, etc., so be it.

I don't think Rolex introduced this new YM to get people to quit buying the Sub.

This reminds me of what rolex did with the Day Date Tridor. The welding of PM metals was revolutionary at the time, but the buying public didn't like it, and such they quit making it. Will this watch be the same, I don't know, but I put my name on the list to get new YM. I think it will be a great new addition.

This YM fan club member says the new YM42 Ti will make a perfect daily. I eagerly await a chance to buy one

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

I don’t own either & this is purely my opinion based on owning various Rolex models over the last 25 years. I currently own 3 Panerai & a Tudor Jumbo Date-Day.
The new Yachtmaster in titanium looks to me like the Submariner should, based on its history as a diving tool watch. The Submariner is now blingy, bloated & much less tool.
Interestingly, it was the Yachtmaster that was to be the ‘dressy’ waterproof dive watch & was literally a re-bodied and dialled Submariner with no significant technical improvement over it.
I’m not a fan of titanium watches (not sure why!), but if I was the Yachtmaster interests me far more than a Sub.
I’d be really interested in others’ thoughts.

Unlike most of the responses to this thread, I'm inclined to agree with you.

Leaving aside the technical details as to what makes a dive watch a dive watch (and arguably the Sub doesn't full meet the standards anyway), The sub now (along with most of the catalogue to be fair) is more jewellery than tool.

A mirror finished case with a highly reflective bezel and gloss dial is never going to be ideal under water. An ex member of this forum had his ceramic sub brushed and the bezel bead blasted. Made for a much better tool watch.

I wouldn't say the sub is bloated, however and bigger is always better for legibility.

I think the new Ti YM looks fantastic. If I could wear a SD43 as a daily the 42mm YM in Ti would be a breeze.

Its not really about what's best for a particular application for 99.9% of buyers these days. Leaving aside hype based desire, its really just down to aesthetics.

And for me, the new Ti YM 42 blows the ceramic Sub out of the water in that respect.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Unlike most of the responses to this thread, I'm inclined to agree with you.

Leaving aside the technical details as to what makes a dive watch a dive watch (and arguably the Sub doesn't full meet the standards anyway), The sub now (along with most of the catalogue to be fair) is more jewellery than tool.

A mirror finished case with a highly reflective bezel and gloss dial is never going to be ideal under water. An ex member of this forum had his ceramic sub brushed and the bezel bead blasted. Made for a much better tool watch.

I wouldn't say the sub is bloated, however and bigger is always better for legibility.

I think the new Ti YM looks fantastic. If I could wear a SD43 as a daily the 42mm YM in Ti would be a breeze.

Its not really about what's best for a particular application for 99.9% of buyers these days. Leaving aside hype based desire, its really just down to aesthetics.

And for me, the new Ti YM 42 blows the ceramic Sub out of the water in that respect.

Well said Scott

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Unlike most of the responses to this thread, I'm inclined to agree with you.

Leaving aside the technical details as to what makes a dive watch a dive watch (and arguably the Sub doesn't full meet the standards anyway), The sub now (along with most of the catalogue to be fair) is more jewellery than tool.

A mirror finished case with a highly reflective bezel and gloss dial is never going to be ideal under water. An ex member of this forum had his ceramic sub brushed and the bezel bead blasted. Made for a much better tool watch.

I wouldn't say the sub is bloated, however and bigger is always better for legibility.

I think the new Ti YM looks fantastic. If I could wear a SD43 as a daily the 42mm YM in Ti would be a breeze.

Its not really about what's best for a particular application for 99.9% of buyers these days. Leaving aside hype based desire, its really just down to aesthetics.

And for me, the new Ti YM 42 blows the ceramic Sub out of the water in that respect.

Actually the reflective surfaces of the sub aren't a problem at all when diving, if anything it helps when at depths. I've dived with my sub, my SD43 and my Omega 300M.

However I completely agree with you about the YM Ti, it appeals to me a lot.

[1259]

The yachtmaster is much nicer than the submariner. I don’t really see them being cross shopped.