|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
14 August 2009, 10:59 PM
|
#31 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 167
|
There's no school like old school...
I had this debate, and went with the 14060M and nver looked back. I wanted the truly "classic" Submariner, and for me that meant the non-COSC 14060M. I love the Submariner Date, but the Submariner has laways been the ONE to me.
__________________
GMT Master II 16760 Submariner 14060M |
|
|
|
15 August 2009, 01:07 AM
|
#32 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Real Name: Dell Deaton
Location: NAWCC Museum!
Watch: Never kiss & tell!
Posts: 883
|
Bond, James Bond
Quote:
As the Bond association is raised here, I'll comment on that some. I'd never wear a film-correct Rolex Submariner every day the way I wear my 16610. So if I were inclined toward that direction, the 14060M would make more sense. And it's lineage safely makes it consistent as far as I'm concerned. That said, I've Polled on this and most Rolex collectors reject the notion of the 14060M as a "Bond" watch. So, if that's your criteria, it is not. The 16610, on the other hand, is virtually identical to the Rolex worn by Timothy Dalton in "Licence to Kill." That film was made sorta in the middle of a rapid succession of Submariner Date changes from Rolex, so the exact model number may not be a match. And, of course, the Dalton model had lug holes and some other apparent differences that are not consistent with the current offering. But not, in my opinion, significant. 
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 August 2009, 01:22 AM
|
#33 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Ashutosh
Location: Rochester NY
Watch: Daytonas,SD
Posts: 2,342
|
16610 all the way....
__________________
 Everything becomes nothing after ROLEX 116520 SS Daytona White Dial 116520 SS Daytona Black Dial 116523 18K&SS Daytona Slate Dial 16600 Sea-Dweller 16710 GMT Master II Pepsi Bezel 16613 18K&SS Submariner Blue Dial 116660 Deepsea Sea-Dweller |
|
|
|
|
22 August 2009, 08:28 PM
|
#34 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: GMT+1
Posts: 2,711
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 August 2009, 09:22 PM
|
#35 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Mike
Location: Kentucky
Watch: 16610 1675 Speedy
Posts: 1,057
|
Both are great choices. I prefer to have the date feature so I went with the 16610. If thats not a big deal for you for with the ND.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
22 August 2009, 09:56 PM
|
#36 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Real Name: Mikey Uí Néill
Location: Olden Texas
Watch: 14060M & 16570
Posts: 1,941
|
I have the 14060M non-COSC, you should too.
|
|
|
|
|
22 August 2009, 10:00 PM
|
#37 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Watch: ♛
Posts: 4,408
|
I say 16610, but I'm baised
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
23 August 2009, 01:28 AM
|
#38 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Real Name: Dennis
Location: Bay Area - 925
Posts: 40,018
|
The Sub Date is my favorite Rolex, although I own a 14060 also, it does not get as much wrist time as my 16610, due to the date feature.
__________________
TRF Member #6699 (since September 2007) |
|
|
|
|
23 August 2009, 03:09 AM
|
#39 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Real Name: Hermann
Location: Middle of Europe
Watch: 16710/3185 16613 B
Posts: 413
|
The Pins on the 14060 are stronger.
And both Watches belong on a Corvus "James Bond" style Band ( but I would prefer the NATO model, because of its increased safety ). ;-) Just kidding, Hermann |
|
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Linear Mode
