What I Do Not Like About The Sub 114060

[jdc]

The movement is a good call, the box shape I thought I would not like on the SubC but when I handled it was not such an issue as in the pictures I had seen on the internet. What I like about this new sub is the maxi dial the first since the 5513's and the upgraded bracelet. It interests me and I cannot wait to see one in person

[Dr. Robert]

Originally Posted by Rollie2011

I think it looks great

Me too........but I miss the lug holes

[Len S]

With the Sub-C in the line up, I can't imagine that this version Sub will be as popular.

[FX44]

Good write up

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Len S

With the Sub-C in the line up, I can't imagine that this version Sub will be as popular.

I agree here.. With this move, they will put the 114060 at a price point only a few hundred below the Sub Date. At that price point, you can have a GMT II, Exp II42, or get the 116610 for only peanuts more in cost..

this positioning doesn't really put the 114060 where the scales will tip in it's favor for anybody but the person who absolutely must have this model.. I fear this is not a large percentage of current watch buyers..

[dimitros]

Originally Posted by Tools

Everybody has been waiting, or at least they say that they have been waiting for the new ceramic 114060..

I'm not one of them, although the 14060 is one of my favorite references..





First, I look at the latest "block" case. I have never liked the larger lugs and square crown guards.. they just look to clunky. Rolex was able to bring in the taper on the Exp II 42, and they have also done so on the new Sky-Dweller. So, in my view, they dropped the ball on this classic by simply defaulting to their current mass of blocky boxes..

Bell & Ross called-- they want their case back.

There is something to be said about curved/round shapes. Whether its curves on a woman ala Sofia Loren or Jaguar E type, Ferrari 250 GT. Round shapes seem to defy time.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Tools

this positioning doesn't really put the 114060 where the scales will tip in it's favor for anybody but the person who absolutely must have this model.. I fear this is not a large percentage of current watch buyers..

Frankly, it does seem to me that the appeal of the Submariner for at least the last decade was one of aesthetics, nostalgia, and practicality.

Now, as you note, that it's just a Sub without a date at a price very near the Sub-Date, modern sensibilities might very well be the the death knell of the model because it has nothing very much to offer the modern watch buyers who by and large expect a date.

The other dateless models are more stand-alone models that don't compete with other models that only differ by that one feature, such as the Daytona, the Explorer, and the Milgauss.

I hope I'm wrong.

[snaggle]

Originally Posted by Puffy

that would look quite nice...

but without lug holes. they don't belong on a modern day watch imo

Ohh Baby!

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by dimitros

There is something to be said about curved/round shapes. Whether its curves on a woman ala Sofia Loren or Jaguar E type, Ferrari 250 GT. Round shapes seem to defy time.

The YM case still has that appeal in my judgement and maybe the 114060 would have been better if it had shared the case with the YM, if that were a possibility.

[zeuloa]

Originally Posted by Ceramic

Sub C Date is much nicer, I am happy that I went ahead and purchased the sub c.

If I would make a decision between 14060M and 16610, then I would definitely choose 14060M as it has smaller crystal, uses same bezel with SD, has lug holes which all gives a unique look...

But, the new SUB C ND has no difference from SUB C Date other than the date.
As the case is big and simple, it really needs some complication...
Just my opinion...

Has anyone seen real pictures? Who knows, it might be a bit smaller and thinner than the Sub C Date. I have t see it in person to cast my vote.

[dalip]

Good points. However, the market is clearly telling them otherwise. The lack of cyclops /date along with a small saving is clearly going to be enough to sway buyers towards this model. But I feel it's more the lack of cyclops. There are many who simply don't want it on the sub. Both in terms of new buyers and those who may be upgrading. The only modern alternative in this design is the DSSD offering no cyclops but with a much bigger case .... Simply too big for some. The cleaner and simpler look of the ND C will appeal to a wide range of young execs .... I know this for sure about India which is a key target market for Rolex.

Also it seems that the new DJ II SS with smooth bezel is coming in at a price point below the sub C ND?

These two will be massive sellers IMO. They offer a cheaper alternative to the more common sub date - sales of which have been outstanding here as well as in the major Indian capitals and Singapore. I can only talk of these places as I visit frequently.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by zeuloa

Has anyone seen real pictures? Who knows, it might be a bit smaller and thinner than the Sub C Date. I have t see it in person to cast my vote.

Good point.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by dalip

Good points. However, the market is clearly telling them otherwise. The lack of cyclops /date along with a small saving is clearly going to be enough to sway buyers towards this model.

I hope you're right.

[myjianrong]

Originally Posted by Roley

In my opinion... All the upgrades, and the "Maxi Dial", gives this watch balance and new life. Stunning time piece.

what is "maxi dial" mean? i tot it is 40mm?in what sense?

[GradyPhilpott]

The maxi dial has wider hands and larger lume plots than the traditional dial.

[Maxfli]

I don't dislike it. But I still like the old case design more.

[GradyPhilpott]

After watching this video, I think I really do like the maxi dial without the cyclops on the crystal quite a lot.

It still has a very clean look to it that the Sub-Dates can't claim.

http://www.rolex.com/en#/rolex-watch...bmariner/video

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Puffy

that would look quite nice...

but without lug holes. they don't belong on a modern day watch imo

thats nice
add an older style case, bracelet and lugholes and ill take two


awaiting the first thread...
"i broke the ceramic bezel on my tool watch and they want a $$$ four digit number to fix it."

[Boothroyd]

Originally Posted by Tools

The 3132 contains Rolex latest Paraflex Shock system.. If it's the lastest non-date movement that Rolex makes, this classic workhorse should have been fitted with it..

Excellent point. I expressed interest in the new Sub ND yesterday, but not having the 3132 movement makes me cross it off my list. My Explorer has been spot on COSC timing, and I would't get the new entry without the 3132. THANKS for pointing this out, Tools!

[Preacher]

They new cases may look blocky and akward now but eventually the old style watches will start to look dated and old fashioned. It's a fact of life.

[gwalker]

I think it looks nice. I won't ever own one because it has no date. I felt the older one was seriously dated. It's like going to a car dealership and them selling a new car designed in the 80's with cars produced today. That's just how I felt about it.

[Dan2010]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

After watching this video, I think I really do like the maxi dial without the cyclops on the crystal quite a lot.

It still has a very clean look to it that the Sub-Dates can't claim.

http://www.rolex.com/en#/rolex-watch...bmariner/video

This is exactly why I have had a love affair with the 14060M, 5513, etc ever since I got an interest in watches. Now that it has an awesome bracelet and clasp, it is just about perfect in my book.

[gwalker]

Originally Posted by subtona

awaiting the first thread...
"i broke the ceramic bezel on my tool watch and they want a $$$ four digit number to fix it."

Yes it's a tool watch but tools are expensive. It cost money to make good tough utilitarian things. I mean I spent $60k on a pick up and my neighbor spent over $70k for his construction truck. Tools are expensive.

[stockae92]

The "next" Sub should be an evolution of the current Sub, not an evolution from the Sub Date ... :(

[jamesw]

It looks like Rolex took the easy way out. Maybe the Sky-Dweller took all the R & D money so there was none left to give The Sub some differentiation from the 116610.
I think it will still look better on the wrist than in photos though.

[paracord]

I like the Super Case and Maxi Dial better. I agree though...the lug holes would have been better.

Truthfully though....Rolex is looking to keep margin up on these watches. They want a consistent lineup so they no longer have to produce two different cases for the two models. Sad but true.

The relatively small "enthusiast" crowd just isn't enough to justify not streamlining the assembly line.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by gwalker

Yes it's a tool watch but tools are expensive. It cost money to make good tough utilitarian things. I mean I spent $60k on a pick up and my neighbor spent over $70k for his construction truck. Tools are expensive.

Agreed good tools are expensive.

would be nice if they would take their money up front and routine service costs would be minimal. $90 for aluminum bezel vs ceramic several times that (not sure of exact cost here, factor in no DIY option and added service costs) is to me, unnecessary in this realm.

but agreed good tools are expensive and a joy to use

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by zeuloa

Has anyone seen real pictures? Who knows, it might be a bit smaller and thinner than the Sub C Date. I have t see it in person to cast my vote.

I had a talk with my friend the watchmaker today and he says that the case is the same case as the SubC, so don't look for any differences, except for the dial and the crystal and a few hundred dollars.

[chiko323]

Does this mean my 14060M is super rare now?!?!?!?! . I actually like the new NDC. I'm sure it will look even better in person

[Power Play]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

I really like it, but I have always been a big fan of the new ceramics. The one glaring omission I see, is that Rolex missed the opportunity to really make it really special. This is basically a 116610 without the date. I think it would have been a much bigger hit, if the word "Submariner" was in red, or they preserved the lug holes, or even if they went back to the two-line style of dial text. Just one (or all) of these features would have really made it shine as a unique successor to the 14060M. Without anything to differentiate it from the 116610 (except the lack of a date) I find it to be a bit boring.

Yeah. You are dead on. Thx for verbalizing my thoughts!