Submariner vs. Submariner Date.

[JIMT8292]

When I could eventually treat myself about 6 months ago I was never in any doubt it was going to be a Submariner. I wore my dads OP Date for 15 years before 'lending' it to my boy one night 4 years ago (eventually gave him the box and full ownership last week on his 21st) and I always found the date an unwanted complication.

[Rlxlvr1]

Originally Posted by alamla01

I see a lot of people on TRF who say they prefer the submariner over the submariner date. Personally I feel like the date complication and cyclops are indicative of the rolex brand. (Just a personal feeling)



Would anyone tell me why so many seem to prefer the submariner?

I can't remember the date for the life of me... so Date for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[slide13]

I tend to look at the date in the morning as I peruse my calendar on my phone to preview my day. After that I tend to just remember what date it is....same date all day long....so a date function just isn't that ncesaary these days.

I used to find it more useful, before the above became my standard practice though.

[Leodagan]

No date for the sub and if I want a sub with a date I'll take the 116600lv. ..... and that's what I did ...

[TimeToWatch]

What about SD4000?

[iliketime]

so many people have sub dates, that I didn't even know the original sub came without a date. It wasnt until I bought my first rolex (a 16570) that I began to do the research and found there was one with out the date. No date sub is just a classic, one less thing to set if you rotate watches.

[rph08]

I prefer the Submariner (14060m) simply because I think it looks better than the Sub Date. If it were my one and only watch, then maybe I'd pick a Sub Date. Although, honestly I'd probably go with a BLNR or an older 16710 as my one and only. I do think an LVc would make an awesome addition to anyone's collection though!

[jabbawock545]

Each to their own, i don't need the date and hate the cyclops 114060 for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[droptopman]

Bond, James Bond.
I like both but prefer the classic Sub. If you've ever worn a vintage Sub, the modern 14060/114060 provide some nostalgic connection to the originals. At least for me they do. Something about the simplicity just works for me.
I have a 116613lb too, but honestly if they made other Sub Date models without the date, I would prefer them. Would love to see a 116618lb and LVC without a date...or at least the option to chose Sub or Sub Date.

[KBM]

Just look at it!

[DocHolliday]

You can't go wrong either way, but IMHO the date gives it a superior look. It gives the watch depth and it looks more dynamic than the ND sub.

[ejvette]

I would like to own both but too redundant lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mjclark32]

For me, I just "needed" the date at a quick glance...

[alamla01]

Thank you all for your replies!

[burneyr]

I wish I had bought a no date in retrospect. Now I wear several watches in rotation, but only wear the date maybe twice a year. Even with quickset it's a pain to set - I want something I can set the time, give a few winds on the stem, and walk out the door.

Definitely wish I had bought a 14060 or 114060 instead.

[Mystro]

Date for me. The cyclops is functional and a Rolex icon. I won't buy a watch without a date function.
You can save money if you don't want a date function and a good way to get a new owner into the Submariner line at the lowest price point.

[dpdan93]

As much as I love the look of the original sub, I find myself looking down at my wrist for the date as much as the time so I went with the Sub date. When I can afford to have another, it will surely be a 5513 etc for those special days where I don't care what day it is.

[strafer_kid]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I prefer the original look.

Indeed - have one myself - love it!

[sutats]

It has a more balanced dial and also having the nonchalance of not having to know the date.

[Xerxes77]

Another vote for Sub Date

[Quailhunter]

I think I would drive myself nuts flipping my wrist over to check the date only to find it's not there. I've got one watch without a date, Calatrava, and it's worn only on special occasions. While I do understand the asthetics of the unadorned watch crystal, my engineering practicality dictates a date function.

[Gerry62]

Both are winners

but my first Rolex, many years ago It was a 14060

[bjr011]

Submariner w.Date for me!!

[CYKBC]

Do a search. These types of threads is like asking vanilla or chocolate. It's ice cream. Be an adult and make a decision. :)

[brandrea]

If a one and only I would have to have a date complication.

The 114060 looks cleaner though.

[ajas]

Date

[Tantsu]

Originally Posted by bjr011

Submariner w.Date for me!!

Yes:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[904VT]

I couldn't tell you why myself, because I like the Sub C Date LN so much more than the no date

If I want a cleaner no date dial, I look to Daytonas in the Rolex catalog personally.

[Prestige_Swiss]

Date for me

[faz]

Those who prefer a no date sub are the ones who don't write checks. How else are you going to write checks if you can't glance at date on that watch on the hand that is holding the check book open?? Let go of the check book, pull iphone out of your back pocket, click the home button, see the date, then put it back, open the check book again??? Naaah... Too much work! Just glance man... glance at your watch and you have the Date!

You know the pain and suffering Rolex engineers had to go through to put a damn Date function into that watch??? only for you guys to now come and say 'no, I don't have a use for it!??' Those Rolex engineers be like if they were alive today!