Question about five digit SS Subs

[CaliSpecial]

Hi all. This may seem like a dumb question and I apologise if it is but does anyone know why Rolex chose to offer the later versions of the 16610 with a no holes case but didn’t offer the same option on the 14060M?

[kieselguhr]

Not sure as to the reason why, but maybe it was to use the surplus of perforated lug cases

[joli160]

Rolex never discloses any info about anything.
We'll never know the reasoning behind it

[padi56]

Originally Posted by CaliSpecial

Hi all. This may seem like a dumb question and I apologise if it is but does anyone know why Rolex chose to offer the later versions of the 16610 with a no holes case but didn’t offer the same option on the 14060M?

Simply because they wanted to keep the 14060 and 14060M as close to the original Submariner from the 1950s.And because the watches back then many were working tool watches,so it was far easier to change the bracelet to strap if needed with a lug hole case.But today the days of Rolex being a tool watch have long gone,so now all have non lug hole cases.

[77T]

Originally Posted by padi56

Simply because they wanted to keep the 14060 and 14060M as close to the original Submariner from the 1950s.And because the watches back then many were working tool watches,so it was far easier to change the bracelet to strap if needed with a lug hole case.But today the days of Rolex being a tool watch have long gone,so now all have non lug hole cases.

This is what I believe too. The 55xx and succeeding 14060 were the “jeeps” in the Rolex garage. If you had a toothpick, you could remove bracelet or strap and clean the lug holes with same toothpick during the changeover.

My goodness those were the days...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[padi56]

Originally Posted by 77T

This is what I believe too. The 55xx and succeeding 14060 were the “jeeps” in the Rolex garage. If you had a toothpick, you could remove bracelet or strap and clean the lug holes with same toothpick during the changeover.

My goodness those were the days...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Have to agree when owners bought Rolex watches to wear hopefully for life because they were the best that was available to do the job.And not like today thought of as mainly £££$$$ or some sort of investment thing.

[214270Explorer]

Originally Posted by padi56

Have to agree when owners bought Rolex watches to wear hopefully for life because they were the best that was available to do the job.And not like today thought of as mainly £££$$$ or some sort of investment thing.

Yeppers. Another reason to own and appreciate 5-digit and earlier versions.

[CaliSpecial]

Thanks for the replies and interesting perspectives. I’d definitely love to have a 14060M in the collection one day, but I’d love it even more without the holes.

I’m putting my flame suit on as I know many will see this as blasphemy!

[Deroya]

It is the only watch to survive my collection. The only one i will never sell, the holes are necessary IMO. Kept it honest and the last true produced tool watch in the line.. rightfully so.

[Rado63]

I know why. So watch enthusiasts and collectors would have something to talk about.

[Meyrin]

[QUOTE=77T;10619834]This is what I believe too. The 55xx and succeeding 14060 were the “jeeps” in the Rolex garage. If you had a toothpick, you could remove bracelet or strap and clean the lug holes with same toothpick during the changeover.

My goodness those were the days...

That's why I so cherish my 14060! And yes, those most certainly were the days!

[Efferalgan]

Originally Posted by Deroya

It is the only watch to survive my collection. The only one i will never sell, the holes are necessary IMO. Kept it honest and the last true produced tool watch in the line.. rightfully so.

I just put my 14060m (Final series from 2012) on sale but your post is forcing me to change my mind and keep it :)