When will 14060 be considered vintage?

[Flyoverguy]

Is there some general time period which must elapse?

[Nikrnic]

You'll get a lot of different answers and opinions but when it comes down it its got to be about the age not the features or characteristics. I'd stand on 25 yrs old which really doesn't sound that old.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[KatGirl]

If we use the same criteria as in classic cars (my other hobby is watching car shows on motortrend. I am such a tomboy!), 25 years!

[shaunylw]

25 years sound right to me. The problem is the huge gap between vintage and antique. 25 years vintage, 100 years for antique. So vintage spans multiple decades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dan S]

There are many threads on the topic of "what is vintage?", and the general consensus is that there is no consensus, and also that it doesn't matter.

If you are asking because you want to post a thread about a 14060 from the 1990s in this forum, just go ahead ... I don't think people will mind.

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by Dan S

There are many threads on the topic of "what is vintage?", and the general consensus is that there is no consensus, and also that it doesn't matter.

If you are asking because you want to post a thread about a 14060 from the 1990s in this forum, just go ahead ... I don't think people will mind.

Classic watch, classic question.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Flyoverguy

Is there some general time period which must elapse?

Well my interpretation of vintage most all models with acrylic crystals and pre 3 series movements.

[Kowaco]

It already is


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[athom]

let's stop with those sh**** threads...on top after searching you'd have found 1000 threads about that boring subject...

[-dustin]

Originally Posted by athom

let's stop with those sh**** threads...on top after searching you'd have found 1000 threads about that boring subject...

so angry, this one.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by athom

let's stop with those sh**** threads...on top after searching you'd have found 1000 threads about that boring subject...

What’s your deal? No need to be so rude! Lighten up....

[rrod]

Being friendly and kind >> being angry and rude, IMHO ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

As to 14060, the tritium 2-liners are already perfectly vintage to me!

[ILuvSubs]

Ask 10 people you’ll probably get 10 different answers. Different people use different points as the dividing line - tritium dials, plexi crystals, 5 digits, matte dials, lug holes, pre-ceramic bezels, etc.

It probably doesn’t matter where you draw the line. I personally think it is vintage.

How about we split the difference and call them neo-vintage?

[Kingface66]

Until it’s universally agreed upon that it’s vintage, then it’s not.
We all agree a ‘62 5512 is vintage. We all agree a 1970 1675 is vintage. We all agree a ‘77 1680 is vintage.
If it’s not obvious to everyone, then it’s not.

[roh123]

Does it matter? Sometimes I think people think things get more expensive if it is called vintage. Sapphire sports models will always be very different to older plastic models. It’s just different animals.

[Styles Bitchley]

Originally Posted by roh123

Does it matter? Sometimes I think people think things get more expensive if it is called vintage. Sapphire sports models will always be very different to older plastic models. It’s just different animals.

Yes. I think for many it’s an exercise in marketing, where a watch starts increasing in value. Like throwing that other important one in there: “rare”

[Nikrnic]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

If we use the same criteria as in classic cars (my other hobby is watching car shows on motortrend. I am such a tomboy!), 25 years!

I was going to mention that same car anology being a car guy although 25 yrs does sound older for a car than a watch.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[rootbeer7]

4 series vintage, 5 series classic.

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by Styles Bitchley

Yes. I think for many it’s an exercise in marketing, where a watch starts increasing in value. Like throwing that other important one in there: “rare”

I agree. I have 2 Gshocks that are more rare than most Rolex, doesn’t mean they’re more valuable.

[Gasoil4ever]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

4 series vintage, 5 series classic.

Here is the right answer.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

4 series vintage, 5 series classic.

I like this answer.

[996marty]

Definitely a classic

[214270Explorer]

Easy. When your SS Daytona comes in to the AD.

[aaamax]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

4 series vintage, 5 series classic.

I second this one and a good way to see it from now on. Why didn't I think of it before... lol.

[Vlad]

14060 is a strange bird and, honestly, my favorite model to wear. To me it is classic, even though the last 14060m was only made few years ago. But it's truly the last of the classic Subs - hollow endlinks and lug holes. With the last version being a 4 liners, it's like Rolex started with 5512 and finally finished with 14060m

[barrypang]

After 30 years

[ciceroyeah]

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

4 series vintage, 5 series classic.

I like the term "neo-vintage" being thrown around by certain publications and grey dealers, generally meaning 5-digit sports models with Tritium (mid 1980s through late 1990s, and into the 2000s for some models, before the ceramic versions arrived).

https://www.rescapement.com/blog/neo...collectibility

IMO some of the most beautifully "vintage" feeling Rolex references come from the 1980s and early 90s.

[/16610]

As others have alluded to above, I don’t think that there’s a 25 year limit - or any other fixed age.

Anything Rolex with plexiglass I see as being vintage, the five digit models as being classic, and transitional models (matte dialled 16800 Submariners for instance) as having one foot in either camp. Neo-vintage is a good term, particularly for models which exhibit particular characteristics (such as porcelain dial 16520s or cream ‘Panna dial’ 16550s). It’s about characteristics and eras, rather than age.

The one caveat is that, with time, these distinctions may well fade. In 50 years, stuff coming out now might be seen as being vintage, or at least classic... we’re not in 2070 yet, though.

[Rumar89]

Originally Posted by Vlad

14060 is a strange bird and, honestly, my favorite model to wear. To me it is classic, even though the last 14060m was only made few years ago. But it's truly the last of the classic Subs - hollow endlinks and lug holes. With the last version being a 4 liners, it's like Rolex started with 5512 and finally finished with 14060m

Agreed! The maxi dial, super case and the ceramic bezel changed the character of the model. Less tool, more bling, for better or worse.

[ILuvSubs]

Originally Posted by ciceroyeah

I like the term "neo-vintage" being thrown around by certain publications and grey dealers, generally meaning 5-digit sports models with Tritium (mid 1980s through late 1990s, and into the 2000s for some models, before the ceramic versions arrived).

https://www.rescapement.com/blog/neo...collectibility

IMO some of the most beautifully "vintage" feeling Rolex references come from the 1980s and early 90s.

The mid 80s through late 90s have the "best of both worlds" attributes of lug holes, sapphire glass to protect against water leaking in, the patina of tritium, the aluminium bezel insert, the charm of the hollow end links and stamped clasp and a comparatively lower price point.

For me, my favourite period for vintage Rolex is the 70s to early 80s, when you had the matte dials and then you started getting the "issued" watches (e.g., Military Submariners, COMEX, Omani / Khanjar dials, etc.), the maxi dials for the 5513 / 5512, DRSDs, Red Subs, radial dial for the 1675, etc.