Submariners.. new vs old.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Just to be redundant, again. This does it for me. Had the Maximized 114060 and I've had it with it. Great watch in every way except for feeling too big on me. Ultimately it had everything I wanted and more; just a bit too much more.

Great watch! The thing I really like about your 14060 (and vintage Sub Dates,) compared to my 16610, is the thinness of the bezel, which makes the crystal stick up a bit more, while simultaneously making the watch case look flatter. It really looks good, and it's probably the main criticism of my 16610, which has a thicker bezel.

[cervantes]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Great watch! The thing I really like about your 14060 (and vintage Sub Dates,) compared to my 16610, is the thinness of the bezel, which makes the crystal stick up a bit more, while simultaneously making the watch case look flatter. It really looks good, and it's probably the main criticism of my 16610, which has a thicker bezel.

Yes, the thinner bezel without the maxi dial is beautifully proportioned. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that regardless of the maxi dial and the ceramic insert bezel, the lugs on the new model just look off to me - particularly on a nato strap where the lug width and position is even more pronounced.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by cervantes

Yes, the thinner bezel without the maxi dial is beautifully proportioned. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that regardless of the maxi dial and the ceramic insert bezel, the lugs on the new model just look off to me - particularly on a nato strap where the lug width and position is even more pronounced.

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I was referring to the bezel thickness of the older models. Either way, agree about the lugs.

[rollee1]

This thread took a turn since my visit.
Any Rolex Sub is a great watch.

However, aesthetically side by side the older 16610 / 14060M are more pleasing, the overall appeal of the watch and bracelet looks better balanced, and chamfers.
These older models (in NOS or mint condition) are becoming rare, adds to the joy of locating one; the search adds to the satisfaction of ownership

Indeed the new cerachrom bezel and glidelock are pieces of art, (I love the indigo lume!) makes the new 116610 /114060 looks updated and fresh.

To a non watchaholic, these upgrades are not as outstanding as to the owner who knows and appreciates these differences.
This is the reason none of us here can be truly happy with just one Rolex watch. We want them all
The hobby gets addictive / dangerous as we learn more of our babies.

[cervantes]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I was referring to the bezel thickness of the older models. Either way, agree about the lugs.

So was I. And the totally flat crystal. Put it on a strap and the lugs look even more unwieldy.

[JayLexo]

Originally Posted by cervantes

Yes, the thinner bezel without the maxi dial is beautifully proportioned. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that regardless of the maxi dial and the ceramic insert bezel, the lugs on the new model just look off to me - particularly on a nato strap where the lug width and position is even more pronounced.

Totally agree, it was the lugs that put me off the SubC, just doesn't look right in my opinion, especially the way they flow into the bracelet. loved it apart from that but that was enough to make me buy the previous model.

[JJL]

For the Sub especially, I prefer the vintage models. I'd try to get one with a matte dial. Just has so much character to it... style4days...

[997.2]

Dang everyone towards the end of the thread is a 5 digit fiend! Love it and totally agree.



Give me the 5 digit any day of the week. 114060 is too big in the hips.



^ looks bad



^ looks bad to the bone

[TheMethod]

Newer ones have better clasp and bracelet but I would still take the 14060m.

[Great_mazinger]

As we know I have a 114060 and love it. But I love all the Submariners and Sea Dwellers new and old. No other diver compares to a Rolex diver. As Stan Lee says, "I am a true believer"

In other words, there is no wrong choice here.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by JayLexo

Totally agree, it was the lugs that put me off the SubC, just doesn't look right in my opinion, especially the way they flow into the bracelet. loved it apart from that but that was enough to make me buy the previous model.

Agreed. I certainly understand change, and, while I prefer the light weight, aluminum bezel, and even the non-Maxi dial of my 16610, Rolex could have released the identical SubC, but with a non-Maxi case, and I would have understood the point of upgrading, even if it wasn't completely to my liking. However, the Maxi case took it off the cliff, for me, which is actually great, because it doesn't tempt my bank account at all.

Of course, I also don't want anyone to think that I believe my 16610 is the best Sub of all time, either. I pretty much like and would wear all Subs for various reasons...except the new one.

p.s. I actually did think of one upgrade that I like about the SubC: the blue parachrome hairspring. That's pretty sweet.

[Dante1972]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

p.s. I actually did think of one upgrade that I like about the SubC: the blue parachrome hairspring. That's pretty sweet.

You can't forget about the glidelock clasp. The SubC has a lot more to offer than the parachrom hairspring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rolexbiker]

Originally Posted by Bangel

The difference between new and old is more than just the bezel insert.

Some believe the Glidelock clasp alone is worth the price difference

As a suggestion, I think you should decide for yourself which one you'd choose if money was no object and then work backwards from there.

+1 Glidelock makes all the difference

[Techno]

It is ironic that people see upgrade as disadvantage. Shiny ceramic bezel that is scratch proof , fat bracelet with new glide lock. Even Mercedes hour hand and no date on SubC is negative

[Rolexbiker]

Originally Posted by Techno

It is ironic that people see upgrade as disadvantage. Shiny ceramic bezel that is scratch proof , fat bracelet with new glide lock. Even Mercedes hour hand and no date on SubC is negative

I have had mine almost a month and still taking plastic bits off it. apparently the black hieroglyphics on the case is on plastic to be removed which led me to the plastic on the crown guards

I like the new ones. The flat printed bezel looked good in it's day...and the plastic is nicer on the new ones...hee hee

[wrightbrain]

Depends on which one you like.

I don't like the big lugs on the new models, they look too blocky to me, don't look like subs.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Dante1972

You can't forget about the glidelock clasp. The SubC has a lot more to offer than the parachrom hairspring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I said the hairspring is the only improvement that I like. The Glidelock is longer and heavier, not to mention the potential failure issues with the spot welding Rolex uses on it, as well as potential jamming issues.

If I wanted to exchange my Sub for a bulkier dive watch that looses that classic Sub shape, has a better clasp/bracelet, has a flashy Ceramic bezel, has a potentially better movement, has larger indices, and has a better water resistance...I could save some money and buy a new Planet Ocean 8500, which is arguably a better watch, technically, than the SubC.

Being a tough, yet relatively small and unflashy diver is much of the appeal of the Sub, IMO, but Rolex and Omega seem to be competing with each other in who can make the flashiest divers, these days. FWIW, I also think that Omega's 2500 Planet Ocean is more appealing than their newer 8500 series version.

[JohnFM]

It helps to have a larger wrist (at least 7") to pull off the SubC. On my 6.75" wrist, the older Sub or Sea Dweller just looks better. I want to like the newer watches and they are better in many ways, no doubt, but the classic look of the 5512/513/14060/16610/16600 will endure for years to come. The new Sea Dweller hits the mark with its trimmer lugs, but it is a relatively thick watch, which won't work for everyone. Would be great to see a SubC with trimmer lugs.

All of that said, buy what works on your wrist. These are all beautiful watches that look great on some and not so much on others. The forums are fun but try the watches on to see what looks best and makes you happy.

[sco]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

I said the hairspring is the only improvement that I like. The Glidelock is longer and heavier, not to mention the potential failure issues with the spot welding Rolex uses on it, as well as potential jamming issues.

If I wanted to exchange my Sub for a bulkier dive watch that looses that classic Sub shape, has a better clasp/bracelet, has a flashy Ceramic bezel, has a potentially better movement, has larger indices, and has a better water resistance...I could save some money and buy a new Planet Ocean 8500, which is arguably a better watch, technically, than the SubC.

Being a tough, yet relatively small and unflashy diver is much of the appeal of the Sub, IMO, but Rolex and Omega seem to be competing with each other in who can make the flashiest divers, these days. FWIW, I also think that Omega's 2500 Planet Ocean is more appealing than their newer 8500 series version.

If we all tell you that you are right and the the 16610 is amazing, will you please stop? We get it, you don't like the shape of the case etc. You have made that perfectly clear. From your Porsche comments to Leica, we got it! Move on and "love the one you're with."

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by sco

If we all tell you that you are right and the the 16610 is amazing, will you please stop? We get it, you don't like the shape of the case etc. You have made that perfectly clear. From your Porsche comments to Leica, we got it! Move on and "love the one you're with."

I don't think the 16610 is particularly amazing in the history of Subs. I like nearly all Subs in different ways.

I'm responding to various people in this thread, and this is a thread specifically asking about new vs. old. I think it's important to have opposing opinions and thoughts in threads like these, especially so new Rolex buyers have lots of reference material and options to look through when making a decision.

If we're each supposed to give a one line answer to the question and not discuss back and forth our reasoning, then maybe I don't understand the concept of forums in the first place??? I could understand if I started a thread called "I hate Ceramic Subs," but it's nothing like that. Whenever I see someone start a thread called "This Sub vs. That Sub," "Thick lugs vs. thin lugs," etc., I'm gonna be compelled to talk about this stuff. I mean, it's only watches we're talking about.

[silkroaded]

I picked up one of the last of the 16610s and couldn't be happier.

The new ceramic doesn't do it for me.

[silkroaded]

Nato

[silkroaded]

Stainless

[JayLexo]

Originally Posted by silkroaded

I picked up one of the last of the 16610s and couldn't be happier.

The new ceramic doesn't do it for me.

Loving the strap on that! Could you PM where you got it from please?

[rollee1]

Originally Posted by silkroaded

I picked up one of the last of the 16610s and couldn't be happier.

The new ceramic doesn't do it for me.

You got me wanting to pickup the same green RB

[silkroaded]

Originally Posted by JayLexo

Loving the strap on that! Could you PM where you got it from please?

It's the rubber B vulchramatic.

You can get them from here in the UK

http://www.blowers-jewellers.co.uk/s..._type_brand=or

[Ancestral Star]

Originally Posted by silkroaded

Nato

Looks dynamite. What tool did you use to remove the Oyster bracelet?

[JayLexo]

Originally Posted by silkroaded

It's the rubber B vulchramatic.

You can get them from here in the UK

http://www.blowers-jewellers.co.uk/s..._type_brand=or

Thanks for that

[TheMethod]

[antbkny]

Originally Posted by wilfreb

the maxi dial and the blue Chromalight are just awesome




the new Super Case just looks awesome in younger guys like myself




the Cerachrom bezel is just too gorgeous to ignore, anfter 5 years of dialy use, still looks like the first day.




there is no going back for me, IMO the current Sub is the best of them all, and the bracelet and clasp are in a league of its own, i love, like and respect older models for what they represent, a Sub is a Sub in any shape or form, iconic as no other timepiece, but once you hold the new Sub in your hand, there is no way back.

great photos. Love the subc