ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

boost2perfection · 9 September 2015, 01:52 PM

14060 FTW can't beat the clean look ND

evlkoala · 9 September 2015, 03:12 PM

No matter what,I think you will eventually go through a few Subs before you find that one perfect watch.

I started with 16610 as my 1st Rolex, thought that a Sub with date is the true Rolex. I didn't understand why people love that ND 2-Liner so much.

I was wrong! I couldn't get used to the cyclop, it was very distracting for me so I went to check out the 14060, it happened to be a 2-Liner. Traded it and no regret ever since

14060 2-Liner is a keeper, pre-ceramic and no longer in production.

Arclight · 13 September 2015, 11:19 PM

Personally my view is that the two line no date 14060 is the most attractive watch ever made by Rolex.

997.2 · 14 September 2015, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phils

Dear 997.2: Remember Bond had no choice on date model or not until the 1680 came along.

Didn't know that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gerry62 · 14 September 2015, 01:57 AM

14060 my choice

Wooddog44 · 16 September 2015, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azguy

Both were made in the gazillions over the past decade and beyond, never will be collectible, IMHO, and a dime a dozen in every pawn shop, jewelry store and website. Although, I do believe overall I see less 14060's than 16610's....I picked the no-date-sub for it's clean lines and unobstructed crystal.

Attachment 658080

Certainly get your point sir but "dime a dozen" IMHO is probably a poor choice of metaphor...

boost2perfection · 16 September 2015, 07:08 AM

14060 it's a modern classic, nothing like the clean no date 2 liner, lug holes

joemcp · 16 September 2015, 07:43 AM

Gotta say I love the one I have ... but sometimes I look at a Sub (without date) and drool... plus no need to adjust 5x a year!

subtona · 16 September 2015, 07:51 AM

No date

Watch Traders Eu · 1 November 2015, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m-abz-t

Hey All,

There are afew topics around regarding this matter.... just cant find the right answer.

Which Submariner would you go for out the two? 16610 or 14060?

Is the 14060 more of a collectables compared to the 16610? as I have read in a diff forum there are too many 16610's about.

Still cant make my mind up on a submariner... I think both are great... don't mind with or without date really as I like both.

Also just thinking in regards to its value in the future... which one is most likely to hold its value?

Found out on my own skin...
16610 keeps its value and actually increases it with the time overall if early '90s...
14060 unfortunately not coause not so wanted as the 16610.
14060M is a bit different though, but just cause particular reference.

jt- · 1 November 2015, 03:51 AM

The 14060m COSC version is by far my favourite of the breed.

For a while I was convinced the two liner was the one to get because that's what the majority around here prefer. Once I started to get out there and see them in person though, it was clear (to me anyway) that the COSC version fills out the dial better, and as a bonus is reminiscent of the 5512 Steve McQueen wore.

Sublovin · 1 November 2015, 04:43 AM

I own the sub with the date but it's an older T dial model and I like it a lot. If I were buying a new ceramic version I would go with no date it just appears cleaner. It's all personal preference and as far as value goes it's all relative the original MSRP I don't believe either is more collectible than the other. Just go with the one you want

firstOwatch · 1 November 2015, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tools

Indeed..

There is a Sub, and there is a Sub Date !!!

Both are collectible and always will be, regardless of when it was made.

If your first & only one , Date Sub.
But U will chase for the other ( ND ) missing one !
Take me 10 long years

Speed · 1 November 2015, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m-abz-t

Hey All,

There are afew topics around regarding this matter.... just cant find the right answer.

Which Submariner would you go for out the two? 16610 or 14060?

Is the 14060 more of a collectables compared to the 16610? as I have read in a diff forum there are too many 16610's about.

Still cant make my mind up on a submariner... I think both are great... don't mind with or without date really as I like both.

Also just thinking in regards to its value in the future... which one is most likely to hold its value?

Define "collectibles"

gwozhog · 1 November 2015, 06:56 AM

You want a real tool watch then buy the 14060. All the rest are just jewelry.

JohnFM · 1 November 2015, 07:09 AM

The 14060 is more uncommon and has a cleaner look. It's also a touch smaller, which is great for those with wrists under 7".

The one thing I do like about the 16610 (apart from the convenience of the date) is the buckle/clasp. Slightly different on the two watches and never quite figured out why the 14060 has the clasp it does. Not a big deal, of course, but a little different.

ibramr · 1 November 2015, 11:09 AM

Greetings. It is likely that, over time, you will end up with both, or a combination of a 14060 and a 16710 (GMT II, with an all black insert). Both submariner models are equally attractive--although the 14060 is a tad more elegant. My 2 cents. Enjoy in good health.

withthesword · 1 November 2015, 11:13 AM

why not both?

JohnFM · 1 November 2015, 11:23 AM

Put a Daytona (no cyclops) crystal on your 16610 and it's a nice blend of the two ;-)

Mezz72 · 1 November 2015, 04:52 PM

in my view, if u r looking for a no date, just go for a Daytona. Unless u don't like it or find it too expensive.

elkaholic · 1 November 2015, 10:41 PM

I've owned both 14060m (4 line) and 16610. I agree that the 14060 is very clean and symmetrical looking due to the lack of cyclops. However, it is hard for me to pick a favorite of the two.

The 14060m with hollow end links and slightly flatter case wears just slightly better on my wrist, seems to lay flatter when adjusted properly than the 16610.

If I were out to buy my first and/or only Rolex without a date it would without question be the 14060, the 39mm Explorer would be second in line in the no date category.

But, I have decided I need both the 16610 and 14060m again, so I'm looking to add them both back to my collection very soon. In my opinion, the Submariner line has always been the best looking watch and best combination of size and utility/go anywhere with any attire piece that Rolex offers. The 14060 works nicely on weekends/holidays/outdoors activities when I don't need to know or care what the date is. 16610 will fall into rotation during the work week with the two DJ models I currently own, as I do find their date feature useful at work.

Just my experiences, your mileage may vary.

joejoe1225 · 1 November 2015, 11:52 PM

I'm NO help here.

I have Both and Love Both.

You will probably end up with both at some point - No bad move.

16 September 2015, 07:51 AM	#39
subtona "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 26,540	No date __________________

1 November 2015, 06:56 AM	#45
gwozhog "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Point Blank, TX Posts: 2,894	You want a real tool watch then buy the 14060. All the rest are just jewelry. __________________ I once dated a girl in high school and her dad told me I would never amount to anything. He was right

1 November 2015, 11:13 AM	#48
withthesword "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Matte Location: Toronto Watch: 16570 Posts: 1,006	why not both? __________________ Ready. Ready. Hack. My Flickr Photostream Wishlist: 1984 gmt

1 November 2015, 10:41 PM	#51
elkaholic "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: ATL Watch: Rolex Posts: 683	I've owned both 14060m (4 line) and 16610. I agree that the 14060 is very clean and symmetrical looking due to the lack of cyclops. However, it is hard for me to pick a favorite of the two. The 14060m with hollow end links and slightly flatter case wears just slightly better on my wrist, seems to lay flatter when adjusted properly than the 16610. If I were out to buy my first and/or only Rolex without a date it would without question be the 14060, the 39mm Explorer would be second in line in the no date category. But, I have decided I need both the 16610 and 14060m again, so I'm looking to add them both back to my collection very soon. In my opinion, the Submariner line has always been the best looking watch and best combination of size and utility/go anywhere with any attire piece that Rolex offers. The 14060 works nicely on weekends/holidays/outdoors activities when I don't need to know or care what the date is. 16610 will fall into rotation during the work week with the two DJ models I currently own, as I do find their date feature useful at work. Just my experiences, your mileage may vary. __________________ 16570 Exp II White 16220 DJ silver stick 16233 DJ champagne stick

1 November 2015, 11:52 PM	#52
joejoe1225 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Real Name: Joe Location: USA Watch: ROLEX Posts: 1,928	I'm NO help here. I have Both and Love Both. You will probably end up with both at some point - No bad move. __________________

9 September 2015, 01:52 PM	#31
boost2perfection "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2012 Real Name: Shelly Location: Planet Earth Watch: 116520 Posts: 1,149	14060 FTW can't beat the clean look ND

9 September 2015, 03:12 PM	#32
evlkoala "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Los Angeles Watch: Sub Posts: 862	No matter what,I think you will eventually go through a few Subs before you find that one perfect watch. I started with 16610 as my 1st Rolex, thought that a Sub with date is the true Rolex. I didn't understand why people love that ND 2-Liner so much. I was wrong! I couldn't get used to the cyclop, it was very distracting for me so I went to check out the 14060, it happened to be a 2-Liner. Traded it and no regret ever since 14060 2-Liner is a keeper, pre-ceramic and no longer in production.

13 September 2015, 11:19 PM	#33
Arclight Banned Join Date: Mar 2013 Real Name: Rob Location: New York Watch: Rolex Posts: 577	Personally my view is that the two line no date 14060 is the most attractive watch ever made by Rolex.

14 September 2015, 01:57 AM	#35
Gerry62 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Italy EU Watch: Rolex Panerai Posts: 7,484	14060 my choice

16 September 2015, 07:08 AM	#37
boost2perfection "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2012 Real Name: Shelly Location: Planet Earth Watch: 116520 Posts: 1,149	14060 it's a modern classic, nothing like the clean no date 2 liner, lug holes

1 November 2015, 03:51 AM	#41
jt- "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Real Name: John Location: Toronto Posts: 171	The 14060m COSC version is by far my favourite of the breed. For a while I was convinced the two liner was the one to get because that's what the majority around here prefer. Once I started to get out there and see them in person though, it was clear (to me anyway) that the COSC version fills out the dial better, and as a bonus is reminiscent of the 5512 Steve McQueen wore.

1 November 2015, 04:43 AM	#42
Sublovin 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: USA Watch: Lots Posts: 4,593	I own the sub with the date but it's an older T dial model and I like it a lot. If I were buying a new ceramic version I would go with no date it just appears cleaner. It's all personal preference and as far as value goes it's all relative the original MSRP I don't believe either is more collectible than the other. Just go with the one you want

1 November 2015, 07:09 AM	#46
JohnFM "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: northern CA USA Watch: 114270 Explorer Posts: 477	The 14060 is more uncommon and has a cleaner look. It's also a touch smaller, which is great for those with wrists under 7". The one thing I do like about the 16610 (apart from the convenience of the date) is the buckle/clasp. Slightly different on the two watches and never quite figured out why the 14060 has the clasp it does. Not a big deal, of course, but a little different.

1 November 2015, 11:09 AM	#47
ibramr "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: usa Posts: 173	Greetings. It is likely that, over time, you will end up with both, or a combination of a 14060 and a 16710 (GMT II, with an all black insert). Both submariner models are equally attractive--although the 14060 is a tad more elegant. My 2 cents. Enjoy in good health.

1 November 2015, 11:23 AM	#49
JohnFM "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: northern CA USA Watch: 114270 Explorer Posts: 477	Put a Daytona (no cyclops) crystal on your 16610 and it's a nice blend of the two ;-)

1 November 2015, 04:52 PM	#50
Mezz72 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Singapore Posts: 618	in my view, if u r looking for a no date, just go for a Daytona. Unless u don't like it or find it too expensive.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)