214270 for a 114060?

[1William]

The Sub for the reasons listed above and the bracelet is great.

[Racerdj]

I have always like the Sub, so that is my choice.

[vubui]

I would (and did) choose the Explorer II.

Reasons:
- I absolutely love it, orange hand, maxi dial, size, everything.
- GMT hand comes in very handy
- I have never come across another one on someone's wrist
- I think the sub is fantastic, but especially in Stockholm where I live they are quite common
- I travel a lot and wanted something that didn't scream Rolex.

[GradyPhilpott]

I have the 114270 and the 14060M.

I got my Explorer first and have no regrets, but the Sub is what I really wanted.

I just got distracted along the way and acquired the Explorer and the 116200 63600 DJ first.

As I said I don't regret my free-associating through the Rolex catalog before getting the Sub I'd longed for for so many years, but I think there is a strong case to be made for going for the watch you know you will eventually buy on the first purchase.

Then you can buy others as the notions strikes.

[floater156]

Sub

[SeikoSam]

Sub for me...

[Bulldog21]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Sub. No brainer

+1

[JackDFD]

Explorer. You won't be one of ten guys in the room wearing a Sub.

[kjp1]

I have had both and would definitely go Sub. The Explorer, even with the larger case still felt a little small. The no date ceramic Sub is damn near the perfect watch! (IMHO, of course).

[Angrypuppy]

If go for the 114060 and save for a 114270.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hdms]

Had the same dilemma before.

[SeaAndSky]

Tough choice! I'd get the 114060 for its better bracelet, deeper water resistance, and crown guards. It's simply a tougher watch. I also prefer the more uniform hour markers on the dial of the Submariner.

[Solo118]

There is something really special about the 214270, however my personal preference is the SubC

[Foiel]

I had an Exp 1 39 mm then I traded in for a 114060 that I have now.. In my opinion 114060 forever!!!!!

[HongNinja]

Suuuuuub. No question.

[Rags]

I have both so I'm a happy man...

[rollerball]

214270. Pure and Simple. No date, no bezel. Just what Rolex does best, time telling. No dilemma of whether should one be buying the date sub. And of course, 3132 vs 3130, not that one is better than the other, but one is definitely more updated than the other.

[Lol-x]

The Sub has better legibility, lume, dial symmetry and proportionality to me as well as a clasp that has more on the fly adjustability. The rotating bezel is useful.

[travisb]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

The Sub has better legibility, lume, dial symmetry and proportionality to me as well as a clasp that has more on the fly adjustability. The rotating bezel is useful.

I have nothing else to say.

[Gerardus]

Originally Posted by Nobody.Move

Get the 214270.

Nice Pic

[fania123]

Guess I didn't post this question the right to way, I have the 214270 and really like it but I find it sitting in my watch box getting passed up and wearing other watches I own. So one call to DavidSW and all was corrected. I'm now the proud new owner of this bad boy and I'm loving it! I think she's a keeper.

[Foiel]

Is there a big difference between movement 3130 (114060) and 3132 (214270)?

[tcpx]

Definitely the 114060.. a modern classic!

[Dubarzy]

looks great!

[tylerad1]

Originally Posted by Foiel

Is there a big difference between movement 3130 (114060) and 3132 (214270)?

Paraflex shock absorption

[Foiel]

Thank you Tylerad1, do you think that makes the 3130 a much worse mov compared to 3132 or is just a irrelevant detail?

[Rolex fan 61]

Explorer or the 42mm explorer 2 in polar white would be my choice !!!!

[Malak]

Explorer

[SemperFi]

Tough choice as they are probably the two most iconic Rolex watches ever made. I'll straddle the line and say that either one is a great choice and there are no wrong choices.

[polaris72]

I have got 114060 and I just paid for BNIB from a trusted seller on TRF for 214270. Like you, had a hard time deciding, so I am getting both.