ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Ragu · 25 January 2007, 12:36 AM

I've always liked the un-cluttered look of this Sub.

What are your thoughts of "not" having the date option pro/cons?
Wish I could post a pic of a Sub no-date to follow this thread, maybe someone can help me out.

Thanks

leopardprey · 25 January 2007, 01:24 AM

Traditional, the way Subs were until I believe 1966. Less moving parts in the watch = a little more simple and rugged? Can always look at a calender once or twice a day or newspaper, etc.. to know what the date is then remember. Also a little less in price since less complicated movement. The origianl James Bond Watch and choice of Steve McQueen. Can't go wring with that.

nottinghill · 25 January 2007, 01:38 AM

Here's mine:

Alcan · 25 January 2007, 01:42 AM

To me the date feature on a watch is almost indispensable. I use it all the time.

padi56 · 25 January 2007, 01:47 AM

A Rolex classic for sure great watch with a lot of history, picture below of the 14060m older brother my 5513.The dates not that really important today with date on phone papers etc and myself not a huge fan of the cyclops

roadcarver · 25 January 2007, 02:25 AM

I used to have a 14060 (non M version), like yourself I also like the clean look. However, I found out that I did miss the date feature.

So, the closest thing to a clean look is the Sea-Dweller as it does not have a cyclops. I sold my 14060 to get the SD.

Mind you, the SD is heavier and you do feel it on your wrist. The 14060 on the otherhand is VERY comfortable!

mikey · 25 January 2007, 02:44 AM

I had a 14060 cross my path in the last 3 years. It was a great watch, but I got bored of it rather quickly because it had no date which is important. It was very comfy and looks good on a leather strap.

quinson418 · 25 January 2007, 04:15 AM

Get a Sea-Dweller with the date and still have the simple and clean appearance since it doesn't have the cyclop.

Blue Bull · 25 January 2007, 04:29 AM

I like the cyclops and the date... I would go for the ss Sub/Date above the Seadweller and Sub/no date.Personal preference,thats all.

Ragu · 25 January 2007, 11:36 AM

My problem is that I can't see the date when I don't have on my reading glasses. And the only time I use my reading glasses is when...you know I read.
So, all the other times I'm not reading the date will not be visible.
Anyone else have / had this dilema?

mike · 25 January 2007, 11:48 AM

As I've said before----simple elegance.

Mrdi · 25 January 2007, 12:23 PM

The only thing cleaner is an EXP 1

Ragu · 25 January 2007, 01:18 PM

Mike,
simply an amazing pic!

A. Jacobs · 25 January 2007, 01:22 PM

I really like the un-cluttered dial on the non-date Sub. The only thing that kept me from buying it was that it was not a certified chronometer, so I went with the Sub date.

colemanitis · 25 January 2007, 01:29 PM

I love the look of the 14060M, but I couldn't live without the date feature. This is why I chose the SD!

Kris · 25 January 2007, 03:11 PM

It's a nice watch and all, but the absense of the SCOC turns me off.

Why isn't this watch SCOC?

Is Rolex afraid that if they make it SCOC, the watch may take away sales from their other Subs and GMT lines?

henry2703 · 25 January 2007, 03:37 PM

SCOC....

Well...er... does it matter? anyway, that watch is definitely within COSC limits... and most people respect that watch for what it is... not because it is COSC certified....

tonelar · 25 January 2007, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quinson418

Get a Sea-Dweller with the date and still have the simple and clean appearance since it doesn't have the cyclop.

Or just knock the cyclops off a subdate...

padi56 · 25 January 2007, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

It's a nice watch and all, but the absense of the SCOC turns me off.

Why isn't this watch SCOC?

Is Rolex afraid that if they make it SCOC, the watch may take away sales from their other Subs and GMT lines?

First its COSC. Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronometres.
Its very simple 100% down to cost,thats why the non date sub is not tested.And all Rolex movements are more than capable of meeting the COSC standard. Same goes for most of any movement all brands made today,with a bit of careful regulation.

The COSC test refers to the movement only because uncased movements are all that the testers get. These blank movements without dial, hands and winding crown are received and given standard hands and dials. Depending on whether manual or automatic winding, they received standard state-of-wind and are tested. The test procedure uses photography time lapse at set times daily, synchronised by a master clock. Any deviation of the seconds hand from master clock, seen on the photo, is the daily variation recorded.The COSC test is quite expensive around £110 to £140 per movement

The movement is then returned to manufacturer who can take as long as they want to finally encase the movement in your "chronometer watch".Some reasons why the COSC procedure IMO can be meaningless in real terms:in reality its just a bit of paper,afraid words like superlative are meaningless bullsh!te very much like the COSC just a big marketing ploy IMHO.

As I already indicated, only the movements are submitted for testing. Not even hands and dials are present, these are added at the institute. It is common knowledge, however, that additional shipping and handling, and above all, encasing the movements, can and will drastically affect its accuracy from original test.And today nearly all modern day movements Swiss,Japanese,European and even some Chinese,can with a bit of patience and fine tuning reach COSC standards.And you buy the watch because it appeals to you and not because of a bit of paper.Which with Rolex now, you dont even get a copy of your watches COSC timing certificate its now all in Rolex computer main data base.And the Sub 14060m is exacly the same movement as in the Rolex Explorer,the only difference its not sent for COSC testing,again just to keep the cost down.

indra · 25 January 2007, 09:03 PM

mike · 25 January 2007, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by indra

Beautifull!!!

miner · 25 January 2007, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

It's a nice watch and all, but the absense of the SCOC turns me off.

Why isn't this watch SCOC?

Is Rolex afraid that if they make it SCOC, the watch may take away sales from their other Subs and GMT lines?

My understanding is that the no date sub shares the same movement as the explorer 1. The explorer 1 has a COSC cert. Same movement, Rolex just don't submit them. When you buy a Rolex the only way you'd know that it's COSC is the red hang tag (and of course their word and $$ on the price)!

Ragu · 26 January 2007, 12:36 AM

padi,
very enlightning info you gave there !

Kris · 26 January 2007, 02:51 AM

I'll gladly pay extra for the "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified" on the watch dial.

Let me ask you this, Volvo is known for being the safest car when it comes to automobile accidents as the car is designed to keep it's occupants safe.

Stringent testing is done on all their models in simulated car crash tests.

Would you buy a new Volvo model car that wasn't crash test rated but believed that since it's a Volvo, it gotta be as good as the other Volvo models anyways?

Sorry, I'll be more than happy to pay that extra coin for that certification.

padi56 · 26 January 2007, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

I'll gladly pay extra for the "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified" on the watch dial.

Let me ask you this, Volvo is known for being the safest car when it comes to automobile accidents as the car is designed to keep it's occupants safe.

Stringent testing is done on all their models in simulated car crash tests.

Would you buy a new Volvo model car that wasn't crash test rated but believed that since it's a Volvo, it gotta be as good as the other Volvo models anyways?

Sorry, I'll be more than happy to pay that extra coin for that certification.

Cannot see how testing a cars safety has anything to do with the simple COSC watch testing.But the fact remains the Airking and the Sub non date use the Cal 3130.Which is exactly in every shape and form as the Cal 3130 thats used in the Explorer which is tested.And all movements are machine tested for accuracy,even the non tested ones before they are cased. The only difference is the bare movement has not been tested by the separate company the COSC.But all Rolex movements will easily perform to the COSC standard,as will many many others.And many of the COSC tested ones are returned for simple regulation same as for the non COSC ones.

Ragu · 26 January 2007, 04:37 AM

So, after all is said and done if I can't see the Date because I don't have on my reading glasses then a Sub. no-date makes sense...?

I wonder how many other fine folk here have the same problem of not being able to see the date without their glasses on and wearing a date watch?

padi,
again nice explanation given with info I didn't know.
This place is great!

roadcarver · 26 January 2007, 04:41 AM

Hey Ragu,

I'm not a point yet that I require reading glasses or bifocals hence it is not an issue yet, although I wear corrective lenses to see distant objects.

Best,

Vernon

JJ Irani · 26 January 2007, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadcarver

Hey Ragu,

I'm not a point yet that I require reading glasses or bifocals hence it is not an issue yet, although I wear corrective lenses to see distant objects.

Best,

Vernon

I think I need bifocals....I keep mistaking the rams for ewes!!

madformac · 26 January 2007, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

I think I need bifocals....I keep mistaking the rams for ewes!!

I think thats bisexual not bifocal JJ..

roadcarver · 26 January 2007, 04:48 AM

Mr. Shag-meister is in the house!

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

I think I need bifocals....I keep mistaking the rams for ewes!!

25 January 2007, 12:36 AM	#1
Ragu "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Ragu Sauce Location: Southern, FL Watch: the Sauce ;) Posts: 782	Sub no-date #16040M.. I've always liked the un-cluttered look of this Sub. What are your thoughts of "not" having the date option pro/cons? Wish I could post a pic of a Sub no-date to follow this thread, maybe someone can help me out. Thanks

25 January 2007, 01:38 AM	#3
nottinghill "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Real Name: Clarence Location: A 'fine' city Watch: 16613 & 116660 Posts: 265	Here's mine: Attached Images __________________ Rolex TT Submariner Date Blue Dial (Ref#116613LB) Rolex Deep Sea Sea Dweller (Ref#116660) Rolex 18K/SS Oyster Perpetual Datejust (Ref#16233) Omega Seamaster 300M Chrono (Ref#2920.80.91)

25 January 2007, 01:42 AM	#4
Alcan "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Al Location: Way Up North Watch: your P's & Q's Posts: 10,473	To me the date feature on a watch is almost indispensable. I use it all the time. __________________ Member #1,315 I don't want to get technical, but according to chemistry alcohol IS a solution!

25 January 2007, 01:47 AM	#5
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 53,239	A Rolex classic for sure great watch with a lot of history, picture below of the 14060m older brother my 5513.The dates not that really important today with date on phone papers etc and myself not a huge fan of the cyclops __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

25 January 2007, 02:25 AM	#6
roadcarver "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Vernon Location: C-a-n-a-d-a Watch: 16600 Posts: 5,641	I used to have a 14060 (non M version), like yourself I also like the clean look. However, I found out that I did miss the date feature. So, the closest thing to a clean look is the Sea-Dweller as it does not have a cyclops. I sold my 14060 to get the SD. Mind you, the SD is heavier and you do feel it on your wrist. The 14060 on the otherhand is VERY comfortable! __________________ I'm just a cook...

25 January 2007, 01:24 AM	#2
leopardprey Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Chad Location: Around the world Watch: Panerai 233 Posts: 4,204	Traditional, the way Subs were until I believe 1966. Less moving parts in the watch = a little more simple and rugged? Can always look at a calender once or twice a day or newspaper, etc.. to know what the date is then remember. Also a little less in price since less complicated movement. The origianl James Bond Watch and choice of Steve McQueen. Can't go wring with that.

25 January 2007, 02:44 AM	#7
mikey "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: USA Watch: Oysterdate 6694 Posts: 2,713	I had a 14060 cross my path in the last 3 years. It was a great watch, but I got bored of it rather quickly because it had no date which is important. It was very comfy and looks good on a leather strap.

25 January 2007, 04:15 AM	#8
quinson418 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Washington, USA Watch: Rolex Sea-dweller Posts: 207	Get a Sea-Dweller with the date and still have the simple and clean appearance since it doesn't have the cyclop.

25 January 2007, 04:29 AM	#9
Blue Bull Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,887	I like the cyclops and the date... I would go for the ss Sub/Date above the Seadweller and Sub/no date.Personal preference,thats all.

25 January 2007, 11:36 AM	#10
Ragu "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Ragu Sauce Location: Southern, FL Watch: the Sauce ;) Posts: 782	My problem is that I can't see the date when I don't have on my reading glasses. And the only time I use my reading glasses is when...you know I read. So, all the other times I'm not reading the date will not be visible. Anyone else have / had this dilema?

25 January 2007, 11:48 AM	#11
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,682	As I've said before----simple elegance.

25 January 2007, 12:23 PM	#12
Mrdi Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: PA Posts: 3,478	The only thing cleaner is an EXP 1

25 January 2007, 01:18 PM	#13
Ragu "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Ragu Sauce Location: Southern, FL Watch: the Sauce ;) Posts: 782	Mike, simply an amazing pic!

25 January 2007, 01:22 PM	#14
A. Jacobs "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Real Name: Andrew Location: Ohio Watch: SS Sub Date 16610 Posts: 629	I really like the un-cluttered dial on the non-date Sub. The only thing that kept me from buying it was that it was not a certified chronometer, so I went with the Sub date. __________________ Rolex Submariner 16610 "Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity."

25 January 2007, 01:29 PM	#15
colemanitis "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Jeff Location: Florida Watch: PAM 1090 Posts: 3,723	I love the look of the 14060M, but I couldn't live without the date feature. This is why I chose the SD! __________________ Member #471

25 January 2007, 03:11 PM	#16
Kris Banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Canada Watch: Sea-Dweller Z-ser. Posts: 313	It's a nice watch and all, but the absense of the SCOC turns me off. Why isn't this watch SCOC? Is Rolex afraid that if they make it SCOC, the watch may take away sales from their other Subs and GMT lines?

25 January 2007, 03:37 PM	#17
henry2703 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: too far from HK Posts: 129	SCOC.... Well...er... does it matter? anyway, that watch is definitely within COSC limits... and most people respect that watch for what it is... not because it is COSC certified.... __________________ If your friend is using numerous strokes to get his ball out of the bunker, don't stand around him and count his strokes.... It's justifiable Homicide.

25 January 2007, 09:03 PM	#20
indra "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 82	__________________ It's good to be the king... Last edited by padi56; 25 January 2007 at 09:34 PM.. Reason: Got the hint, it's resized ;)

26 January 2007, 12:36 AM	#23
Ragu "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Ragu Sauce Location: Southern, FL Watch: the Sauce ;) Posts: 782	padi, very enlightning info you gave there !

26 January 2007, 02:51 AM	#24
Kris Banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Canada Watch: Sea-Dweller Z-ser. Posts: 313	I'll gladly pay extra for the "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified" on the watch dial. Let me ask you this, Volvo is known for being the safest car when it comes to automobile accidents as the car is designed to keep it's occupants safe. Stringent testing is done on all their models in simulated car crash tests. Would you buy a new Volvo model car that wasn't crash test rated but believed that since it's a Volvo, it gotta be as good as the other Volvo models anyways? Sorry, I'll be more than happy to pay that extra coin for that certification.

26 January 2007, 04:37 AM	#26
Ragu "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Ragu Sauce Location: Southern, FL Watch: the Sauce ;) Posts: 782	So, after all is said and done if I can't see the Date because I don't have on my reading glasses then a Sub. no-date makes sense...? I wonder how many other fine folk here have the same problem of not being able to see the date without their glasses on and wearing a date watch? padi, again nice explanation given with info I didn't know. This place is great!

26 January 2007, 04:41 AM	#27
roadcarver "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Vernon Location: C-a-n-a-d-a Watch: 16600 Posts: 5,641	Hey Ragu, I'm not a point yet that I require reading glasses or bifocals hence it is not an issue yet, although I wear corrective lenses to see distant objects. Best, Vernon __________________ I'm just a cook...

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