What I Do Not Like About The Sub 114060

[Tools]

Everybody has been waiting, or at least they say that they have been waiting for the new ceramic 114060..

I'm not one of them, although the 14060 is one of my favorite references..





First, I look at the latest "block" case. I have never liked the larger lugs and square crown guards.. they just look to clunky. Rolex was able to bring in the taper on the Exp II 42, and they have also done so on the new Sky-Dweller. So, in my view, they dropped the ball on this classic by simply defaulting to their current mass of blocky boxes.. This could have been fixed by simply affixing a 22 mm endlink.. hey, I might have bought that !!

To me, the sleek lines are gone - they might as well have made a square watch... I don't care so much about the lug holes... but without the graceful sweep of the case to lug to bracelet, it just fails to excite me..

Looking at the specs, the glaring thing I see missing is the Paraflex shock system. Rolex went through the trouble of making a new movement for these big-case watches with the new 3132 that the Explorer sports... Why isn't this new Sub good enough for the latest movement.. another head scratching omission..

So, yes, I suppose that it looks ok.. and the new glidelock was a long time coming.. but now it's just another Sub without a date, so what's the point...

[Rollie2011]

I think it looks great

[NYC6]

Well said Larry. My feelings as well.
Whats the difference in the movements you mentioned?
_________________________

XLVI Super Bowl Champs NY Giants

[Tools]

Originally Posted by NYC6

Well said. My feelings as well.
Whats the difference in the movements you mentioned?

The 3132 contains Rolex latest Paraflex Shock system.. If it's the lastest non-date movement that Rolex makes, this classic workhorse should have been fitted with it..

[RedBaronF2001]

Rolex had the opportunity to make the no-date Submariner really stand out in the sports lineup by using the new EXP II 42mm case, but they clearly went the easy route by re-using the "maxi" case.

I guess I can't blame them.

[wantonebad]

Hallelujah Larry!! BRAVO!!!

could not agree more!!!!!!!!!!
The new TUDOR Pelagos is 42mm, with an escape valve, and the sleek design we all love. The emperor has no clothes, and the new subs are sqare boxes!!!

[MoBe]

Rolex could have kept the old one put a better bracelet on it and kept selling it at a lower price for years to come.

Change for change`s sake is not a good idea,even from Rolex.

[SaddleSC]

I really like it, but I have always been a big fan of the new ceramics. The one glaring omission I see, is that Rolex missed the opportunity to really make it really special. This is basically a 116610 without the date. I think it would have been a much bigger hit, if the word "Submariner" was in red, or they preserved the lug holes, or even if they went back to the two-line style of dial text. Just one (or all) of these features would have really made it shine as a unique successor to the 14060M. Without anything to differentiate it from the 116610 (except the lack of a date) I find it to be a bit boring.

[Puffy]

good points larry
if i wanted a No Date model I'd get the Milgauss. better case/bracelet integration
on the 114060 the lugs look like after-thoughts

[Roley]

In my opinion... All the upgrades, and the "Maxi Dial", gives this watch balance and new life. Stunning time piece.

[padi56]

But Larry it does contain the all singing and dancing Parachrom with the superalloy 904L
cerachrom insert and chromolight hands markers.Its a shame about the block case like you will stick with the 14060/M range the last of the classic breed.

[Puffy]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

if the word "Submariner" was in red, or they preserved the lug holes, or even if they went back to the two-line style of dial text.

that would look quite nice...

but without lug holes. they don't belong on a modern day watch imo

[azguy]

Originally Posted by MoBe

Rolex could have kept the old one put a better bracelet on it and kept selling it at a lower price for years to come.

Change for change`s sake is not a good idea,even from Rolex.

Hey there's a brillant idea

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by Puffy

There it is! Now...that watch would be an absolute must own.

[Gharddog03]

Should of been 42mm.

[horseco]

I think having a stand alone model (14060) that shares the Submariner name, but little else with the 116610 seemes very odd to me. The passing of the no date, is the end of an era... but it was probably time...

[mtrunner]

Excellent point on the movement. I wonder what their rationale was for not using the new 3132 movement?

[aeon888]

What I do not like about the new 114060 is that I have to wait before it hits the US market. And me being in the forgotten state of Nebraska, maybe our AD will it have in stock (if they got Lucky) by next year hopefully. :(

[mike]

To be honest I'm a tad bit suprised Rolex even carries the reference and didn't discontinue it. One wonders outside of WISdom how many they sell compared to the date version.

Rolex doesn't strike me as sentimental in the least. I am glad they did as at least it does speak somewhat to the companies heritage.

[Johny]

Originally Posted by Tools

The 3132 contains Rolex latest Paraflex Shock system.. If it's the lastest non-date movement that Rolex makes, this classic workhorse should have been fitted with it..

hi larry...i wonder if they have used the bezel and insert from the sub date ceramic? jocke photoshopped a 22mm endlink subdate ceramic in a thread last year.

[capote]

The maxi case is the worst designed case ever to come from Rolex. Slowly it has worked itself through the sport line. Sub ND was the last of the great classic cases.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by mike

To be honest I'm a tad bit suprised Rolex even carries the reference and didn't discontinue it. One wonders outside of WISdom how many they sell compared to the date version.

Rolex doesn't strike me as sentimental in the least. I am glad they did as at least it does speak somewhat to the companies heritage.

I'll agree with this..

Also, at the price point that this watch will be at... likely ~ 7,500USD; how many will actually buy one.

A lot of the buyers today get into Rolex through the relatively inexpensive 14060.

[Ceramic]

Sub C Date is much nicer, I am happy that I went ahead and purchased the sub c.

If I would make a decision between 14060M and 16610, then I would definitely choose 14060M as it has smaller crystal, uses same bezel with SD, has lug holes which all gives a unique look...

But, the new SUB C ND has no difference from SUB C Date other than the date.
As the case is big and simple, it really needs some complication...
Just my opinion...

[Mr. K]

Glad it finally got the upgrades. I for one, like it.
But can respect that some will prefer the older style. There are many that prefer vintage to the new stuff too. Good news is the older models will probably be cheaper in a few years on the used market..

[z32turbo]

I like the way it looks but I agree with Larry and that Rolex should have inserted the newest movement available.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Tools

but now it's just another Sub without a date, so what's the point....

I guess you could say that I am in a state of quiet resignation.

We all knew that this was coming and it turned out exactly as I expected that it would, just a little sooner.

I have my randomly-numbered 14060m, which I am told is a 3130 with the blue Parachrom hairspring, so I'm pretty happy.

I was at the AD a week ago and the watchmaker and I were talking about Basel and what to expect.

In the meantime, I was trying on several watches for the heck of it and I tried on one of the Sub-Dates for the first time that I can remember and I had to admit that there were qualities of the watch's appearance that were compelling, although the over-sized lugs still seem superfluous.

I do agree that the 114060 is now just another Sub and while I avoided ever calling the earlier Submariners "No-Date Subs," I think that now the term is appropriate. It's just that Sub with no date.

In terms of what I don't like, I really have to admit again that because this was inevitable and long expected that one simply has to accept it for what it is and what they did was better than just killing it off.

I think the change has made a lot of people quite happy for all the wrong reasons, but they are the future of the line.

[FNFZ4]

Yup, That was the first thing I noticed. It looks a bit square with those big lugs... I guess its okay. I personally dont like it. If I were to get a modern Sub I would go with the date. The ND Subs should always be closer to its roots....

[Woody]

I like the design but it is so much like my existing Sub-C that I don't see me buying one to add to the collection. Then again perhaps when I get to try one on I might change my mind

[BH13GMT]

I agree with the idea of the 22mm end link, something that should have been done on the SDDS.
I think they had to follow suit on the SubC date with the case style, even though the Exp2 style case would make more sense.
Yes I will swerve the ND Sub C

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by mike

To be honest I'm a tad bit suprised Rolex even carries the reference and didn't discontinue it. One wonders outside of WISdom how many they sell compared to the date version.

Rolex doesn't strike me as sentimental in the least. I am glad they did as at least it does speak somewhat to the companies heritage.

Great points Mike.