Opinions on 114060 ND SubC

[HongNinja]

Alright guys,

Now that the ND SubC has been out for a few months, what is your take? Where does it fall on your list?

I've gotta tell you, after going and looking at it on person, it's climbed a lot on my "list".

I've recently had opprotunity to deal my 16600/SD for one of these new badboys NIB and three days old. I'm thinking about going for it.

Thoughts on the 114060?

[Thevenin]

On my bucket list already I was exactly in the same boat. I had a 16600. Just beautiful, no doubt. Said that, 114060 will be my next watch, soon

I would not trade unless I had to btw, 16600 & 114060 just could keep me a looong time...

Also, nuff said, would love to see an updated Sea-Dweller, a 116600, somebody please

[Xenophon]

Love it

[HongNinja]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Love it

Gorgeous. Modern Rolex "tool" watch. Gotta have it.

[HongNinja]

Originally Posted by Thevenin

On my bucket list already I was exactly in the same boat. I had a 16600. Just beautiful, no doubt. Said that, 114060 will be my next watch, soon

I would not trade unless I had to btw, 16600 & 114060 just could keep me a looong time...

Also, nuff said, would love to see an updated Sea-Dweller, a 116600, somebody please

lol. This amazing hobby drives me crazy to!

The deal I'd be getting for the ND is hard to pass up. Even if I have to give up SD. I figure if I don't like the ND, I could get into another one easy, or go into a SubC/Explorer II 42mm fairly easy.

After seeing the new 114060. I really want one

[warrior]

I'll probably be in the minority...but I wouldn't deal your SD for the ND Sub C. I've handled the ND Sub-C several times....

1. It's waaay too shiny IMO. Looks very "blingy/fashiony". I honestly believe it's the kind of look that one gets tired of eventually. Not at all classic looking.

2. The maxi hour markers look too cramped.

3. Fat lugs

I think the SD face is by far the most handsome Rolex diver. Why?
No cyclops combined with the hour markers looking very balanced against the dial face. The hour markers of the SD look slightly larger than the 14060 and 16610 because of the ever so slightly smaller dial. Tight and balanced.

Finally, the SD cuts the glare better than any Rolex diver I've handled. IMO, the lack of AR coating is the bane of the Rolex diver existence....and the SD handles this the best. I think it's because the thicker crystal cuts the glare against the smaller face.

[HongNinja]

Originally Posted by warrior

I'll probably be in the minority...but I wouldn't deal your SD for the ND Sub C. I've handled the ND Sub-C several times....

1. It's waaay too shiny IMO. Looks very "blingy/fashiony". I honestly believe it's the kind of look that one gets tired of eventually. Not at all classic looking.

2. The maxi hour markers look too cramped.

3. Fat lugs

I think the SD face is by far the most handsome Rolex diver. Why?
No cyclops combined with the hour markers looking very balanced against the dial face. The hour markers of the SD look slightly larger than the 14060 and 16610 because of the ever so slightly smaller dial. Tight and balanced.

Finally, the SD cuts the glare better than any Rolex diver I've handled. IMO, the lack of AR coating is the bane of the Rolex diver existence....and the SD handles this the best. I think it's because the thicker crystal cuts the glare against the smaller face.

All great points. Truly. That's why it's a hard decision, but I'm leaning towards the SubC ND. Plus, I've really been wanting the new clasp and the engraved rehaut. The "new" stuff has really grown on me. It has a really clean face without the date/bubble. Although normally I enjoy my complications with a date.

If I don't like it, I'm sure I could find someone around here to take it. I see this being a "cult" watch(much like my SD).

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by warrior

I'll probably be in the minority...but I wouldn't deal your SD for the ND Sub C. I've handled the ND Sub-C several times....

1. It's waaay too shiny IMO. Looks very "blingy/fashiony". I honestly believe it's the kind of look that one gets tired of eventually. Not at all classic looking.

2.

3. Fat lugs

.

Saved me some typing....

[JJL]

Originally Posted by warrior

I'll probably be in the minority...but I wouldn't deal your SD for the ND Sub C. I've handled the ND Sub-C several times....

1. It's waaay too shiny IMO. Looks very "blingy/fashiony". I honestly believe it's the kind of look that one gets tired of eventually. Not at all classic looking.

2. The maxi hour markers look too cramped.

3. Fat lugs

I think the SD face is by far the most handsome Rolex diver. Why?
No cyclops combined with the hour markers looking very balanced against the dial face. The hour markers of the SD look slightly larger than the 14060 and 16610 because of the ever so slightly smaller dial. Tight and balanced.

Finally, the SD cuts the glare better than any Rolex diver I've handled. IMO, the lack of AR coating is the bane of the Rolex diver existence....and the SD handles this the best. I think it's because the thicker crystal cuts the glare against the smaller face.

I agree 100%

I like how the SubC ND looks with the clean dial and no cyclops - but IMO the SD offers everything it does and more. I much prefer the SD.

[Gharddog03]

Go for it.

[316lad]

My absolutely honest opinion? Not as nice as the 14060 M.

But then again, I am getting on a bit.

[gwalker]

I'd really consider it. I think it looks much better than the SD but the no date is a killer. If it was for a 116610 I'd trade it in a heartbeat. If you don't consider a date a must go for it. To me the maxi dial, bigger lugs, updated clasp, ceramic bezel, are HUGE upgrades over the previous model. I felt the 14060 felt flimsy and cheap (I know it's not but its always felt that way)

[drhanson]

I've historically been anti-sub but I can't wait for my local ADs to get the 114060 in stock so I can see how it feels. I like how clean it looks, has a good amount of bling but isn't over the top. It's definitely risen towards the top of my list.

[Sam Philip]

I prefer the SD

[kilyung]

I like it but I'd wait for prices to fall. ND Subs have historically not been the most popular models.

[Time2time]

Stunning watch.
Buy it.

[The GMT Master]

Not my cup of tea. I think the 5513 (or 5512 if you can get your hands on one) is the ND Sub of choice

[padi56]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Not my cup of tea. I think the 5513 (or 5512 if you can get your hands on one) is the ND Sub of choice

X2 On that one Chris or even a trit dial 14060.

[nauticajoe]

Awesome watch but I wouldn't buy since I already have the SubC.

[HongNinja]

Thanks for everybody's input.

I decided to go for it. Biggest reasons:

-Brand new model(like the "newness" around model)
-I got a great deal on it.
-My crystal on the SD needs to be replaced, and is due for a service within a couple years. The 114060 I'm getting is dated just a couple days ago.
-Finally, if I don't like it, I'm pretty positive I could flip it for another SD or something else I'd like.

After seeing it in person, and this offer I had to do it.

That all being said, I agree 100% with all your comments about the SD. Having that in mind, it does bug me a little letting this awesome Z serial go, but I'm excited for all the "new" Rolex additions on this new ND SubC.

[Jannal]

Go for it.

I traded-in my Sub C 116610LN for this, I have no regrets.

[HongNinja]

Originally Posted by Jannal

Go for it.

I traded-in my Sub C 116610LN for this, I have no regrets.

Dang, the new SubC for the ND huh?! I've actually heard of a few people doing that.

I'm stoked for it. I figure worst case scenario I'll flip it for a date Sub or tw new Explorer II. haha

[superdog]

I think this is a true modern classic. Love this watch!!

[nick c]

Love it

[Solo118]

Its a great piece, modern awesomeness.

I was just curious if anybody knows if the case is slightly smaller than the SubC date?

The 14060m was a bit smaller than the 16610

[sleddog]

Originally Posted by Solo118

Its a great piece, modern awesomeness.

I was just curious if anybody knows if the case is slightly smaller than the SubC date?

The 14060m was a bit smaller than the 16610

I haven't had the chance to micrometer the two cases myself Sol, but from another thread/post by Eddie, they are the exact same size from memory..

[sleddog]

A fantastic watch to own IMO!

[perpetualman88]

Congrats Brandon I cant wait to see wrist pics tomorrow :)

[HongNinja]

Originally Posted by perpetualman88

Congrats Brandon I cant wait to see wrist pics tomorrow :)

Thanks buddy! It'll be on my wrist mañana.

I feel special, should I post an "Incoming!" thread?! Hahahahaha

[gregdolley]

I like the SD better, but the ND sub is really popular...