Sold my Sub, and now I want a Sub...

[jasoncd]

Hoping to get some info and some opinions here. I sold my ceramic Sub a while back .

It just never felt right on my wrist. I have very thin wrists at 6" if keep the measuring cloth snug, and a little under if I pull it tight. The Sub just felt a little too long lug to lug, and a little too long in the clasp. Both of those together just slightly put the watch off for me.

I loved the 116610 otherwise. I bought a new Explorer I to satisfy my Rolex itch. Love how solid the new models feel, love the blue lume, etc., and I've been loving the Explorer.

But I still find myself thinking about the Sub, and now I'm looking at older models. The 16610 looks smaller, due to the lugs, but I don't think it's actually smaller? My question to the Rolex experts - is there a certain model Sub that wears a little smaller? 16610 is a classic, 14060 is great too, and my favorite might be the 16610LV.

I've done some searches, and hear the 14060 wears smaller, but can't seem to find out why people say that. Others talk about different end links making a difference?

I wear an Anonimo Polluce that fits fine at 42mm. I'm not concerned about how the watch will look - anything remotely modern will look big on me. I'm okay with that. But if the watch doesn't fit, and the Sub C was just a touch too big, that's a deal breaker.

So help me decide if a Sub could be in my future, or if I should go back to other makers for my dive watch fix!

And every thread needs pictures, so here's three shots I randomly found through google, and moved to imgur hosting:

14060:


16610:


16610LV:

[kamek]

I was in the same boat with about a 6" wrist -- I thought the Sub C would be too big for my wrist, so I bought a 16610 instead. I had an opportunity to try my friend's Sub C on right along with my 16610, and thought that the Sub C was a very wearable size. I sought out to flip my 16610 for a 116610 immediately after and never looked back. I liked the 16610, but I love the 116610 -- it's what sang to me most on my wrist and made me happiest, so the 16610 may not pop as much to you in person as your Sub C did. The size difference are noticeable, but more subtle than you think.

[rainbowmax]

Originally Posted by kamek

I was in the same boat with about a 6" wrist -- I thought the Sub C would be too big for my wrist, so I bought a 16610 instead. I had an opportunity to try my friend's Sub C on right along with my 16610, and thought that the Sub C was a very wearable size. I sought out to flip my 16610 for a 116610 immediately after and never looked back. I liked the 16610, but I love the 116610 -- it's what sang to me most on my wrist and made me happiest, so the 16610 may not pop as much to you in person as your Sub C did. The size difference are noticeable, but more subtle than you think.

I'm in the same boat and completly agree with you:got the 1166110 Ln and never looked back: it's a terrific watch in my 6" wirst.

Cheers,

[vukotab]

Welcome to TRF!

Simple answer is - yes, all of the older Subs are wearing a little smaller than Sub C.
Although they all share same size of 40 mm, new models have new style cases, with wider lugs and more wrist presence than the older ones.
Personally, I much prefer older models than the new ones, IMHO they're more elegant and well balanced.
And about hollow end links on 14060...well, for me it's not an issue, but I can see why they bother some people. Bracelet definitely feels much more solid on 16610, and it's little heavier, so if you're into the heftier watches, maybe it's the right way for you?

I strongly suggest that you try both 14060M and 16610 and then to make the decision.
And I would go for 14060M in a heartbeat, I like that watch very much and I think that it's maybe the most comfortable watch that I ever tried...

[mailman]

Welcome to TRF I started with a 16610, went to a 116610. The Glidelock is great. I'm a big fan of the maxi dial and hands. The blue lume and ceramic insert are cool. It's heavier and wears bigger and it got noticed more.

Now I wear a 16610LV. I prefer the thinner profile for everyday wear, and it has the maxi dial which is a plus for me. The lighter weight is noticeable too

I would get a Sub C as a second watch. I think they're great

[Kyle3130]

14060M gets my vote but I am biased!

[joe100]

Hollow end link bracelet. It will sit on the wrist better

[jasoncd]

Thanks for all the responses all! TRF helped me when researching my other purchases, and I'm glad to be posting here.

Originally Posted by vukotab

I strongly suggest that you try both 14060M and 16610 and then to make the decision.

This is probably what I should do, but I'm at a lose on how to try on these discontinued models. I could start going by pawn shops (a little eww...), or I could see if Torneau has anything pre-owned (a little eww...). I'll see what's in my area, start doing some research.

Originally Posted by joe100

Hollow end link bracelet. It will sit on the wrist better

Any idea why, versus and SEL? Just how they bend or move at the lugs?

To the 16610LV advocates...I agree, gorgeous. And I do favor the maxi dial. But it is less everyday wearable, and at some point I'd be wanting to rock a black bezel. But if I got the black bezel, I'd be looking up pictures of the LV...and the LV is "limited"...sorta.

Argh the problem is all three look great and I'd love wearing 'em all. Guess there could be worse problems.

[jasoncd]

Well, I seem to have run into my reply disappearing, let's try this again...

Thanks for all the responses! TRF was a big help to me in researching my first and second Rolex purchases, and it's good to be posting here!

Originally Posted by vukotab

I strongly suggest that you try both 14060M and 16610 and then to make the decision.
And I would go for 14060M in a heartbeat, I like that watch very much and I think that it's maybe the most comfortable watch that I ever tried...

Trying on discontinued models may be difficult. I could try area pawn shops (eww...) or the pre-owned selection at Torneau (eww...). I'll do some research on what's out there locally...

Originally Posted by joe100

Hollow end link bracelet. It will sit on the wrist better

Any idea why? Is it just how the bracelet moves or bends at the lugs? I read a review of the 14060 that claimed it was 0.5mm more narrow and 1.0 mm thinner than the 16610, so that sounds promising. I'm not up to speed on the model yet, but it seems like the 14060M is the one I'd want, trying to find one as new as possible.

To the LV owners - gorgeous watches, love them! I keep going back and forth in my head - the LV is "limited" and will only become more "limited", the green looks awesome. But I'd want to rock a black bezel at some point, the green doesn't go with everything as well as the black does...

But if I went black bezel, I'd be looking at pictures of LVs all day...

Ha, could be worse problems to have I guess!

[mailman]

Originally Posted by jasoncd

To the LV owners - gorgeous watches, love them! I keep going back and forth in my head - the LV is "limited" and will only become more "limited", the green looks awesome. But I'd want to rock a black bezel at some point, the green doesn't go with everything as well as the black does...

But if I went black bezel, I'd be looking at pictures of LVs all day...

Ha, could be worse problems to have I guess!

You could always buy a black bezel insert and change it out if you like. This way you could go back and forth between the black and green. It would be like having two watches

[6306]

If 42mm is your sweet spot then maybe a Tudor Pelagos would suit you better? That's one of the reasons I chose it over a Sub.

[jasoncd]

Thanks for all the comments guys. I've been searching old threads, and the issue of bracelets not fittings without removing a permanent link from the 6 side came up. Ugh, I guess this scratches the 14060 and 16610 off the list? I really don't want to mess with mangling the bracelet, I do not trust myself to get it right the first time around.

Originally Posted by 6306

If 42mm is your sweet spot then maybe a Tudor Pelagos would suit you better? That's one of the reasons I chose it over a Sub.

It's not that 42mm is a good size for me, but the Anonimo I have has really short lugs and a perfectly flat case back, so it perches on top of my wrist just fine. The sub-c had longer lugs, with a domed case, which basically caused it to see-saw a bit on my wrist.

Mine's at Stoll & Co. getting serviced at the moment (), but here's what it looks like.

Originally Posted by gr33n

The 16610LV (my one and only rolex) has a half-link (contrary to 16610), which is perfect for 16cm circonference wrists like mine.
It is beautiful: maxi dial, i.e. great lume / green touch (quite small, do not worry) for the touch of nature color / simple but efficient bracelet / light and very well engineered. (do you know K.I.S.S principle? See wikipedia)
Tell me, and I will post you high definition pics of my LV by PM.

The green touch is very small!

This is great to hear - although I think that still may be bigger than my wrist. Do you have all links removed except the half link to get the watch to fit you? Would love some pics if you have them handy!

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

if you wear the new explorer okay, then, maybe give the SubC another shot? the wide dial of the 39mm explorer makes it seem as big, if not bigger, than a 40mm submariner.

The Explorer may feel better because it's thinner, or perhaps it is just slightly smaller in a way that I can work with. Honestly the 36mm version probably would have worked better for me, but I was set on a new style bracelet, lume, etc. I didn't want the old 'fiddly' bracelet, rattles, etc. that I've heard so much about.

Now, though, I'm kinda loving the idea of a real tool Rolex, that I really won't mind wearing everywhere. The older style sub seem like it would fit the bill great, and the Explorer can fill 'dressier' tool watch duty. I'm shirt and tie at work, and a suit if I'm traveling, but tee shirt and jeans outside work. I identify more with the tee shirt and jeans side of my life, which is why I keep coming back to Subs, instead of branching out to looking at a Grand Seiko (admittedly gorgeous).

[LA_LEC]

Yes, the tapered design of the classic case flow into the bracelet giving it a more organic union to the eye which makes it appear much more balanced on the wrist.

I would recommend the LV for many reasons.

1. It is a submariner with date function.

2. It is the 50th anniversary edition of Rolexes most iconic watch.

3. It stands out in a crowded room full of black subs.

4. It will hold it's value better (and probably only increase in value).

5. It's a damn fine watch.

[withthesword]

i went through two sub dates and a gmtii before i finally decided i was kidding myself all along.

the sub nd was all i really needed, and it's all i have now. no regrets.

[superdog]

welcome to the jungle.

[Chewbacca]

i laughed when i read the title.

welcome to wis-dom.

you'll figure it out. and yes, the 5d ref# wear smaller than the 6d ceramics. i'd sample the 16610 LV

good luck!

[impalass]

Welcome to TRF, and what a fine delemma to have. I've owned both the 14060m and 16610, imo both wear very similar with the 14060m being a bit more comfortably. With your wrist size you could go either way.

The LV is a perfect mix of old school meets new school and is definitely a good canidate for daily wear. The touch of green in the bezel will not compromise your cothing choices unless you're very fashion conscience in which case as mentioned the black bezel is an option.

Finding discontinued models to test drive may be a challenge but once accomplished a trusted seller on TRF is the way to go imho.

[gpfps]

I stopped flipping date subs, sea dweller and a deepsea Bought a new sub 2 years ago and never, ever think of selling it.

[Wahlberg]

One question though, when you take off all the links of an 14060 bracelet will it fit on a 6.5" wrist or do you need to take of permanent links?


That's the only thing I'm worried about regarding my wrist. I thought the braclet on the new 114060 would cope with this better, which probably is the case but still can you do it with the old one?

[WyoWatch]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

One question though, when you take off all the links of an 14060 bracelet will it fit on a 6.5" wrist or do you need to take of permanent links?


That's the only thing I'm worried about regarding my wrist. I thought the braclet on the new 114060 would cope with this better, which probably is the case but still can you do it with the old one?

I sold my 14060M in favor of my 116610LN (Sub C) for that very reason. I never could get the older sub to fit my 6.5" wrist correctly no matter what I did. I would have had to taken out a permanent link and even then who knows if it would have fit correctly. The 116610 is a whole different story. They made the bracelet with an extra removable link on either side and I have an absolutely perfect fit for my wrist between link removal and glidelock adjustment. I have never looked back and never will. The new bracelet is a real thing of beauty.

[Tudor66]

I recommend the 1680 if you have a smaller wrist. I wear mine a 93150 bracelet, which is a really good combination. Try one on and see how it looks...

[gr33n]

The 16610LV (my one and only rolex) has a half-link (contrary to 16610), which is perfect for 16cm circonference wrists like mine.
It is beautiful: maxi dial, i.e. great lume / green touch (quite small, do not worry) for the touch of nature color / simple but efficient bracelet / light and very well engineered. (do you know K.I.S.S principle? See wikipedia)
Tell me, and I will post you high definition pics of my LV by PM.

The green touch is very small!

[Cru Jones]

if you wear the new explorer okay, then, maybe give the SubC another shot? the wide dial of the 39mm explorer makes it seem as big, if not bigger, than a 40mm submariner.