Night legibility white Daytona versus SubC

[roadie1]

Ive had both but not at the same time. It seems the white dial Daytona may be more legible at night than the Sub C. I would assume the lume last the same? Can anyone conform this?
Thanks!

[nauticajoe]

Really? I would have said more towards the SubC myself. The bigger plots definitely makes it a brighter/bigger lume.

[dddrees]

There is hardly any lume at all on the Daytona. So the SubC would definitely be more legible and it probably last longer since it uses the chromolite.

[roadie1]

The sub c may be brighter. I just remember my white Daytona seemed really bright and legible at night. But....that was before I had a Sub C.

[travisb]

Mainly because of the maxi dial markers.

[Lion]

First of all Rolex watches are not known for their lume but I would think the SubC would have more of an impact over the white Daytona.....of course everyone's perceptions are different!!!

[guyrolex]

I have both- there is no comparison- Sub C has incredible lume at night, but you can barely see the white Daytona in darker rooms, even if you hold the dial to a light before

[SALTY]

Disclosures first.
I do not own a Sub-C but do own two GMTII-C watches (SS & TT) as well as a White face Daytona.

The Daytona is hard enough to see in the daytime, let alone at night! If night visibility is your priority, and it has to be a Rolex, gotta believe that the Sub-C would be easier to see in any light, especially low light.

I am obviously a fan of Rolex watches but for reading time at might, Tritium vials are hard to beat!

[VetteBandit]

Sub c no question. The daytona has barely any lume, especially on the hands.

[chillviper]

The Daytona is not designed with readability in mind. I need my glasses to see what time it is in daylight :-) Lot of action going on with the Daytona dial vs a Sub.

[HyperM3]

You want to tell the time at night, take out your cell phone. Unless you have a Ball or Luminox etc. you arent looking to your watch to tell your time in darkness.

[Megalobyte]

Don't have a Daytona, but I'm thinking it's not better than this. :)

[rohardi]

I would guess the Sub C would be better. I don't have a Daytona to compare it to yet my self though. If all else fails in low light, I just look at my iPhone....

[improviz]

In low light, the watch with the highest level of contrast between dial and hands will win every time, unless the watch with lower contrast has more lume, which in the case of the Daytona is not true. SubC wins this contest, though as others have said, Rolex lume isn't on a par with other brands in terms of longevity, though for most it's more than adequate (particularly on newer models like the Sub C).

[Cabaiguan]

I was trying to tell the time on my white dialed Daytona last night while on my way to pick up pizza for the kids and I could not see a thing. My old SubC never had that issue. Love my Daytona but visibility in certain conditions sucks.

[impalass]

In the wee hours of the night my old Submariner (U serial) with tritium lume is easier to read than my brand new SS Daytona (black).

[z32turbo]

I'd say SubC over any Daytona.

[nim]

i have both daytona and sub C
the lume on the sub C is definitely brighter than the daytona

[mike]

I don't. whatcha think?

[roadie1]

Thanks Mike! Great lume shots!

[springbar]

Originally Posted by HyperM3

You want to tell the time at night, take out your cell phone. Unless you have a Ball or Luminox etc. you arent looking to your watch to tell your time in darkness.

I do.

The absolute best thing about the newer sport Rolexes is the fat minute hand. The old minute hand was the hardest thing to read in darkness. Even the seconds were easier.