The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12 September 2012, 02:21 AM   #1
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
Opinions on 114060 ND SubC

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?
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:42 AM   #2
Thevenin
"TRF" Member
 
Thevenin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: La Jolla, CA
Posts: 575
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
Thevenin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:52 AM   #3
Xenophon
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Xenophon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Xenophon
Location: UK
Posts: 2,729
Love it
Attached Images
 
__________________
The sea! The sea! Θάλαττα! θάλαττα!
Xenophon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:55 AM   #4
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thevenin View Post
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
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:56 AM   #5
warrior
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: massachusetts
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 1,692
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.
warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:57 AM   #6
Gharddog03
"TRF" Member
 
Gharddog03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Genaro
Location: Fresno Ca.
Watch: R O L E X
Posts: 4,466
Go for it.
Gharddog03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:58 AM   #7
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenophon View Post
Love it
Gorgeous. Modern Rolex "tool" watch. Gotta have it.
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 04:01 AM   #8
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrior View Post
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).
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 04:38 AM   #9
316lad
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 1,642
My absolutely honest opinion? Not as nice as the 14060 M.

But then again, I am getting on a bit.
316lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 04:44 AM   #10
Mickey®
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Mickey®
Location: Atlanta, GA
Watch: Swiss Made
Posts: 5,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrior View Post
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....
Mickey® is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 04:51 AM   #11
gwalker
"TRF" Member
 
gwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Gunter
Location: AL/NJ
Watch: DSSD; 116610LN
Posts: 5,509
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)
gwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 05:48 AM   #12
drhanson
"TRF" Member
 
drhanson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Denver
Posts: 51
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.
drhanson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 05:57 AM   #13
JJL
"TRF" Member
 
JJL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: US
Watch: 1680 Red & 16622
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrior View Post
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.
JJL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 08:33 AM   #14
Sam Philip
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 4,345
I prefer the SD
Sam Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 08:36 AM   #15
kilyung
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
kilyung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,940
I like it but I'd wait for prices to fall. ND Subs have historically not been the most popular models.
kilyung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 08:44 AM   #16
The GMT Master
"TRF" Member
 
The GMT Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: England
Posts: 8,150
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
The GMT Master is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 08:45 AM   #17
nauticajoe
"TRF" Member
 
nauticajoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Joe
Location: PA
Posts: 14,774
Awesome watch but I wouldn't buy since I already have the SubC.
nauticajoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 08:52 AM   #18
Time2time
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: U.K
Watch: Milgauss GV, Sub-C
Posts: 2,178
Stunning watch.
Buy it.
Time2time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 10:59 AM   #19
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
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.
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 11:16 AM   #20
Jannal
"TRF" Member
 
Jannal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 685
Go for it.

I traded-in my Sub C 116610LN for this, I have no regrets.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Bell & Ross: BRS-98S
Casio: G-Shock GW-5000U / GW-5000-1JF / DW-5035D 35th / DW-5030C 30th / DW-5000SP 20th / DW-5600C-9CV / Marlin W-450
Panerai: Luminor 000i
Seiko: SBGX117 / SBGX335
Jannal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 11:22 AM   #21
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jannal View Post
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
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 11:44 AM   #22
superdog
2024 Pledge Member
 
superdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Real Name: Seth
Location: nj
Watch: Omega
Posts: 24,834
I think this is a true modern classic. Love this watch!!
__________________
If happiness is a state of mind, why look anywhere else for it?

IG: gsmotorclub
IG: thesawcollection

(Both mostly just car stuff)
superdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 11:46 AM   #23
nick c
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 26,846
Love it
nick c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 02:31 PM   #24
Solo118
2024 Pledge Member
 
Solo118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 6,092
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
Solo118 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 02:35 PM   #25
sleddog
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
sleddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Rob
Location: Nearby.
Posts: 24,931
A fantastic watch to own IMO!


__________________
He who wears a Rolex is always on time, even when late!!

TRF's "After Dark" Bar & Nightclub Patron-Founding Member..
sleddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 02:37 PM   #26
sleddog
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
sleddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Rob
Location: Nearby.
Posts: 24,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solo118 View Post
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..
__________________
He who wears a Rolex is always on time, even when late!!

TRF's "After Dark" Bar & Nightclub Patron-Founding Member..
sleddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:01 PM   #27
perpetualman88
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
 
perpetualman88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: David Farkas
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: 116610, 5712/1A
Posts: 8,182
Congrats Brandon I cant wait to see wrist pics tomorrow :)
perpetualman88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:07 PM   #28
gregdolley
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Real Name: Greg Dolley
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Rose Gold Daytona
Posts: 1,283
I like the SD better, but the ND sub is really popular...
gregdolley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:29 PM   #29
JizJizJiz
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: Zack
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 1,362
I love that watch - but frankly, get it if you love it; my opinion is irrelevant :).

I love the 16600 more though :D.
__________________
Thank you,

-Zack Ji
2FA on TRF enabled
JizJizJiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 September 2012, 03:46 PM   #30
HongNinja
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Earth
Watch: 228238, 114060
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by JizJizJiz View Post
I love that watch - but frankly, get it if you love it; my opinion is irrelevant :).

I love the 16600 more though :D.
That doesn't help Zach!!
HongNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.