Will the new Sub-C "kill" the GMT IIC?

[mpkRolex]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Good reply!!!

Thanks JJ. I am currently one of those who has both gmtiic and 16610 (the old sub)..So there is no hurry for me for the Subc and I am willing to wait for two years till there are a lot out there and the initial hype and bubble is busted and the prices are compititive...

[Watch Professor]

Perhaps the question should be- will the GMT IIC hurt sales of the new Sub C since they are so similar? A buyer might consider the GMT with its added complication and cheaper (by $250 as of now) price. Also, the PCL factor adds to the beauty of the watch, imo, and makes the GMT both a tool watch and a dress watch. I would chose the GMT IIC over the new Sub C if I saw them side by side in an AD's showcase. The only factor that makes the new Suib desirable to me, as I stated in another post today, is the Glide-Lock clasp.

[warp_foo]

Originally Posted by psv

It seems to me that GMT IIC buyers have been picking up the watch because the really like the new look/case/bezel/dial but what will happen to GMT IIC demand and value once the new Submariner Ceramic comes out?

The Sub-C will have: maxi hands and dial, the new beefier case, ceramic bezel (120 clicks like the DSSD?), a cleaner look without the green hand/text and on top of that the new state-of-the-art bracelet with glidlock for added comfort and WITHOUT PCL. I mean, if you are into the new look (let's leave that discussion out of this thread) what is not to love/prefer in the new Sub-C?

What is your take?

Cheers,

PSV

The Sub C is missing one hugely important bit: It lacks a second timezone.

m

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by warp_foo

The Sub C is missing one hugely important bit: It lacks a second timezone.

m

We know that and that's why it's NOT the GMT-IIC!!

[RRGHOST1]

The one thing i didn't like about the GMT IIc was the green hand and the green writing on the dial. Red was so much better ! As a GMT lover, i would buy a new ceramic Pepsi if they ever make one.

[mike]

Oh, I think the Sub-C will be a killer reference. I do think the divide between the two references has thinned a bit given the IIc's new look.

Still the new Sub should prove wildly popular.

[Rex Kwon Do]

I've considered myself a GMT hater but the IIc in person has left me a changed man. I feel like the IIc is the perfect "show" watch to go with my 16610's sturdiness. The larger numbers on the bezel and more importantly the PCL and touch of green (the LV is too much for me) just hit it out of the park with me.....but the PCL would never hold up in my line of work...

So next up to go alongside the TT DJ (dress) and 16610 (daily) is the IIc(social)!!

Need more cash for the Rolex addiction!!!!!

[rob]

The new Sub-C is very well thought out. The choice is much like a Porsche Cayman S vs. Boxter S. You either want the 24 hr hand or not. Convertible or not. Much the same/yet much different. Price difference, nominal. It's what you want. I personally like the PCL's when dressing nice. I like the ez link vs. the glide clasp(if it's the same as the DSSD). I would prefer a matte dial. I do like the ability to track three different time zones. Many soul ties to the GMT for me that the sub cannot fill. Ex USAF, many AF guy's had GMT's (Navy, wore Sub's) Gen. Yeager, My Pararescue Commandant, My Dad's first Rolex, all wore GMT's. Now my dad wears a Sub. If I could justify one I'd buy a DSSD, or a Sub-C, as a second Rolex.

[springbar]

Originally Posted by psv

I mean, if you are into the new look (let's leave that discussion out of this thread) what is not to love/prefer in the new Sub-C?

Uh, its lack of a second timezone complication?

Are the functional features of our watches so unimportant we don't even consider them anymore?

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by springbar

Uh, its lack of a second timezone complication?

Are the functional features of our watches so unimportant we don't even consider them anymore?

Well, the second time-zone feature is considered a complication, however slight it might be.

As for the functional features, it really depends on what you need and what you will realistically use.

Personally, for me, all I need is TIME & DATE - that's it. Since I hardly travel, the time-zone function is useless to me and I never use it.

JJ

[handyhsl]

Same as Timo, I compared them in person, side by side, wore them and look at them closely.
I personally like GMT2C better than SubC (I tried the TT SubC version, but it will be the same as SS SubC).
Many ppl think that GMT2C is much better than old GMT, because of the triplock crown and half link
Whereas the SubC won’t have much improvement..
Old sub didn’t kill the old GMT, so why would new Sub kill new GMT..
Remember, GMT is the only Rolex watch that offers 3 timezones

[Mockingbird]

Kill it? No.
Will it outsell the GMTIIC? Yes, dive watches are known to have mass appeal, and the Submariner is the watch that got many people into watches in the first place.

Personally, when the SubC and the GMTIIC are juxtaposed I prefer the GMTIIC, (I would need to brush the centerlinks) because of it's complications (I travel a lot), and because I find the 24 hour bezel aesthetically pleasing.

[jnkay]

I wouldn't sell my SS GMT-IIc for a SS Sub-c, but I might consider the sub in the future when the price stabilizes. If I was to do it over and had a side-by-side choice, not sure which one I'd buy (first, anyway). They both have a place in my collection.

[chronus]

First post here after a lot of lurking...

I have been going back and forth on the Sub vs. GMT, even though I travel a lot and never dive so you would think the decision would be easy. I am currently on business in Germany and looked in person at the TT Sub-C blue (which looks much better in person, I really disliked the new blue from pics, but up close looked great) next to the TT GMTII-C. They both looked flawless to me.

I think it's all about functionality. As far as one watch "killing" the other, I could tell you it wouldn't be because one "looks" better or performs better than the other. I doubt that most people will test the true diving limits of a Timex, let alone their Rolex.

[BASSETHOUNDS]

Different watch with different features and hence I would have thought a different clientele . I can however see that one could take business away from the other . They are in the same price range , it's either the clasp or the various time zones that will decide .

[Andad]

The upcoming Subdate is a beaut but $ for $ the old model is still the winner....

Granted the new model has cosmetic bezel, bracelet and case changes but at a huge premium in Australia.

[The Waddler]

One point that hasn't been raised is that of exclusivity. In the past the most "popular" watch was the sub which made wearing a GMT that little more special (this is purely subjective and only my humble opinion). The Sub is an icon. A benchmark. It's James Bond's watch for goodness sake. It's always going to be the top seller.

However, I'm looking forward to the sub selling in its thousands/hundreds of thousands and leaving me with the more exclusive/slightly less common GMT. (Even though they are selling by the bucket-load right now).

Will it kill it? No way. Will it outsell the GMT? Of course, but what's new? People know what they are buying and there will always be those that go with the GMT simply to stay away from the herd.

As for resale - well mine's a watch for life so that matters nothing to me. I also LOVE the green 24hr hand (set to Singapore time) and writing. I'm a committed GMT fan who will no doubt admire the sub from afar but always be happy in the minority in the future.

And as someone else said, can anyone really tell the new sub apart from the LV with a black bezel from afar?

[Rolexsd4000]

Originally Posted by The Waddler

One point that hasn't been raised is that of exclusivity. In the past the most "popular" watch was the sub which made wearing a GMT that little more special (this is purely subjective and only my humble opinion). The Sub is an icon. A benchmark. It's James Bond's watch for goodness sake. It's always going to be the top seller.

However, I'm looking forward to the sub selling in its thousands/hundreds of thousands and leaving me with the more exclusive/slightly less common GMT. (Even though they are selling by the bucket-load right now).

Will it kill it? No way. Will it outsell the GMT? Of course, but what's new? People know what they are buying and there will always be those that go with the GMT simply to stay away from the herd.

As for resale - well mine's a watch for life so that matters nothing to me. I also LOVE the green 24hr hand (set to Singapore time) and writing. I'm a committed GMT fan who will no doubt admire the sub from afar but always be happy in the minority in the future.

And as someone else said, can anyone really tell the new sub apart from the LV with a black bezel from afar?

The last statement sealed the whole thing..

[mpkRolex]

Originally Posted by The Waddler

One point that hasn't been raised is that of exclusivity. In the past the most "popular" watch was the sub which made wearing a GMT that little more special (this is purely subjective and only my humble opinion). The Sub is an icon. A benchmark. It's James Bond's watch for goodness sake. It's always going to be the top seller.

However, I'm looking forward to the sub selling in its thousands/hundreds of thousands and leaving me with the more exclusive/slightly less common GMT. (Even though they are selling by the bucket-load right now).

Will it kill it? No way. Will it outsell the GMT? Of course, but what's new? People know what they are buying and there will always be those that go with the GMT simply to stay away from the herd.

As for resale - well mine's a watch for life so that matters nothing to me. I also LOVE the green 24hr hand (set to Singapore time) and writing. I'm a committed GMT fan who will no doubt admire the sub from afar but always be happy in the minority in the future.

And as someone else said, can anyone really tell the new sub apart from the LV with a black bezel from afar?

Very well said Alex Couldnt agree more

[jonathon555]

ok here is my take ,

I bought my first rolex 8 weeks ago. I had a choice of GMT IIC, 16610, 16610 LV

i purchased the GMT IIC, i liked all 3 watches it was a hard choice.

I liked the bracelet , I liked the maxi dial & i liked the pan-am development heritage.

I don't think the new sub will kill the value of the GMT, if anything I think it will lift it as they are so close.

In the uk the GMT & Sub have always been £70 ish apart the new sub is £4610 so the GMT will get a price lift to be closer I think probably to £4520.00

I have a new sub on order as well as a deep sea (when it comes in)

The sub & GMT have co existed for 50 years & always will. I see alot of people I meet in business (engineering) wear GMT's (pepsi or other) but also a few with subs.

I think some people will always like one or the other or both .


i am in the both camp, I just find the whole rolex thing infectious.

I have never took so much feel good factor from a brand / watch , I want to get a collection if possible.


Don't laugh all at once.

[Bebot]

Yes!!!

[London]

I had exactly this dilemma when I bought my GMT2c in summer 2008. I loved everything about the GMT2c except for the PCLs. We all knew more or less that there would be a new sub, that the new sub would look pretty much like the GMT2c, but probably wouldn't have PCLs. On that basis, I paid an AD 3k sterling for my new GMT2c, knowing that I would have to wait two years to get a ceramic sub, at which point the price would be much higher. And here we are - a new sub I'm told is 4,610 sterling, and if you want it anytime soon from an AD, you'll probably have to pay a bit more. But even if I got one now at list price, it would cost me 1,600 more than I paid an AD for for my GMT2c. And I knew I couldn't justify that difference for the sake of the PCLs. I feel very happy about my buying decision and I'm still very happy with my watch.

Thanks to all for their contributions. I remember that this forum really helped me go through the thought process. Cheers!

[scl6118]

Not at all!

[mborkow]

I predict that, for the first time ever, the GMT is going to outsell the Sub...there was a lot more excitement about the new GMT than there is for the new Sub which as a watch which doesn't represent anything new; every improvement on it can be found on either the GMT or the DSSD. And those who don't see the changes as improvements won't be inclined to buy. They will focus on the 100s of 1000s of the current model Subs which will be for sale for many years to come (albeit secondhand)

[tgoose1]

Sub wearer myself and have no use for GMT functionality, but the IIc is no slouch and has arguably the same ruggedness as the C-sub. If function is not an issue, I see no disadvantages infact I must admit the IIc may be the more attractive of the two, and will be less expensive for the next couple years due to pent-up C-Sub demand.

[walds11]

Doubt it and probably not at the price jump.

[Dr. Jones]

I agree with JJ the looks are so very close. Bottom line if you need to have the time for up to three time zones GMTII C is your choice. If you are like me and leave the country maybe one time each three to four years the Sub is calling out to you baby.

[theken]

I think it is more likely that TRF members that own a GMT2C will buy the SubC and keep their GMT2C.
For most of us, I think the GMT2C with a second time zone is more practical feature than a SubC with a deeper depth rating.
Selling a GMT2C for $5K to buy a $7K+ SubC makes little sense to me as I suspect they will be of comparable value once the SubC is readily available at the ADs and through other sources.

[The Waddler]

Originally Posted by Dr. Jones

I agree with JJ the looks are so very close. Bottom line if you need to have the time for up to three time zones GMTII C is your choice. If you are like me and leave the country maybe one time each three to four years the Sub is calling out to you baby.

but don't you already own a GMT?