What made the Submariner the most iconic watch in the world?

[AK797]

I don't really think any watch is truly iconic with the masses, as watches just do not figure on most people's radar. Rather it is the Rolex name that is instantly recognisable and stands as as an icon of a high luxury and supreme product.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by CRM114

The question is based on a false premise.

The Submariner isn't even the most iconic Rolex, let alone most iconic (or popular, or recognised) watch in the world. It has no "elevated status".

Sorry to break it to you. James Bond is pretend and just not that big of a deal.

This should be stickied at the top of the forum!

[Headshrinker]

Originally Posted by Joearch

Pure design excellence

[Memphis]

i would say it's the yellow gold president.... hence why everyone thinks of old rich men when they think of rolex.

[Wooddog44]

The combo of the black bezel and black dial on the stainless bracelet just looks so right...

[daddywalrus]

Funny that people will say the Sub isn't the most iconic watch in the world but offer no alternative.

I think the Datejust is the most iconic to the mainstream person. Submarner is for the WIS crowd though.

[strafer_kid]

Maybe not the most iconic but certainly up there with some others!

[Swearengen]

Fleming's Bond did exist, however he wrote books about birds

Originally Posted by CRM114

The question is based on a false premise.

The Submariner isn't even the most iconic Rolex, let alone most iconic (or popular, or recognised) watch in the world. It has no "elevated status".

Sorry to break it to you. James Bond is pretend and just not that big of a deal.

[MCO1]

Originally Posted by GB-man

It's a culmination of things over decades. Bond would certainly be near the top if not at the top.

I don't personally give the sub the throne as most iconic. Being a watch lover I would put it in the rarified air with the santos, tank, reverso, speedy and a select few others.

That said, it's my favorite of the lot

I agree....it is one of many wristwatch icons, many mentioned in this comment I might add the GMT, Explorer, Royal Oak, Fifty Fathoms and Navitimer. Most makes have a model that "made" them Rolex just has more than its fair share.

[aperna]

This may help answer your question

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by SubMarine

Was it the early James Bond movies? Where there a single event that elevated the status of the submariner?

James Bond would have a lot to do with it.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by aperna

Attachment 735862

This may help answer your question

What's the pretend spy doing there? Jotting down his rules as he explains to her "How to avoid a beating" from a guy like him in real life so she doesn't forget when she's grown up?

Oh I see, he's wearing a Sub on his left-hook wrist. Well, that changes everything.

[JUSTIFIED]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

Quite. It's forum guys who worship the Sub (and Daytona) not the watch buying public.
In terms of sales the Datejust massively outsells the Sub...or to put it another way, more people like the Datejust than the Sub. Brutal but true. Me? I think the DayDate is possibly the most iconic Rolex.
I really like the early Sub; the current one, I can admire but not love.

Full transparency..I own a Daytona 116520 SS. I don't enough about the non TRF respect for the Sub to refute your statement about it only having "worship" status by TRF members. I do know that there are plenty of watch enthusiasts outside of TRF that believe the Daytona is one the most iconic watches of all time (much in part due to the association w/ Paul Newman).

[THC]

In real life Sean Connery sports a WG DD on occasion ..Will look for a pic

[flw]

Originally Posted by CRM114

What's the pretend spy doing there? Jotting down his rules as he explains to her "How to avoid a beating" from a guy like him in real life so she doesn't forget when she's grown up?

Oh I see, he's wearing a Sub on his left-hook wrist. Well, that changes everything.

Given what's in the picture, you want to re-think that. That's pretty offensive.

[LuminousMaximus]

Originally Posted by dcheeta

perfection. Restraint of design, utility, durability. Its beauty comes from its "form follows function" aesthetic.

+1

[landroverking]

All I can say, is here we go again.

[Rebel]

For me, it was Roger Moore in Live and Let Die. That is where I fell in love with the Submariner.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by flw

Given what's in the picture, you want to re-think that. That's pretty offensive.

You think so? I'm sorry you feel that way, but I find women-beaters and pictures of them to be offensive. So no, I don't "want to re-think that".

Perhaps some should re-think what is reality vs. movie fantasy and who/what they choose to idolize/emulate.

[polarinda]

Best looking rolex model though.

[zjd168]

I think rolex icon is yg 36 DD or tt dj.

[Cimballi]

Originally Posted by CRM114

The question is based on a false premise.

The Submariner isn't even the most iconic Rolex, let alone most iconic (or popular, or recognised) watch in the world. It has no "elevated status".

Sorry to break it to you. James Bond is pretend and just not that big of a deal.

Do you have any evidence to support your statements?

[DCheeta]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Well said Dave.

This logic follows through in many iconic things from furniture to architecture and clothing, etc.

I agree completely, Brian.

[flw]

Originally Posted by CRM114

You think so? I'm sorry you feel that way, but I find women-beaters and pictures of them to be offensive. So no, I don't "want to re-think that".

Perhaps some should re-think what is reality vs. movie fantasy and who/what they choose to idolize/emulate.

Hmm ... I think that perhaps we misunderstand each other. I suggested that the imagery of a white man beating up a black woman could be considered offensive, and you replied by inferring that I idolize that and live in a fantasy world? I don't think that passes for common sense.

[Rolthai32]

Originally Posted by rollerballer

Has it been over taken by the Apple Watch?

What a stupid inane comment

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by flw

Hmm ... I think that perhaps we misunderstand each other. I suggested that the imagery of a white man beating up a black woman could be considered offensive, and you replied by inferring that I idolize that and live in a fantasy world? I don't think that passes for common sense.

Perhaps you should educate yourself on his own repeated, publicly-avowed views on men hitting women, and read up on his ex-wife. Then, get back to me. His views are well-known for anyone not born yesterday or living on Mars.

How you see anything racial..."imagery" or otherwise... is beyond me or common sense. That inference/angle is purely your own. Mr. "REAL James Bond" Connery certainly didn't make any distinction when he was listing the reasons he felt it was okay for a man to rough a woman up.

I don't know why anyone would want to emulate the dirtbag, on-screen or off. I find him and all the imagery of what he publicly suggests is "manly" to be offensive.

[flw]

Originally Posted by CRM114

Perhaps you should educate yourself on his own repeated, publicly-avowed views on men hitting women, and read up on his ex-wife. Then, get back to me. His views are well-known for anyone not born yesterday or living on Mars.

How you see anything racial..."imagery" or otherwise... is beyond me or common sense. That inference/angle is purely your own. Mr. "REAL James Bond" Connery certainly didn't make any distinction when he was listing the reasons he felt it was okay for a man to rough a woman up.

I don't know why anyone would want to emulate the dirtbag, on-screen or off. I find him and all the imagery of what he publicly suggests is "manly" to be offensive.

I think that you should have explained that more directly to begin with. I am not a Connery fanboy in particular - and therefore I was not aware of his "repeated, publicly-avowed views on men hitting women", nor do I have a lot of spare time to "read up on his ex-wife". I have better things to do than read Hollywood gossip tabloids, either from the 1960s or now, and I suspect I'm not alone in that. Therefore, since I don't obsess over all things related to Sean Connery, his views and personal behavior are not necessarily as well known as you seem to think they are.

So let's be clear - I'm not defending Connery in any way. But the fact that the photo shows a white man and a black girl, combined with your original comment, means that a racial component is a reasonable inference. I'm not sure how I have to end up explaining that.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by flw

I think that you should have explained that more directly to begin with. I am not a Connery fanboy in particular - and therefore I was not aware of his "repeated, publicly-avowed views on men hitting women", nor do I have a lot of spare time to "read up on his ex-wife". I have better things to do than read Hollywood gossip tabloids, either from the 1960s or now, and I suspect I'm not alone in that. Therefore, since I don't obsess over all things related to Sean Connery, his views and personal behavior are not necessarily as well known as you seem to think they are.

So let's be clear - I'm not defending Connery in any way. But the fact that the photo shows a white man and a black girl, combined with your original comment, means that a racial component is a reasonable inference. I'm not sure how I have to end up explaining that.

It's not a reasonable inference in any way, shape, or form, and Connery didn't express his views in obscure "Hollywood gossip tabloids" only fanboys read. He expressed them in the most widely-read men's magazine and then 20 years later verbally re-iterated them to the most widely-watched newswoman interviewer on earth at the time.

Don't attempt to assign your erroneous interpretation/racial slant to what I wrote when it's based on your ignorance of Connery's very public, clearly-stated views re woman-beating. If all you saw was a picture of a white man and black girl and then somehow imagined their colors were somehow relevant in order to be hair-trigger offended by imagery of your own making, then jump to conclusions/attempt to scold someone because you default to seeing the world through a racial prism whenever the obvious isn't obvious to you, that's your problem.

Before telling someone else they should "re-think" what they wrote about a subject, maybe you should read what's been stated by the subject himself on the subject before you assume they should.

[Le Chef]

I couldn't care less about what actor did what or to whom on a watch forum. Seems like a petty irrelevance to me.

I've still not seen anyone show one piece of data that supports the Sub as the most iconic watch in the world. Seems like a lot of chutzpah or hyperbole to me.

[warrior]

I would tend to agree with this. However, I do think amongst watch enthusiasts, there are certain models within brands that hold an "iconic" status. You really don't need numbers....Patek ( Nautilus, Calatrava), AP ( Royal Oak), Omega ( Speedmaster Pro), IWC ( Portuguese), Breitling ( Navitmer) , Jaeger LeCoultre ( Reverso) and Rolex ( Submariner, Datejust).

The few times I've asked ADs here in the States...they do say the Sub Date is the best seller among sport models.

Originally Posted by AK797

I don't really think any watch is truly iconic with the masses, as watches just do not figure on most people's radar. Rather it is the Rolex name that is instantly recognisable and stands as as an icon of a high luxury and supreme product.