Trade 114060 for 'vintage' Submariner?

[MovieGuy]

Hey all, just wanted to get some opinions. As many of you know I work at an AD. I currently have a Submariner 114060 and have considered replacing it with a somewhat vintage Submariner or Submariner Date. Not something that's too old, probably from the 80s at the oldest. Definitely want all steel. Would want something with a sapphire crystal. Anyone think I would regret doing it? I almost bought the last 14060M we had when the changeover to the 114060 happened.

The watch would be a daily wearer.

Let's hear what you all think!

[Old Expat Beast]

How about a very late (say 88-89) 5513. I know you said sapphire, but a new service acrylic is fine and has much more vintage appeal. Best of both worlds with a service luminova dial and hands.

[masyv6]

In terms of a daily wear, I don't think you can beat a modern Sub. I can understand the appeal of vintage from time to time, but a vintage wouldn't be my daily driver.

I'm not a big vintage guy overall, for what it's worth. So my opinion is obviously rather slanted towards the modern stuff.

[Ally9]

Make your own history

[douglasf13]

I would trade any 6-digit Rolex for the preceding 5-digit version, except for maybe the 114270. You could just buy a near new 14060M, although I do like Adam's 5513 idea.

[natosub]

For a daily wearer I would not. The 114060 checks all of the boxes

[Bigsykedaddy]

Originally Posted by natosub

For a daily wearer I would not. The 114060 checks all of the boxes

My thoughts as well

[Fleetlord]

No

[yannis]

Although i never owned it i believe the 114060 is a good daily. Is adding a 14060 or 16610 an option?
Now if 16610LV came to play then i would consider a trade. Or a 1680. I do like the maxi dial and the only downside of 14060 and 16610 to me is that i am not very fond of the small dot hour marks although they are fantastic watches.

[MovieGuy]

Originally Posted by yannis7777

Although i never owned it i believe the 114060 is a good daily. Is adding a 14060 or 16610 an option?

Probably not at this point. I wouldn't see the need to add another Submariner, I'd rather replace it if I did anything.

Thanks everyone for the advice. Maybe I'll just wait to see if we ever get an older Submariner in trade at work.

At one point in my career I had a modern and vintage model of every watch brand we carried. I liked wearing the vintage models the best so I could talk about the longevity of the brands and how their watches hold up over time. That would be the main reason why I'd consider going with an older Submariner.

[MovieGuy]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

How about a very late (say 88-89) 5513. I know you said sapphire, but a new service acrylic is fine and has much more vintage appeal. Best of both worlds with a service luminova dial and hands.

That is sweet Adam!

[DCheeta]

It sounds like a 14060 meets all of your criteria. It's a perfect daily wearer.

[Afghanvet]

It's all personal preference. I personally prefer the 5-digit reference so if in your shoes, I would make the trade. The 5-digit references will arguably become more rare with time as they aren't made anymore as well. My $.02.

[Kobin]

Originally Posted by DCheeta

It sounds like a 14060 meets all of your criteria. It's a perfect daily wearer.

Yes, yes, exactly that.

[DCheeta]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

How about a very late (say 88-89) 5513. I know you said sapphire, but a new service acrylic is fine and has much more vintage appeal. Best of both worlds with a service luminova dial and hands.

Damn, Adam...every time you post a photo of your 5513 I start to salivate.

[Steph-paul]

A ref 14060/14060M is nice for everyday, plenty of charm and practicality. In my opinion the end of an era. I have a 14060M G serial and I am really happy with my choice.
Nothing wrong with the six digits, just a question of taste.

[Rebel]

Yep.

[Mis3]

114060 is my daily wearer and I absolutely love it.

I would not trade it for a vintage Sub. I wear the watch for its look and elegancy. IMO, most Subs, new or vintage, look the same from 10 feet away.

[doramas]

It's more beautiful 14060. It has the essence of the first submarines

[MovieGuy]

Thanks everyone! I did gift the watch to myself as a combination work and wedding anniversary gift. Like was said, I should make my own history with it.

Perhaps some day I'll add a vintage one to my collection.

[Boaters]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

How about a very late (say 88-89) 5513. I know you said sapphire, but a new service acrylic is fine and has much more vintage appeal. Best of both worlds with a service luminova dial and hands.

Looks good Adam

[Xerxes77]

I think modern Sub is better!

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Mis3

114060 is my daily wearer and I absolutely love it.

I would not trade it for a vintage Sub. I wear the watch for its look and elegancy. IMO, most Subs, new or vintage, look the same from 10 feet away.

If only my arm was ten feet long.

[rmlovett1]

I have both...modern Sub 116610ln and early 80's, matte dial,16800 (which sounds like what you're describing) if it was my "only" one to wear, I'd stick with the modern Sub. Although the 16800 is more than capable of doing that job. I think it's a matter of personal preference if it's your only daily wearer. Do you like the modern bigger case, glide lock bracelet, etc...or the classic? Both are fantastic, and I love both, but if I were forced to choose between the two, and have only one to wear daily...I'd go modern.

[Cru Jones]

For a watch from the 80s? No thanks. I'd keep the 114060.

[ejvette]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

How about a very late (say 88-89) 5513. I know you said sapphire, but a new service acrylic is fine and has much more vintage appeal. Best of both worlds with a service luminova dial and hands.

That is an absolute beautiful example ... looks to perfect to wear

[Maiden]

For me, and this may cause a little controversy, but the five digits are not really vintage, they are the "older" modern Rolex and the new six digit versions are the proper evolution of the modern luxury version, with changes that would be expected, ie a bracelet befitting a watch that costs several thousand dollars.

I would do as Adam said, go for the 5513, that is a true vintage watch with the plexi ect,....five digits are not vintage IMO, just the previous modern version if that makes any sense?

[SeaDweller50]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

For a watch from the 80s? No thanks. I'd keep the 114060.

Me too, 100 percent.

[rmlovett1]

Originally Posted by Maiden

For me, and this may cause a little controversy, but the five digits are not really vintage, they are the "older" modern Rolex and the new six digit versions are the proper evolution of the modern luxury version, with changes that would be expected, ie a bracelet befitting a watch that costs several thousand dollars.

I would do as Adam said, go for the 5513, that is a true vintage watch with the plexi ect,....five digits are not vintage IMO, just the previous modern version if that makes any sense?

There's definitive arguments over what is vintage vs not vintage ....as a 5513 was produced into 1990. So would a glossy dial, WG surrounds dial '88-'89, 5513 be considered a vintage watch, vs a '79-'83, matte dial, tritium dial, 16800 not being vintage? Many opinions on this subject

[douglasf13]

This just in...