Submariner (without Date) Owners ...

[illiguy]

Who also own a Rolex GMT model, like a BLRO or BLNR. This question recently crossed my mind, and would love to get TRF feedback.

Many here indicate that they prefer the Submariner to the Submariner Date due to the “clean dial” and lack of date window/cyclops. Did this ever give you pause before buying, or does it make your GMT model less than ideal today, to have the cyclops and date window?

[BumbleB]

Originally Posted by illiguy

Who also own a Rolex GMT model, like a BLRO or BLNR. This question recently crossed my mind, and would love to get TRF feedback.

Many here indicate that they prefer the Submariner to the Submariner Date due to the “clean dial” and lack of date window/cyclops. Did this ever give you pause before buying, or does it make your GMT model less than ideal today, to have the cyclops and date window?

Nope. Different occasions for different watches. I did swap the bracelets though :)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gk718]

Originally Posted by BumbleB

Nope. Different occasions for different watches. I did swap the bracelets though :)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The GMT looks awesome with brushed links..wish Rolex would release them that way

[BumbleB]

Originally Posted by gk718

The GMT looks awesome with brushed links..wish Rolex would release them that way

Cheers, and agree. I wear it often when I travel and just is a bit less shiny with fully brushed bracelet, so suitable for all occasions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Handey0465]

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

[BumbleB]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

Not true, then you would probably settle for an explorer or DJ.

The Sub is a classic that looks good in any collection. If you have many Rolexes with date then the Sub is a great addition to a collection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaliSpecial]

I recently sold a subC date to buy a subC ND, specifically for the reasons you stated. The cyclops irritated the shit out of me on a daily driver.

I also have a GMT (16710) that I now use as my special occasions watch so can live with the cyclops as I don’t wear it so often. However, i have seriously considered having the crystal replaced on that watch to one without cyclops. Has anyone ever done this?

[Montremoi]

Originally Posted by CaliSpecial

I also have a GMT (16710) that I now use as my special occasions watch so can live with the cyclops as I don’t wear it so often. However, i have seriously considered having the crystal replaced on that watch to one without cyclops. Has anyone ever done this?

On a 5-digit series there's no anti-UV treatment behind the wart AFAIK, so you could just remove it yourself (e.g. using a razor blade) instead of changing the whole crystal.

[JWD531]

Originally Posted by BumbleB

Not true, then you would probably settle for an explorer or DJ.

The Sub is a classic that looks good in any collection. If you have many Rolexes with date then the Sub is a great addition to a collection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. I want the Submariner some day to add to my collection, assuming it is still made when I am able to add it. If I ever get a Submariner Date, it will be with a blue or green dial. The Submariner date SS black dial is probably one of the last watches I would add to my collection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

I prefer the Submariner to the Submariner Date mainly because it’s truer to the original and I actually do prefer the aesthetic YMMV.

OP, IMO it’s nice to have variety in a collection. The GMT wouldn’t be one without the date so it serves a functional purpose. The cyclops is an iconic Rolex Feature and a useful one too.

[Pawalu]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

Thank you very much

[upsidedownbelt]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

Nonsense.

[myk7000]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

I guess I’m definitely not “most people.”

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

Lol. Thanks.

Either ways Submariner no date is collector's and WIS favorite, not your regular Rolex customer who buys just 1 or 2 Rolex in their lifetime!

[chnzwh]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I would buy the Sub over the Sub Date even if the prices are the same.

[LFFL]

Originally Posted by chnzwh

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I would buy the Sub over the Sub Date even if the prices are the same.

I’d purchase the Sub even if it was more expensive than the Sub date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Xtralarg]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

Rubbish

[RolexWombat]

Originally Posted by Handey0465

IMO, most people settle for the sub no-date because of price.....Not the "cleanliness" and "lack of cyclops"

I would respectfully beg to differ. I would even go as far as say that most people that go for the Sub (as opposed to the Sub-date) do it for reasons other than the price difference.

[upsidedownbelt]

Originally Posted by RolexWombat

I would respectfully beg to differ. I would even go as far as say that most people that go for the Sub (as opposed to the Sub-date) do it for reasons other than the price difference.

If the date and non date were the same price I would bet sales would change very little.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by RolexWombat

I would respectfully beg to differ. I would even go as far as say that most people that go for the Sub (as opposed to the Sub-date) do it for reasons other than the price difference.

I don't know about most, but I bought my 14060M because that's the Submariner I wanted.

I did not settle. Yea, verily, I ordered mine from my AD and got one of the last five left in the United States just weeks before the 114060 was released at Basel.

My AD, who went on the hunt to find mine, was so shocked by the dearth of specimens, he bought one for himself.

[crew]

I have both and love both.
I bought the Sub ND because I enjoyed the clean, symmetrical look of it. Price had absolutely nothing to do with my decision.

[m j b]

It's insulting to presume that someone would buy the sub because they can't afford the date version.

[BumbleB]

Originally Posted by m j b

It's insulting to presume that someone would buy the sub because they can't afford the date version.

And incorrect,

I didn’t get the sub because I couldn’t afford the date...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Yess]

Originally Posted by m j b

It's insulting to presume that someone would buy the sub because they can't afford the date version.

Agreed

But also, what's the price difference? Like 10%? It's not even logical.

I'm waiting on the no date, because the Cyclops is ugly, ugly, to my eye. It's not to many others and that's great, that's what the world is about - variety.

But if I liked the date on the Sub, price definitely wouldn't be an issue!

[Juan Luis]

Originally Posted by m j b

It's insulting to presume that someone would buy the sub because they can't afford the date version.

Yes. The Submariner is so much nicer and clean looking than with date, IMO. Also has direct DNA with the original. That said, I like the cyclops on other versions (GMT II which I own) as well as the non date models. I also own the Explorer I and love it.

[1William]

I own two GMT's and three Rolex Divers and the cyclops is not an issue either way.

[JohanG]

I have 3 Rolexes, two with dates (DJ 16030; GMT 126710 BLNR) ans one w/o (SubC). If I had to choose one to stick with it would definitely be my SubC due to its cleanliness and readability. It's a great watch that you could use for so many different occasions. When I bought it it stood between that and a SubC date, but the latter didn't speak to me as much as the SubC. However, I would love to get a 116610LV or the 16610LV but that's a different story :)

[watchmework]

I think part of the reasoning why some members on here prefer the non-date version, outside of the “cleaner dial”, is the fact of that’s how the Submariner was originally introduced. I don’t think that’s the same case for the GMT master. They are two different watches with two different histories. That said, I much prefer watches that have the date myself...the cyclops and Rolex history that it brings is an added touch.

[ap1]

I dont discriminate, love both

[gk718]

I strongly prefer regular subs to date subs regardless of price (on the second-hand market they’re pretty similar in price anyway). That being said the GMT requires a date window for its function. It would be pretty difficult to track 2 or 3 time zones without having a date reference for at least one of them. Divers would almost never need to know the date during a dive, so it also comes down to the original intended use of the watches. I’ll tolerate the cyclops on a GMT but wouldn’t want it on a sub.