For those who have flipped your Sub-C...why?

[sportsmaven20]

I'm considering a Sub-C purchase and have read many comments from those who are in love with this watch, but I'm wanting to hear from those who have owned a Sub-C and decided to part with it for one reason or another.

What made you move in another direction after owning this watch?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

[Watchdog]

Sub C is a beautiful watch. Are you an old style Sub owner and considering an exchange?

[Atomant]

Alot of ppl thinks the supercase is ugly and wears too big. I don't think so. I have a 16613LN and it wears superb and much better than the old style case. I would wear a watch to fit my wrist size.

[sportsmaven20]

Originally Posted by kingkongkelley

Sub C is a beautiful watch. Are you an old style Sub owner and considering an exchange?

I have a 16610LV and looking to expand my Rolex collection. I'm just trying to get some balanced viewpoints from those who love the new Sub and those who have owned it and chose to part with it. Ultimately, I know it has to sing to me, but I wanted to get some forum feedback as well.

[Darlinboy]

Balance? Bah. Love it, won't flip it.

[gregmoeck]

I loved it, it was grey looking, not black, the buckle was too large, however the bracelet itself was an improvement over the 16610. I loved the look of it but the case was too big and made the lugs stick way out. I couldnt get over the lugs sticking way out. I ended up with a sea dweller and couldnt be more happy. The regular 16610 subs and the 16610LV have too thin bracelet, the sea dweller, and the subC have the beefier bracelets. The sea dwellers sides of the links are polished, the regular subs sides are not.

[mickeydainish]

I regret it now.....Flipped it after a few months. I had just got married.... had a 16610.... and wanted to use the money for something else at the time. I am not hankering for it back though.... I am keen on a DSSD or Explorer next..... :-)

[tomchicago]

it's super nice, but super thick, esp the new clasp, which makes it very tough to wear with a dress shirt, even if your tailor has made the left cuff larger. But, all the new maxi case rollies share this feature and it's something u probably just have to deal with going forward or if not, go previous non-maxi vintage.

[masterserg]

Love my Sub C. Most comfortable watch I ever had. Wouldn't dream of flipping it (Doesn't really answer your question, but had to be said :)

[texex91]

I have flipped 4 Sub's over the past 20 years, most recently a Sub-C. For me, it just get bored of it (but IMHO it's the best Rolex out there overall), and want something new in the stable.

I know I should just probably keep one always, but I know I just won't wear enough. It fits perfect, nice weight, but it's kinda dull in finish (again I know that's the way they are--just MHO).

Flipped it recently for a GMTII-c, as I missed the PCL on the GMTII-c--which for me I can make more use out of in an office and social setting. Subs are a dime a dozen (not that GMTII-c's aren't), so makes it easier for me to get bored of it.

HOWEVER, I do have my eye on a LV for weekend use--but who knows. I have been wearing quite a bit of my Panerai , and think the Sub was not singing to me any more. Give it 6 months to a year and who knows

[psv]

It all depends. If I could only own one watch it would probably be the SubC (black) but since I'm a mad WIS I own multiple, so for me I felt like I already had the Rolex diver angle covered with my SD 16600, Deepsea, Sub 16610 and a 5513. Plus I got more into APs.

There is really nothing negative to say about the latest Rolex Submariner accept that it is a little bit soul-less (because it is so new and shiny?) and it is a bit plain vanilla because it is readily available in every city in the world and sits on more wrists than pretty much any other luxury watch in the world.

[slashd0t]

Personally, I think the SubC is one of the best watches ever made.. Not sure why anyone would flip it if they owned it.. The only thing better than then SubC (from Rolex) is the GMT-IIc

[orangejuicy]

As a preface, I'm a notorious flipper, but when I had the Sub-C I liked it a ton. It was a great all-around watch and was really perfect for most occasions. I do miss it sometimes but ultimately I flipped it so I could get my hands on a JLC Reverso GMT, which I had been craving. I did get a little bored of it and have since been eyeing the Sub C LV. I don't know...nothing can satisfy me!

[wantonebad]

Well since they announced the 42mm Exp my dream is that they will eventually make a proportionally 42mm Sub. I know, it's not going to happen but i can dream. I can't wait to see the new Exp II, it will most likely be my next purchase, that or a 42mm Tudor. The Sub C just doesn't appeal to me with the pregnant lugs. JMHO

[SaddleSC]

I flipped my "boring" Sub C LN for the LV-C Hulk two months ago and couldn't possibly be any happier!

[sportsmaven20]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

I flipped my "boring" Sub C LN for the LV-C Hulk two months ago and couldn't possibly be any happier!

Charles, what made the LN "boring" for you?

[Megalobyte]

Originally Posted by sportsmaven20

Charles, what made the LN "boring" for you?

Green less "boring" than black I suppose. Which color one prefers depends whether you like to be under or over the radar, green stands out a bit, black doesn't.

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by sportsmaven20

Charles, what made the LN "boring" for you?

It was a fantastic watch...I just wanted something with a little more pop. I had worn a 16613 TT Bluesy as a daily wearer for 12 years and kinda missed the uniqueness of the color when I bought the LN. The LV is just such a special watch and I find that it has that "wow" factor that I sometimes felt the black dial lacked.

I also have a 16600 SD when I want to fly under the radar with a black dial, so I have the best of both worlds!

[ZackAaron]

love the new style so much I purchased the Green-c and the black-c

[phampau]

I sold my black sub-c for the sub-c LV!