ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

unclesallie · 25 January 2011, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jessiethe3rd

When a design endures years upon years.
When a watch is copied by every major watch brand.
When a watch is instantly recognizable.
When you become the first official "dive watch."

You are then a Rolex Submariner.

Classic, perfection.

Minutehand · 25 January 2011, 10:49 PM

Very functional tool watch that manages to look extremely good at the same time. I think the hype provided by various celebrities also adds to the enigma.

Me personally, I like the absolute emphasis on no-nonsense efficiency (in addition to the good looks) - which is exemplified, to me, by the difference between the 16610 and the 14060 - Rolex could have kept the two watches the same and just use different movements, however, to keep things functional (e.g. as light as possible) these two subs share very few parts, seen from the outside.

While I also like the Sub C, I think it looses some of the Sub enigma, as a result of perhaps more emphasis on style, referring specifically to the thicker lugs, resulting in a blocky look. However, still a great watch.

With reference to the 16610 and the 14060: Light, comfortable, functional, tough and oh so good looking.

Have a great day all

Patrick Lim · 25 January 2011, 11:03 PM

Simple in my case.
I sweared against wearing Rolex for many years but had a life transforming experience after a fateful encounter with the elegant, understated beauty of the Sub.

simply overwhelmed.
The rest is ... not history... The future rather is more Rolexes!!

dalip · 26 January 2011, 12:07 AM

Right time...right place...perfect design....proven longevity. WINNER :)

dsio · 26 January 2011, 02:30 AM

I forgot to add to my post above. Its the watch that is most easily recognized by chicks as a men's Rolex, and the big crown on the dial helps them if they don't pick up on it.

I actually consider the Omega Pie-Pan to be a superior watch, but if you have to explain its significance to a cute girl, she isn't impressed.

gig · 26 January 2011, 02:38 AM

Same style that has been around for a long time. Fashion sort of winds around the sub style, but usually comes back to something close to it. Kind of like Harley Davidson and cruiser bikes.

26 January 2011, 12:07 AM	#34
dalip "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Dalip Location: Mumbai and Perth Watch: Rolex PAM Omega Posts: 18,656	Right time...right place...perfect design....proven longevity. WINNER :) __________________ ------------------------------------------------------------ *"The liar's punishment is not in the least that he is not believed, but that he cannot believe anyone else." George Bernard Shaw*

26 January 2011, 02:30 AM	#35
dsio "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Real Name: Ashley Location: Brisbane Watch: Rolex Sub 1680 '79 Posts: 2,301	I forgot to add to my post above. Its the watch that is most easily recognized by chicks as a men's Rolex, and the big crown on the dial helps them if they don't pick up on it. I actually consider the Omega Pie-Pan to be a superior watch, but if you have to explain its significance to a cute girl, she isn't impressed. __________________ -- Omega Seamaster Grand-Lux Stepped Pie-Pan 14K Gold OJ2627 '53 -- -- Omega Cal 320 Chronograph 18K Gold OT2872 '58 -- -- Omega Cal 321 Speedmaster Pro 145.012 '67 -- -- Rolex Submariner 1680 "Ghost" '79 -- -- Rolex SS Daytona 116520 '04 --

25 January 2011, 10:49 PM	#32
Minutehand "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: AE Location: Right here Posts: 294	Very functional tool watch that manages to look extremely good at the same time. I think the hype provided by various celebrities also adds to the enigma. Me personally, I like the absolute emphasis on no-nonsense efficiency (in addition to the good looks) - which is exemplified, to me, by the difference between the 16610 and the 14060 - Rolex could have kept the two watches the same and just use different movements, however, to keep things functional (e.g. as light as possible) these two subs share very few parts, seen from the outside. While I also like the Sub C, I think it looses some of the Sub enigma, as a result of perhaps more emphasis on style, referring specifically to the thicker lugs, resulting in a blocky look. However, still a great watch. With reference to the 16610 and the 14060: Light, comfortable, functional, tough and oh so good looking. Have a great day all

25 January 2011, 11:03 PM	#33
Patrick Lim "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Singapore :) Watch: Sea Dweller 4000 Posts: 226	Simple in my case. I sweared against wearing Rolex for many years but had a life transforming experience after a fateful encounter with the elegant, understated beauty of the Sub. simply overwhelmed. The rest is ... not history... The future rather is more Rolexes!!

26 January 2011, 02:38 AM	#36
gig Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: seattle Watch: ss Sub date Posts: 100	Same style that has been around for a long time. Fashion sort of winds around the sub style, but usually comes back to something close to it. Kind of like Harley Davidson and cruiser bikes.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)