Vintage Subs vs. New Sub-Cs

[jk88]

Originally Posted by enginerd

Considered the SD? 16660 or 16600...Sub on steroids and THE diver's tool watch, IMO.

Well, I don't dive THAT deep...

[enginerd]

Originally Posted by jk88

Well, I don't dive THAT deep...

I don't dive at all, but I love my 16600. The SEL 93160 bracelet blows the 93150 out of the water (no pun intended)...the watch just feels so much more substantial and secure. The spring bars are enormous!

Also, I can't stand the cyclops but I love a date function, and tritium & sapphire crystal is my favorite combo!

[Rolexitis]

Get what you like most. You are in a win win scenario.

[jk88]

Just left my AD... Empty handed for now, but not for long

[drjfc62]

Good luck in your discernment. I don't think you'll regret whichever way you go...and hey, I don't think the Milgauss is nerdy, BTW

[tinger]

5512, 5513.
If I were to start over again, I would not own any 'modern' rolex.

[jhcam8]

I've started over more than once.

[Oyster Al]

Also if u have a bigger wrist, subc looks better; if smaller go 16610.

[jshepard]

If it were up to me I'd go with an older sub. If you're afraid of pins coming out then I'm sure there's nothing wrong with taking it to a watchmaker and have them replace the pins and put some locktite. It should allay any paranoia of the bracelet falling apart on you. I personally am not a fan of ceramics so I'm biased.

[versatile1]

There isn't 5 grand to be saved
You can buy new sub ceramics for 6400 and sub date ceramics for 7200
Where are you going to find a pre owned 1400- 2200 sub??

[TempoKing]

You say vintage subs vs subs C's...I think you mean used subs vs subs C's
You also say that you are keen to save 5,000 by buying a used sub and then
you mention your preference for the LV (for a tool ?).
Any sub you buy will be a great move... i just doubt you can save 5k if you buy well used

[bluemartinifan]

Hard to beat a 14060 as a weekend, get wet, don't set the date, iconic watch

[How]

Like you said, create your own stories.

Buy a new SubC and fill it with your own stories. This watch shall be no one else's but your stories.

The SubC is just such a gorgeous beauty.

[Broker Boy]

Originally Posted by How

Like you said, create your own stories.

Buy a new SubC and fill it with your own stories. This watch shall be no one else's but your stories.

The SubC is just such a gorgeous beauty.

This!!! ^^^^^^^^^

[strafer_kid]

Would agree with what someone said earlier - get the one that you really like. Whilst the build quality of some of the newer sports models is arguably tougher due to some of the newer metals now used, I doubt you would have to worry about any of them in normal wear. With any of these watches, if subject to serious abuse, there is a risk of failure somewhere, particularly in the pins, but nothing to really worry about in daily use. unless you are really unlucky! If you are going somewhere extreme or doing something 'heavy', a quick temporary swap out to a NATO pretty much takes care of it. They were undoubtedly built to last. Good luck with whatever you go for!

[gpfps]

With less parts and no welds I think the old clasp will hold up just fine. It's all ready proven that.

[Archduke]

Get the ceramic Sub Date first with lume, sapphire, dealer warranty, glidelock, etc..

Then if you have enough money and still fancy an older watch for aesthetic reasons consider a 14060 / 5513 / 1680 for weekends etc.

Best of both worlds.

[Jason71]

A-serial Rolex 16600 Seadweller. Drilled-through lug holes, sapphire, luminova........you just gotta love it. If I get sand under the bezel.....no problem. I just pop-off the bezel and clean under it. It's a 5 min DIY job. This is the last of the true Rolex tool watches IMHO

[Dr. Robert]

I like subs w/ lug holes

[speedo]

Originally Posted by jk88

...... for daily wear and make my own stories

this was my reason for buying the subc. all subs are nice, i don't have anything against the old models and would not be wanting a subc if i had bought a 16610 earlier but wanted a spanking new watch with my name on the card once not something with a history. as you pointed out, making my own stories.

good luck with your choice!

[Mr. K]

Can't go wrong either way, that is for sure.
I have both types of subs. While the sub c is not perfect, higher bezel seems to make it more prone to getting turned on accident an the clasp is huge.

But when wearing both, the Sub C gets my vote. But get what YOU want. Rolex will never go back and the sub C is here to stay.

[redsubby]

First of all...it ain't a tool watch unless you're a diver or use it for whatever you do...wearing a watch in an active life does not make it a tool watch.
Second, I'd go with the Sub-C, much better much improved watch in about every way you can think of....
Vintage is just personal preference, some people like its look but if you want a better watch, go with the C. I've owned two Red Subs before and if I can only choose between one of them and a Sub-C, I'd definitely go with the C.

[travisb]

Ultimately, one of each.
Start with the 116610LV and start saving for a vintage piece.

[polarinda]

Water resistance is more of an issue in older subs than bracelet failing don't you think?

[jk88]

Originally Posted by polarinda

Water resistance is more of an issue in older subs than bracelet failing don't you think?

Good question... anyone?

[heatscore]

Originally Posted by polarinda

Water resistance is more of an issue in older subs than bracelet failing don't you think?

If a old/vintage watch has been pressure tested, there shouldn't be any issues. The component that is most likely to fail and let water in would be the gaskets, and they are always new. Someone please correct me if Im wrong.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by polarinda

Water resistance is more of an issue in older subs than bracelet failing don't you think?

Water resistance is an issue with even a newer sub if it has not been properly maintained. Regular service and new gaskets are a MUST on all watches to maintain proper water resistance and gasket integrity. I have been diving with my 42 year-old 5513 with no issues whatsoever. It has been serviced recently with a pressure test. Don't just assume that your watch is water resistant since it is "newish". This might work for a couple years, but your risk of water ingress increases as the age of the watch increases. I wouldn't dive with a 5 year-old watch without a pressure test.

[mikkolopez]

Any vintage watch will run the risk of failure of old parts, inaccuracy and/or lack of a viable service center or even parts. So if you got all these covered, a Vintage Rolex will definitely be a topic-starter and a head-turner.

I do however want the failsafe assurance that I won't get any of the above issues so I went for an 116610LN even if a 16610 is around the corner at a lower price.

So to answer you, if you can afford the LV, I'd go for it hands down.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by mikkolopez

Any vintage watch will run the risk of failure of old parts, inaccuracy and/or lack of a viable service center or even parts. So if you got all these covered, a Vintage Rolex will definitely be a topic-starter and a head-turner.

I do however want the failsafe assurance that I won't get any of the above issues so I went for an 116610LN even if a 16610 is around the corner at a lower price.

So to answer you, if you can afford the LV, I'd go for it hands down.

Ability to service a watch as it is related to parts availability will be A VERY LONG TIME when we are referring to a 16610 or a 16600 or 14060. A pretty weak argument IMHO.

[jk88]

If sand gets under the bezel of the Sub-C, is that a potential problem?