ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

C.J. · 12 May 2006, 12:45 PM

edt

mailman · 12 May 2006, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C.J.

the above goes for you too, there, Rob Rambone

Get it right. It's Dick Long

C.J. · 12 May 2006, 12:51 PM

edt

dman · 12 May 2006, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mailman

Get it right. It's Dick Long

That is good, Bubba your cell mate will have something to hang on too.

mailman · 12 May 2006, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dman

That is good, Bubba your cell mate will have something to hang on too.

Just like when they used to tie the bedsheets to each other and climb out the window.

dman · 12 May 2006, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mailman

Just like when they used to tie the bedsheets to each other and climb out the window.

ROTFLMAO!! You are gonna make me wake up the house dude!!! I mean they will all be up at 2 AM let's not rush things.

JJ Irani · 12 May 2006, 04:57 PM

MODERATORS!!! Get these THREE tossers, CJ, Daren and Paulie out of here.

They have just about ruined and completely desicrated this thread!!

Goodwatch · 12 May 2006, 05:17 PM

My beautiful, beautiful thread!

The humanity of it all. They have no honour, know no shame

It was a 4 post hijack

JJ Irani · 12 May 2006, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

My beautiful, beautiful thread!

The humanity of it all. They have no honour, know no shame

It was a 4 post hijack

Sack the buggers!!

Goodwatch · 12 May 2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Sack the buggers!!

Ehhh, your no Saint either Kiwi

JJ Irani · 12 May 2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Ehhh, your no Saint either Kiwi

Goodwatch · 12 May 2006, 07:10 PM

mailman · 12 May 2006, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Be grateful it made it that far

Manatee · 12 May 2006, 10:10 PM

The Rolex Submariner is still useful as a dive watch, but it's a relic of another era. It doesn't have nearly the functionality that modern high-tech dive watches have, and in the world of mechanical dive watches, there are plenty -- many much cheaper -- that can do what it does. It has become far more of a status symbol among a certain group of men than a necessary dive tool.

RobDad · 13 May 2006, 12:57 AM

Aren't we missing the point? - The Sub is THE CLASSIC DIVE WATCH, if not the ultimate!

Manatee · 13 May 2006, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobDad

Aren't we missing the point? - The Sub is THE CLASSIC DIVE WATCH, if not the ultimate!

Yes, that's the word for it. The Submariner is the classic dive watch. It's an icon in the diving world, and it's an icon in the wrist-watch world. If there is a museum of "classic man-made objects" somewhere, the Sub should be included.

JJ Irani · 13 May 2006, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobDad

Aren't we missing the point? - The Sub is THE CLASSIC DIVE WATCH, if not the ultimate!

You said it, Rob....come to me, baby!!!

Subfiend · 13 May 2006, 05:41 AM

And now for something completely different......... back to the topic at hand!

Maybe I am in the minority, but I have worn a Sub or SD for diving for 16 of the 26 years I have been doing it. My Sub replaced my Seiko after it flooded on a dive, and my SD became my primary dive watch last year. Moreover, I wanted a Sub for the entire 10 years that I wore the Seiko (a Sub copy). These are the only watches I would consider wearing underwater, even though there are many, many more available.

Moreover, even though I have several dive computers, I would never rely exclusively on any of them to keep me safe underwater. Instead, I would always fall back on my trusty Sub or SD and the dive tables I keep in my BC pocket.

I am not a fan of electronics. I know A LOT about the current crop of dive computers, and they are far from infallible. Meanwhile, my Sub has taken more abuse than any other piece of equipment I have ever owned, and I trust it implicitly.

I know several other divers that feel this way. Most of them make their living in and around the water, and for them the Sub is the only choice. They buy one watch, a Sub, wear it for decades, and never give it a second thought.

Goodwatch · 13 May 2006, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manatee

The Rolex Submariner is still useful as a dive watch, but it's a relic of another era. It doesn't have nearly the functionality that modern high-tech dive watches have, and in the world of mechanical dive watches, there are plenty -- many much cheaper -- that can do what it does. It has become far more of a status symbol among a certain group of men than a necessary dive tool.

That’s just what attracts me to Rolex. Archaic, relic, of another era, etc. The pace of change is glacier like, still no proper clasp on the Sub bracelet. It’s the ‘status symbol’ part I don’t like. And I am still a bit disappointed how they envisioned the Sub’s 50th Anniversary. I had hoped for a real effort, like a re-edition of the first Sub but with up to date technology. It wasn’t to be and my letter to Rolex about this subject in 2000 was never answered (the others I wrote were).

JJ Irani · 13 May 2006, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Subfiend

And now for something completely different......... back to the topic at hand!

Maybe I am in the minority, but I have worn a Sub or SD for diving for 16 of the 26 years I have been doing it. My Sub replaced my Seiko after it flooded on a dive, and my SD became my primary dive watch last year. Moreover, I wanted a Sub for the entire 10 years that I wore the Seiko (a Sub copy). These are the only watches I would consider wearing underwater, even though there are many, many more available.

Moreover, even though I have several dive computers, I would never rely exclusively on any of them to keep me safe underwater. Instead, I would always fall back on my trusty Sub or SD and the dive tables I keep in my BC pocket.

I am not a fan of electronics. I know A LOT about the current crop of dive computers, and they are far from infallible. Meanwhile, my Sub has taken more abuse than any other piece of equipment I have ever owned, and I trust it implicitly.

I know several other divers that feel this way. Most of them make their living in and around the water, and for them the Sub is the only choice. They buy one watch, a Sub, wear it for decades, and never give it a second thought.

Fantastic post, David. TRFers, give this man a cigar....heck, give him another Rolex!!

Goodwatch · 13 May 2006, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Fantastic post, David. TRFers, give this man a cigar....heck, give him another Rolex!!

JJ Irani · 13 May 2006, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Subfiend · 13 May 2006, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Fantastic post, David. TRFers, give this man a cigar....heck, give him another Rolex!!

Thanks JJ!

I should add that most of the divers I know who own Subs bought them long ago, when they costs in the hundreds of dollars, or at least less than the $2,000 I paid for mine in 1991.

A friend of mine has worn his 1680 Sub since he was in Viet Nam in the late 60s. He was given a new Sub when he retired last year and, when we were diving together two weeks ago, he asked me incredulously "Can you believe these watches now cost almost $4,000?" He was stunned when I told him that it's actually almost $5,000 now. Just the increase in price since early last year would pay for two of his original 1680 Subs at the price he paid in the late 60s.

Subfiend · 13 May 2006, 09:37 AM

Here is a gratuitous shot of the SD underwater, just in case you're wondering what it looks like in its natural element.

12 May 2006, 12:45 PM	#31
C.J. "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: * Posts: 10,196	edt __________________ Me? I'm still looking for Kokomo. I just hope that damn golfer isn't there Last edited by C.J.; 25 May 2006 at 04:48 AM..

12 May 2006, 12:51 PM	#33
C.J. "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: * Posts: 10,196	edt __________________ Me? I'm still looking for Kokomo. I just hope that damn golfer isn't there Last edited by C.J.; 25 May 2006 at 04:49 AM..

12 May 2006, 04:57 PM	#37
JJ Irani Fondly Remembered Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: JJ Location: Auckland, NZ Watch: ALL SOLD!! Posts: 74,319	MODERATORS!!! Get these THREE tossers, CJ, Daren and Paulie out of here. They have just about ruined and completely desicrated this thread!! __________________ Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!

12 May 2006, 05:17 PM	#38
Goodwatch "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Real Name: Frans ® Location: Rotterdam Watch: the sunrise... Posts: 10,230	My beautiful, beautiful thread! The humanity of it all. They have no honour, know no shame It was a 4 post hijack __________________ Member# 127

12 May 2006, 07:10 PM	#42
Goodwatch "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Real Name: Frans ® Location: Rotterdam Watch: the sunrise... Posts: 10,230	__________________ Member# 127

12 May 2006, 10:10 PM	#44
Manatee Banned Join Date: May 2005 Location: Washington DC Are Posts: 677	The Rolex Submariner is still useful as a dive watch, but it's a relic of another era. It doesn't have nearly the functionality that modern high-tech dive watches have, and in the world of mechanical dive watches, there are plenty -- many much cheaper -- that can do what it does. It has become far more of a status symbol among a certain group of men than a necessary dive tool.

13 May 2006, 12:57 AM	#45
RobDad Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Real Name: Rob Dadd Location: London Posts: 134	Aren't we missing the point? - The Sub is THE CLASSIC DIVE WATCH, if not the ultimate!

13 May 2006, 05:41 AM	#48
Subfiend "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Outside Watch: Isn't it obvious? Posts: 1,926	And now for something completely different......... back to the topic at hand! Maybe I am in the minority, but I have worn a Sub or SD for diving for 16 of the 26 years I have been doing it. My Sub replaced my Seiko after it flooded on a dive, and my SD became my primary dive watch last year. Moreover, I wanted a Sub for the entire 10 years that I wore the Seiko (a Sub copy). These are the only watches I would consider wearing underwater, even though there are many, many more available. Moreover, even though I have several dive computers, I would never rely exclusively on any of them to keep me safe underwater. Instead, I would always fall back on my trusty Sub or SD and the dive tables I keep in my BC pocket. I am not a fan of electronics. I know A LOT about the current crop of dive computers, and they are far from infallible. Meanwhile, my Sub has taken more abuse than any other piece of equipment I have ever owned, and I trust it implicitly. I know several other divers that feel this way. Most of them make their living in and around the water, and for them the Sub is the only choice. They buy one watch, a Sub, wear it for decades, and never give it a second thought. __________________ Subfiend

13 May 2006, 09:37 AM	#54
Subfiend "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Outside Watch: Isn't it obvious? Posts: 1,926	Here is a gratuitous shot of the SD underwater, just in case you're wondering what it looks like in its natural element. __________________ Subfiend

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