Have you warmed up to the maxi case...

[Megalobyte]

Originally Posted by LostInTime

No. If I want a square watch I will buy a Monaco.

Wow, you're right, how did I not see that before! The Sub-C looks exactly like a Monaco!

[Michael M.]

Kind of.

[docmarioce]

Is a matter of getting used to the new look. Both are great. I bought a GMT IIC and got rid of it because of the weight (I always thought Rolex are heavy watches) I was OK with the look specially the bracelet. I own 2 old style subs now and I am very happy.

[Dr. Robert]

I just have two words to say............................................... .........................

BAH HUMBUG.

[Grey.Coupe]

I have worn a series of subs since the early 80's and like the new watch so much I now have the new sub-c and a TT. Having worn these watches for a long time, I notice very little difference in their appearance on the wrist from earlier versions. The bracelet alone is reason to trade.

[Watch Professor]

Looks better on the GMT.

[lhanddds]

I plan on having mine over-polished over and over again till it's just right. What do you think about that fellow curmudgeons?

[tomee]

love it

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by lhanddds

I plan on having mine over-polished over and over again till it's just right. What do you think about that fellow curmudgeons?

Bah Humbug, brother Larry!

Save time, I'll lend you an angle grinder!

[Gretsch]

Love it. Like the old one too. Not sure what all the fuss is about really.

[Darlinboy]

SubC is a great watch, love the look of the maxi case!

[mrbill2mrbill2]

No - I tried - I don't think I ever will. The 16610 case flows into the bracelet. The maxicase makes an abrupt "stepped" transition. Not for me.

Live on curmudgeons - we are the life force.

Bah Humbug!!

[93 Turbo]

No, not yet...

[springbar]

Originally Posted by Megalobyte

...some might say it's a form follows function design choice, as the lugs are now stronger, beefier, and, can withstand more years of refinishing. If in fact the new design is stronger and will allow the case to last longer, I'm all for it.

Lug failure has never been a problem. The maxi-case is an aesthetic change.

[Satsu]

Voted with my wallet. Love it and bought it :)

[Megalobyte]

Originally Posted by springbar

Lug failure has never been a problem. The maxi-case is an aesthetic change.

I agree the thinner lugs do fine, but I was thinking more about what happens to a watch case in the long term, like 20, 30 or even 50 years. I know that watch cases, and their lugs, can lose enough material to begin to look odd after many years. Thicker, wider lugs can offset that to some degree, allowing the least replaceable component of the watch, the case, to withstand more refinishing, thus retaining it's basic shape longer and lasting longer with more integrity.

[landroverking]

No!

[Speed]

I like 'em BOTH!

[Offline99]

You'll always get more traditionalists on here since they tend to prefer a watch they already have, particularly one that's been the same over the last 50 years.

I like the supercase, and I never have considered rolex until the sub c.

[Luxe Time]

You'll get used to the more robust / full case size after a week or two. The watch feels more like a precious metal piece - the way many would expect a $8000 watch to feel. Obviously others have different opinions, but I'm confident in saying you'll love your new Sub!

[dmacintyre]

I didn't even notice the lug / crown guard differences until I saw people moaning about it on here!

The Sub-C has been my only Sub so when I look at an older model they look like they are missing something. It all depends what you are used to. The thicker lugs issue definitely disappears on the wrist. As mentioned above, it looks and feels like an $8k watch IMHO. I don't think I'd ever be happy going backwards to an older model.

[crowncollection]

like the old case more

[George Ab]

I've really tried to like it; however, I have not warmed up to it. It is not for me.

[steubi1]

YES.

Greetings
Tom

[buddy13]

thanks for all your replies ...

I will get my Sub-C on Monday, hopefully after a few days I can let you know if I have warmed up to the case shape or not ...

Apart from that I love EVERYTING about the watch. I love the in house movement with in house parachrom hairspring. Maxi dial, thick minute hand, blue lume, clasp etc...

I have handled this watch many times. I agree that the case is 'less' flowing into the bracelet when compared to the old version, however haters of the new Sub-C have to agree with me that there is absolutely no comparison between a 116610 and a 16610. In fact I took a long time to buy a 16610...

The combination of cheap clasp, bad lume, thin minute hand etc... always made the watch feel cheap when compared to say a 1000USD Orient star/Seiko. Apart from the history and pedigree there is not much more quality in it than a 500 USD Seiko Sumo and please note that this is coming from someone who just bought a 14060M as his lifetime watch...

I really hope I can warm up to the case, as I know I will be wearing a much superior watch . Thanks!

[Megalobyte]

Originally Posted by buddy13

thanks for all your replies ...

...apart from the history and pedigree there is not much more quality in it than a 500 USD Seiko Sumo and please note that this is coming from someone who just bought a 14060M as his lifetime watch...

Well I'm a big fan of the C over previous Subs, but I wouldn't quite go that far. The older Sub only feels cheaper when compared side by side to a C, on it's own it might not have been perfect, but far superior, in important ways, to a Sumo I think, even if the Seiko had better Lume and a heavier bracelet. Just my opinion of course.

[Cru Jones]

i still don't "like" it, and i'm surprised by how much better the new Explorer II's case and bracelet flow together, but, i have come to be very, very fond of the hulk.....so, i guess, i am warming up to it?

[buddy13]

Originally Posted by Megalobyte

Well I'm a big fan of the C over previous Subs, but I wouldn't quite go that far. The older Sub only feels cheaper when compared side by side to a C, on it's own it might not have been perfect, but far superior, in important ways, to a Sumo I think, even if the Seiko had better Lume and a heavier bracelet. Just my opinion of course.

Thinking about it. It is of slightly better quality than the Sumo owing to the Sapphire crystal, triplock crown and 3135 movement...but you get my point. It does not feel ANYTHING like a 5500 USD watch....but the Sub-C is on another level IMHO...

Again I still like the 16610 (I had one up to last week ) but I would give the replies of 'The sub-c is ridiculous' more credit if they had some honesty like 'The sub-c is much better built compared to the old model but I never warmed up to the maxi case'..

anyway I think you understand where I am coming from..

[Dr. Robert]

The best Seiko dive watch is the SBDX001, the marinemaster, MM300.
A good pedigree, classic looks, great lume, lug holes, 300m rating.....a full figured watch for all you big watch guys....it has that "je ne sais quoi curmudgeon look"
Who knows how long Seiko will make it........*note: the Grand Seiko dive watches are only 200m rated, seems odd for a high end dive watch?????

[Megalobyte]

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

...the Grand Seiko dive watches are only 200m rated, seems odd for a high end dive watch?????

Odd but likely adequate. Depends on the testing standards. For example, the vintage collection Aquatimer is certified by Iwc for normal diving, yet its rating is "only" 120m, Iwc claims their test is done to a higher standard than is typical, thus unlike many WR ratings that are optimistic, theirs is conservative. Nonetheless, 200m is IMO adequate for all but deep diving. WR and BAR ratings always need to be taken with a grain of salt. Many watches rated for 30 to 50m, wow that's over 150 feet deep! can't even safely go down 6 feet in a pool. And perhaps, like the Iwc, one rated to 120m can safely go down a full 120m plus the additional 25% required for a diving rating.