Submariner date v no date.

[ninotcs]

isnt it kind of obvious why chose one vs other?
One tells you date and the other does no

[landroverking]

Why did folks get upset here when the name is pointed out?

There are many posts here that have pointed the DD bracelet is named "President" not the watch. As to Sub Vs Sub ND the long time Rolex fans and collectors want the watch called by its name. Nothing more nothing less.

[Jack T]

To those who construed my posting as an admonishment, perhaps that misperception could've been avoided had I concluded with a : or ;) or

[improviz]

Nothing wrong at all with pointing it out, so long it is done politely and not in a rather rude, condescending manner, which is certainly what was done by the member in question. Further, I really don't think it's all that big of a deal to abbreviate, which is what's being done… Given that Sub Date sales are 10 to 1 to those of subs, why should everybody who owns the Sub Date be expected to write Sub Date every time you write about the watch? It's silly.

Lastly, on the Submariner Date that I own, it does not read Sub Date on the dial, it reads Submariner, full stop. So it is certainly understandable that most Sub Date owners, who do not after all spend their days perusing Rolex's website or catalogs, would refer to the Sub Date as the Submariner.

[ufboy73]

well, personally i think they are both 'subs'.

the original did not have the date and they came out with the date version - were they supposed to rename the original that had been out for over a decade? no, they just kept its name the same and added the 'date' nomenclature to the new one.

no big deal...they are all subs and all full of awesomeness

[Thebiglagu]

Love the no-date and want one! But I do use the date feature everyday at work.

[busytimmy]

I really love it when this thread comes up again and again. Boy, I can't wait for the next time.

[Ramiks]

Love the new 114060 CND so much, it's one of the important modern pieces imho, however I made my mind on the old 16610 to be my daily wearer and the date function is required for me.

[scooter2]

Sub ND for me.



scooter

[aeon888]

Originally Posted by anothernewphone

The date costs ~$1000 more, so that's reason enough for a lot of people to buy the 114060 instead.

I would still choose the NO date version even if Rolex will exchange their prices and have the NO date cost more than the date version.

I believe the Date version should cost less because the cyclops makes it cheap looking.

[Gerardus]

Originally Posted by Tri-Tip

I agree 100%

Same for me

[Check]

Originally Posted by Jack T

First of all, this topic is such a softball. Really, asking people on this site to weigh in on a date feature?
Now, for a more pertinent issue, one of which you showed surprising ignorance.

There are two such watches that Rolex makes in this particular line - a Submariner and a Submariner with Date. All the promotional materials make that clear, the Rolex website makes that clear, and so do numerous posters on TRF when this topic inevitably arises. The term No Date is not used. Are we clear?

To not know or make that distinction, in my book, should disqualify a person from owning either.

THIS is a Submariner:

Agree on everything that you say, but lighten up. It's just a watch!

[LingB]

I prefer the No Date one....

[therooster]

A vote for the date from me. And I'm also a fan if the cyclop.

[OrangeSport]

I prefer the look without a date, and more importantly without a Cyclops. I tend to know what date it is anyway. Also, it makes setting the watch a little quicker/ easier.

Would have gone for the DSSD if I needed a date.

[Racerdj]

I'm glad we have a choice!

[Ardalan]

No date for me. The dial is well balanced.

[polarinda]

The 16610LV without date on a black bezel would be the perfect SUB.

[Nucengineer]

I like the symmetry of the dial

[Roller07]

I like both and don't think I could choose between the two.

[jatco]

Originally Posted by Thatguy

No other reason.

exactly - I prefer a date. (preferably with my wife...)

[eeh100773]

It seems like almost every SS Sub I see is a Sub date. To not have the date function was no big deal to me - so buying a 14060 allowed me to select a very popular model yet still be a little different. I've actually had people challenge on me on the authenticity of my Rolex, claiming that real Rolexes have to have the date/cyclops. After all, the 14060 & new 14060M are the only Subs not to have dates, I think.

In the end though, it comes down to personal preference on the date function.

[avare]

Originally Posted by eeh100773

I've actually had people challenge on me on the authenticity of my Rolex, claiming that real Rolexes have to have the date/cyclops.

Interesting. Of hand as far as I recall, Rolex has several series of watches without dates. This is not including the smaller watches.

Air King
Daytona
Explorer
Milgauss
Oyster Perpetual 34 mm
Oyster Perpetual 36 mm

Some may question if the last 2 are really one series. If one asuumes that, then there are still 5 distinctive series with no date.


Well dated,
Andre

[Bigthrust]

I have had both. I personally like the date version better because I think it adds more to the watch. I do wish I still had my non-date from the 80s though.

[bobswatches]

we have found that some avid Rolex Sub fans prefer the no-date. they are one of the fastest selling models and some claim that the date window throws the balance/symmetry of the watch off. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and Rolex does us all a favor and makes them both.

[srazam]

no date looks more balanced-- for sure.. though I vote for SUB date..

[14060 M]

The best thing is to have both!

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by 14060 M

The best thing is to have both!

You got it. Thats what Im saving for

[Lew Archer]

When I bought my Submariner Date, the deciding factor was, well, that's what they had in the case! I wanted a Sub, was torn on the date question. I liked the simplicity of the Submariner dial without date/cyclops, but also liked the practicality of having the date complication.

The Sub was somewhat less expensive, but, on the other hand, given the popularity of the Sub Date, I thought that re-sale would be easier if, God forbid, I needed to sell it.

So, when I went into the AD, I was truly on the fence. The AD only had the Sub Date. That closed the deal and I walked away contentedly with my Submariner Date. I still have it.

I still had a yen for the Submariner without the date, so a few years later, I bought the Submariner (14060M), shortly before it went out of production. By then I was on TRF and was reassured that I wasn't the only person crazy enough to have one of each!

[dbhickam]

I went with the 114060 and don't feel as though I'm missing anything. To me the lack of the date is a modern take on a classic Sub, the 5512 (Steve McQueen's Sub). In fact, I believe that if the King of Cool were alive today he'd wear a 114060.