ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

cshecks · 14 January 2010, 07:04 PM

1) Which one do you own and why one vs. the other?

2) I will be buying a SS sub soon, I know having the date is super practical, but, as far as asthetics go, the non-date looks so much cooler/more iconic, more a work or art vs. a timepiece. It's simply a MUCH cleaner piece. Plus I was just looking at that cool pic w/ Mcqueen and his ss sub non-date.

leethal21 · 14 January 2010, 07:39 PM

Funny to read this post.

That was EXACTLY how I felt.

Try on a dweller. You might be surprised. Same Iconic look and a handy date tucked in there.

G.J · 14 January 2010, 07:39 PM

I have a Submariner because I like the clean dial of this particular watch.

Bullyterrier · 14 January 2010, 09:45 PM

I had the Sub (non date), then got the LV. Shortly after getting the LV I sold the Sub. I prefer the Sub Date, it feels a little more substantial, plus I prefer the solid end links to the bracelet and the way the diver extension clicks in to the clasp. Also having the date is a plus factor for me, when I had the Sub I was forever looking at it for the date.
I looked a few times in AD's comparing the Sea Dwellers and the LV, because of the cyclops issue, but the maxi dial of the LV, plus the green bezel sold it to me.

RolexPete · 14 January 2010, 09:51 PM

I have the Sub date and I need it for the date feature. My father is retired and has the Sub no date. He doesn't care what day it is!

Trurolexer · 14 January 2010, 09:52 PM

Sub with Date.

promethus · 14 January 2010, 10:01 PM

I like Sub ND, especially the Non COSC Ver. But only for collecting....
I hate the cyclops on the sub date.
Which is why I feel that SD is the best choice. And it's thicker!! Some folks think that the sub is a much more wearable watch than the SD. You should explore the SD and compare among the other 2.

CPTL · 15 January 2010, 12:14 AM

With date.... Originally, I got the date because I need a date function. Now, the bubble just seems like it's as much a part of Rolex as the mercedes hour hand.

MilgaussMan · 15 January 2010, 01:13 AM

3 o'clock Lume Club! . . . wait, not sure if this even exists.

zippaul · 15 January 2010, 01:45 AM

I am in the same boat as you. I love the look of the 14060M (no date), it simply looks cleaner. The issue that runs through my mind which could be a positive or a negative is that the Sub No Date has the holes in the lugs and the older non solid end link bracelet. Some people like that, some don't, to some it simply doesn't matter. The Sub date has the newer/updated case (no holes) and solid end link bracelet. It also has the magnification bubble/cyclops which for some is a postive and for some is a negative as well. The Sub No Date, if the rumor mill is true is going to be discontinued. The Sub No Date is a bit less expensive as well. If I had enough money to do so, I would own them both.

sea-dweller · 15 January 2010, 02:17 AM

I have both, but like the functionality of the date model better, thus my Sub Date gets more wear.

JBat · 15 January 2010, 02:20 AM

It sounds to me like you've already made your decision. For me, the date was the logical first Sub for me to get. I need and use the complication almost every day. That said, the 14060 is an iconic classic, and I think any true Sub lover will end up with both at some point. I know I will. It's just a question of new, vintage and time for me.

B. Doggy · 15 January 2010, 03:13 AM

Date all the way. It's so ROLEX!

alphamale2012 · 15 January 2010, 03:16 AM

no date imo

looking to buy · 15 January 2010, 03:17 AM

I like date. I need it. I never know the date. But, you are right, the no date does look cleaner. But, If you saw my office you would understand why clean is not necessarily important to me.

tandrup · 15 January 2010, 03:27 AM

I have the ND - and like many other ND owners I bought it because I liked the cleaner look of it compared to the Date-version. The best way to find out is to go to an AD and spend time figuring out which one you like best. Don't buy before you are 100% sure that it's "the one".

ParisDakarBmw · 15 January 2010, 03:28 AM

Vintage = no date

newer = date

ukrolex · 15 January 2010, 03:30 AM

Definately the Sub Date for me. I just wouldn't buy a watch with no date function but if you are happy with a Sub with no date, then just go for it.

Now if someone gifted me a no date rolex, I certainly would not say no

ersnyder · 15 January 2010, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MilgaussMan

3 o'clock Lume Club! . . . wait, not sure if this even exists.

Best argument yet!!

Renoir · 15 January 2010, 03:36 AM

One of each

, actually my wife's got "custody" of the LV!

If only one, I would go with the date...

ocwatching · 15 January 2010, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renoir

One of each

, actually my wife's got "custody" of the LV!

If only one, I would go with the date...

I have no date (which the wife has now)...I don't regret getting it...but I am in the same line of thinking here...

if its your only one...get the date...if its part of a collection...ND...

Speed · 15 January 2010, 03:43 AM

I sooooo want a classic No date 5513 or 14060M for weekends and NATO fun. Budget restrictions keep getting in the way!

poppydog · 15 January 2010, 03:48 AM

I have the SD (old) and date Sub. However, I never use or set the date on either. I will probably get a non-date at some point, but didn't like the holes in the lugs when I looked at one.

Zanuf · 15 January 2010, 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cshecks

1) Which one do you own and why one vs. the other?

2) I will be buying a SS sub soon, I know having the date is super practical, but, as far as asthetics go, the non-date looks so much cooler/more iconic, more a work or art vs. a timepiece. It's simply a MUCH cleaner piece. Plus I was just looking at that cool pic w/ Mcqueen and his ss sub non-date.

What does your little voice say?

Zanuf · 15 January 2010, 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MilgaussMan

3 o'clock Lume Club! . . . wait, not sure if this even exists.

ND

If only to have that 3 o'clock lume!

DLagent · 15 January 2010, 04:13 AM

I recently purchased my first Rolex and made it a 14060M Sub ND. If i had a choice between having the date on my watch and not having it, I'd prefer having it, but my personal opinion is that the cyclops on the 16610 Sub Date is ugly. I would've liked a Sea Dweller since it looks like the Sub and has a much cleaner-looking date feature, but they're more expensive, pre-owned ones are not as common, and if I decide to trade up in the future, my Sub ND will be a lot easier to sell.

In the end, it comes down to your personal preference - they're both great watches to own.

erasuretim · 15 January 2010, 04:16 AM

The sub gets my vote - especially without the COSC nonsense. Its contains real tool watch DNA you know! I think the sub date is a new kid on the block up start

How about forming a "3 o'clock lume club" for all us 14060m fans?

Regards

Tim

JBat · 15 January 2010, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ParisDakarBmw

Vintage = no date

newer = date

The Sub Date first showed up in the 1960's, Paul, so it's not exactly new.

MilgaussMan · 15 January 2010, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erasuretim

The sub gets my vote - especially without the COSC nonsense. Its contains real tool watch DNA you know! I think the sub date is a new kid on the block up start

How about forming a "3 o'clock lume club" for all us 14060m fans?

Regards

Tim

I not really a whiz with the lume shots, someone else will need to produce the "club tag."

Between my Sub and Mil, I'm 100% on board!

Matt

DLagent · 15 January 2010, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erasuretim

The sub gets my vote - especially without the COSC nonsense. Its contains real tool watch DNA you know! I think the sub date is a new kid on the block up start

How about forming a "3 o'clock lume club" for all us 14060m fans?

Regards

Tim

Check out my sig! :-P

14 January 2010, 07:04 PM	#1
cshecks Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Seattle Posts: 92	SS Sub - date or no date? 1) Which one do you own and why one vs. the other? 2) I will be buying a SS sub soon, I know having the date is super practical, but, as far as asthetics go, the non-date looks so much cooler/more iconic, more a work or art vs. a timepiece. It's simply a MUCH cleaner piece. Plus I was just looking at that cool pic w/ Mcqueen and his ss sub non-date.

14 January 2010, 07:39 PM	#3
G.J "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Planet Earth Posts: 2,094	I have a Submariner because I like the clean dial of this particular watch. __________________ In Memory of JJ Irani

14 January 2010, 09:45 PM	#4
Bullyterrier "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: . Posts: 1,343	I had the Sub (non date), then got the LV. Shortly after getting the LV I sold the Sub. I prefer the Sub Date, it feels a little more substantial, plus I prefer the solid end links to the bracelet and the way the diver extension clicks in to the clasp. Also having the date is a plus factor for me, when I had the Sub I was forever looking at it for the date. I looked a few times in AD's comparing the Sea Dwellers and the LV, because of the cyclops issue, but the maxi dial of the LV, plus the green bezel sold it to me. __________________ So Mote it be.

14 January 2010, 09:51 PM	#5
RolexPete "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Peter Location: Massachusetts Watch: 214270 Mk2 Posts: 1,963	I have the Sub date and I need it for the date feature. My father is retired and has the Sub no date. He doesn't care what day it is! __________________ 2016 Explorer 214270 Mk2 - 1996 Submariner 14060* - 1972 Datejust 1601 1972 Oyster Perpetual 1002 - 1978 Oysterquartz 17000 Omega Seamaster 2265.80 - Omega Seamaster 300 166.0324 *RIP PAL 1942-2015

15 January 2010, 12:14 AM	#8
CPTL "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Kevin Location: Texas on my mind Watch: Sub Date; SS/WG DJ Posts: 2,445	With date.... Originally, I got the date because I need a date function. Now, the bubble just seems like it's as much a part of Rolex as the mercedes hour hand. __________________ 16610 Submariner Date; D Serial 16234 DateJust SS with WG Fluted Bezel & Jubillee, White Roman Dial; F Serial 16570 Explorer II White Dial; M Serial And Hers: 78240 Mid-Size DateJust SS with Domed Bezel & Oyster, White Roman; D Serial

14 January 2010, 07:39 PM	#2
leethal21 Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Rick Location: Canada Watch: SD Posts: 232	Funny to read this post. That was EXACTLY how I felt. Try on a dweller. You might be surprised. Same Iconic look and a handy date tucked in there.

14 January 2010, 09:52 PM	#6
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	Sub with Date.

14 January 2010, 10:01 PM	#7
promethus "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: SG Posts: 192	I like Sub ND, especially the Non COSC Ver. But only for collecting.... I hate the cyclops on the sub date. Which is why I feel that SD is the best choice. And it's thicker!! Some folks think that the sub is a much more wearable watch than the SD. You should explore the SD and compare among the other 2.

15 January 2010, 01:13 AM	#9
MilgaussMan "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Matt Location: Indiana Watch: 14060M Posts: 138	3 o'clock Lume Club! . . . wait, not sure if this even exists. Attached Images

15 January 2010, 01:45 AM	#10
zippaul "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Paul Location: Georgia Watch: 16610LV Posts: 172	I am in the same boat as you. I love the look of the 14060M (no date), it simply looks cleaner. The issue that runs through my mind which could be a positive or a negative is that the Sub No Date has the holes in the lugs and the older non solid end link bracelet. Some people like that, some don't, to some it simply doesn't matter. The Sub date has the newer/updated case (no holes) and solid end link bracelet. It also has the magnification bubble/cyclops which for some is a postive and for some is a negative as well. The Sub No Date, if the rumor mill is true is going to be discontinued. The Sub No Date is a bit less expensive as well. If I had enough money to do so, I would own them both.

15 January 2010, 02:17 AM	#11
sea-dweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Dennis Location: Bay Area - 925 Posts: 40,018	I have both, but like the functionality of the date model better, thus my Sub Date gets more wear. __________________ TRF Member #6699 (since September 2007)

15 January 2010, 02:20 AM	#12
JBat "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: John Location: Washington Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ Posts: 7,329	It sounds to me like you've already made your decision. For me, the date was the logical first Sub for me to get. I need and use the complication almost every day. That said, the 14060 is an iconic classic, and I think any true Sub lover will end up with both at some point. I know I will. It's just a question of new, vintage and time for me.

15 January 2010, 03:13 AM	#13
B. Doggy "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Real Name: Bryan Location: Oregon Posts: 7,399	Date all the way. It's so ROLEX! __________________ Rolex / Panerai / Omega

15 January 2010, 03:16 AM	#14
alphamale2012 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Real Name: Sam Location: UK Posts: 1,305	no date imo

15 January 2010, 03:17 AM	#15
looking to buy "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2008 Real Name: Bob Location: Paradise CA Posts: 920	I like date. I need it. I never know the date. But, you are right, the no date does look cleaner. But, If you saw my office you would understand why clean is not necessarily important to me. __________________ 16610 Submariner - 116710 GMT II C - 16570 Explorer II - 126710BLRO GMT II (Pepsi) - 116300 Datejust II

15 January 2010, 03:27 AM	#16
tandrup "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: USA Watch: 14060M Posts: 921	I have the ND - and like many other ND owners I bought it because I liked the cleaner look of it compared to the Date-version. The best way to find out is to go to an AD and spend time figuring out which one you like best. Don't buy before you are 100% sure that it's "the one". __________________ Regards, Lars 14060M, 16570 White, 116200 Tuxedo Dial Georg Jensen 2347

15 January 2010, 03:28 AM	#17
ParisDakarBmw Banned Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Paul Location: New Haven, CT Watch: 116610 Sub-C Posts: 6,552	Vintage = no date newer = date

15 January 2010, 03:30 AM	#18
ukrolex Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 56	Definately the Sub Date for me. I just wouldn't buy a watch with no date function but if you are happy with a Sub with no date, then just go for it. Now if someone gifted me a no date rolex, I certainly would not say no

15 January 2010, 03:36 AM	#20
Renoir "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Renato Location: New York Posts: 2,396	One of each, actually my wife's got "custody" of the LV! If only one, I would go with the date...

15 January 2010, 03:43 AM	#22
Speed "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: USA Posts: 19,706	I sooooo want a classic No date 5513 or 14060M for weekends and NATO fun. Budget restrictions keep getting in the way!

15 January 2010, 03:48 AM	#23
poppydog Banned Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Steve Location: UK Watch: Rolex Seadweller Posts: 253	I have the SD (old) and date Sub. However, I never use or set the date on either. I will probably get a non-date at some point, but didn't like the holes in the lugs when I looked at one.

15 January 2010, 04:13 AM	#26
DLagent "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Fort Lauderdale Posts: 118	I recently purchased my first Rolex and made it a 14060M Sub ND. If i had a choice between having the date on my watch and not having it, I'd prefer having it, but my personal opinion is that the cyclops on the 16610 Sub Date is ugly. I would've liked a Sea Dweller since it looks like the Sub and has a much cleaner-looking date feature, but they're more expensive, pre-owned ones are not as common, and if I decide to trade up in the future, my Sub ND will be a lot easier to sell. In the end, it comes down to your personal preference - they're both great watches to own.

15 January 2010, 04:16 AM	#27
erasuretim "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: cranfield, uk Watch: 14060m Posts: 251	The sub gets my vote - especially without the COSC nonsense. Its contains real tool watch DNA you know! I think the sub date is a new kid on the block up start How about forming a "3 o'clock lume club" for all us 14060m fans? Regards Tim

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