ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

masterserg · 2 February 2012, 06:31 AM

Just for kicks, can you think of changes to the Sub C that would make it even better? I look at mine from every angle and can't come up with anything substantial ...

I might say chamfers, but then I don't think they would go well with the design ... or maybe a sapphire case back, but that's against its spirit ... maybe a fully gradated bezel ...

If anything, I'd probably make the pearl flatter to make it less prone to wall related accidents, not that they are that common ... there is the DSSD clasp as well but that's overkill.

Of course I am expecting a bunch of "get rid of the fat lugs" but I quite like them!

I lied, there is ONE substantial change: the power reserve could be larger but I don't know enough about horlogerie to understand the movement changes involved and related impact on price.

SaddleSC · 2 February 2012, 06:32 AM

I agree with you. I feel like my 116610LV is as perfect a watch for me as has ever been produced.

tkerrmd · 2 February 2012, 06:33 AM

Its pretty darn good!!

ChristianN · 2 February 2012, 06:34 AM

Make the damn crown stand upright when the crown is screwed all the way in ;-).

Apart from that, it's pretty great!

experimentjon · 2 February 2012, 06:34 AM

I love display casebacks and would like to know why Rolex doesn't do them. It'd just add one more nice thing to look at on their watches.

And I think the fat lugs look good too.

mtrunner · 2 February 2012, 06:36 AM

I feel the SubC could use a tad thicker bracelet to go with the bigger lugs but that is my only request. I love it regardless but I do think this would make the watch even better.

Explorertwo · 2 February 2012, 06:44 AM

I love the subC , great, great watch! Nearly perfect. But if there is one thing i would change it would be the last two lines on the dial : superlative...etc. It would make the dial cleaner and even more beautifull IMHO
Cheers!

WyoWatch · 2 February 2012, 06:50 AM

One minor thing: I would have kept the same case as the old ones but still have done the upgrades to bezel, dial and bracelet and hairspring. IMO that would be perfect. That said, I absolutely love my Sub C as is.

Chipmunk · 2 February 2012, 06:56 AM

Lower price?

superdog · 2 February 2012, 06:59 AM

the only change i would make is the cyclops date. absolutely love the watch tho.

TTmax · 2 February 2012, 07:02 AM

I would add a 4th hand that would do one turn every 24h, and replace the bezel with another one rotating both way and going from 1 to 24, to indicate when in the day we are.

Eventually I would let the hour hand be independantly settable , to be able to indicate another hour, when I'm in travel.

Then a PCL bracelet, and it would be perfect....

Dan2010 · 2 February 2012, 07:10 AM

No ceramic bezel. Should have kept the aluminum bezel.

Melanotaenia · 2 February 2012, 07:14 AM

smaller lugs; the new lugs just don't look good to me; I also missed the cross-brushing on the lugs that the old models had (now it is all just brushed in the same direction)

Gharddog03 · 2 February 2012, 07:14 AM

Lower price, 42mm, and clear caseback.

capote · 2 February 2012, 07:16 AM

Aluminum bezel, no engraved rehaut and classic case. Its not too much to ask, is it? A perfect dive watch

Slinkey · 2 February 2012, 07:23 AM

Either narrower lugs or wider bracelet (not too wide!). I like the idea of the crystal caseback, but then that kinda of takes away from the tool-watch intention (IMHO). It's cool to be able to see the movement, but then again you're the only one who does.

Does the SubC crystal have an anti-reflective coating? I'm thinking it doesn't, BUT IT SHOULD! I have the 16610 and wish it did. It would make reading the date much easier.

snaggle · 2 February 2012, 07:29 AM

The crystal caseback would be a good idea if the movement actually looked nice... the thing is, on the sub, the movement has no aesthetic look to it, and not much is showed from just what is seen when the caseback is removed.. Rolex are known for not having nicely designed movements, unlike Patek Philippe for example..

GradyPhilpott · 2 February 2012, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melanotaenia

smaller lugs; the new lugs just don't look good to me; I also missed the cross-brushing on the lugs that the old models had (now it is all just brushed in the same direction)

I agree that this would be the better option than beefing up the bracelet more.

EchoBlueUK · 2 February 2012, 07:30 AM

Maybe slightly bigger 42mm perhaps and some less boxy lugs. But on the whole it's 95% perfect.

steubi1 · 2 February 2012, 07:32 AM

Yes, sure.

If it looked as sharp and sexy as the good old 16610....
then it would be the perfect watch!

Tom

Lion · 2 February 2012, 07:32 AM

Why not enjoy it for what it is.....an iconic Rolex dive watch!!!

petesjag · 2 February 2012, 07:36 AM

Pcl s on the lv would be fitting..otherwise im totally pleased with the design.

novan3 · 2 February 2012, 07:50 AM

Anti-reflective coating on both sides of crystal would perfect the 116610

kmleffler · 2 February 2012, 07:57 AM

A 42mm Sub would be great.

timlaw · 2 February 2012, 08:11 AM

stainless steel blue dial and bezel. tried on an omega planet ocean titanium liquid metal with blue dial and bezel last night - very nearly bought it - a very very good looking watch albeit same price as a sub c.

Z-Sub · 2 February 2012, 08:47 AM

thinner lugs and flatten the raised metal ring around the pearl.

mrbill2mrbill2 · 2 February 2012, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steubi1

Yes, sure.

If it looked as sharp and sexy as the good old 16610....
then it would be the perfect watch!

Tom

X2! Or a wider bracelet to produce the same "flow" from watch head to the bracelet as the 16610.

RRGHOST1 · 2 February 2012, 09:05 AM

I have a TT Blue SubC and its..........perfect !

HSG278 · 2 February 2012, 09:10 AM

No need to change perfection!

The GMT Master · 2 February 2012, 09:14 AM

A new movement. In my opinion, the 3135 is in need of a replacement - it's been a worthy and venerable workhorse, but it's beginning to look dated now. I'd love to see something with the ingenuity of the cal. 4160 from the YM II, and decoration to match that of the Prince (not to mention a display caseback). Rolex needs to remind the world just what it is capable of when it comes to movements

2 February 2012, 06:31 AM	#1
masterserg "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Real Name: Serg Location: US of A Watch: AP Posts: 7,437	Can you think of anything that would improve the Sub C? Just for kicks, can you think of changes to the Sub C that would make it even better? I look at mine from every angle and can't come up with anything substantial ... I might say chamfers, but then I don't think they would go well with the design ... or maybe a sapphire case back, but that's against its spirit ... maybe a fully gradated bezel ... If anything, I'd probably make the pearl flatter to make it less prone to wall related accidents, not that they are that common ... there is the DSSD clasp as well but that's overkill. Of course I am expecting a bunch of "get rid of the fat lugs" but I quite like them! I lied, there is ONE substantial change: the power reserve could be larger but I don't know enough about horlogerie to understand the movement changes involved and related impact on price. __________________ How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat????

2 February 2012, 06:32 AM	#2
SaddleSC "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Charles B Location: GMT -7 Watch: Hulk 116610LV Posts: 6,131	I agree with you. I feel like my 116610LV is as perfect a watch for me as has ever been produced. __________________ Hulk 116610LV + GMT II 126710 BLNR + Explorer 124270 + Air King 126900 + Submariner 16613LB

2 February 2012, 06:44 AM	#7
Explorertwo "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Tom Location: Lowlands Watch: White 'n Black Posts: 641	I love the subC , great, great watch! Nearly perfect. But if there is one thing i would change it would be the last two lines on the dial : superlative...etc. It would make the dial cleaner and even more beautifull IMHO Cheers! Last edited by Explorertwo; 2 February 2012 at 06:45 AM.. Reason: Typing error

2 February 2012, 06:56 AM	#9
Chipmunk "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Alvin Location: So Cal Watch: ROLEXES Posts: 5,390	Lower price? __________________ "A thing of beauty is a joy forever"............John Keats

2 February 2012, 06:59 AM	#10
superdog 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Real Name: Seth Location: nj Watch: Omega Posts: 24,834	the only change i would make is the cyclops date. absolutely love the watch tho. __________________ If happiness is a state of mind, why look anywhere else for it? IG: gsmotorclub IG: thesawcollection (Both mostly just car stuff)

2 February 2012, 06:33 AM	#3
tkerrmd "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Tom Location: In a race car! Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES Posts: 24,123	Its pretty darn good!!

2 February 2012, 06:34 AM	#4
ChristianN Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 229	Make the damn crown stand upright when the crown is screwed all the way in ;-). Apart from that, it's pretty great!

2 February 2012, 06:34 AM	#5
experimentjon "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Real Name: Jonathan Location: Honolulu Posts: 292	I love display casebacks and would like to know why Rolex doesn't do them. It'd just add one more nice thing to look at on their watches. And I think the fat lugs look good too.

2 February 2012, 06:36 AM	#6
mtrunner 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Gary Location: Bozeman, MT Watch: 126508 Paul Newman Posts: 7,835	I feel the SubC could use a tad thicker bracelet to go with the bigger lugs but that is my only request. I love it regardless but I do think this would make the watch even better.

2 February 2012, 06:50 AM	#8
WyoWatch "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Chad Location: USA Watch: 1675 GMT and Sub C Posts: 1,443	One minor thing: I would have kept the same case as the old ones but still have done the upgrades to bezel, dial and bracelet and hairspring. IMO that would be perfect. That said, I absolutely love my Sub C as is.

2 February 2012, 07:02 AM	#11
TTmax Banned Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Christophe Location: France Watch: DJ/Gmt2/IIc/E2/ToG Posts: 434	I would add a 4th hand that would do one turn every 24h, and replace the bezel with another one rotating both way and going from 1 to 24, to indicate when in the day we are. Eventually I would let the hour hand be independantly settable , to be able to indicate another hour, when I'm in travel. Then a PCL bracelet, and it would be perfect....

2 February 2012, 07:10 AM	#12
Dan2010 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: South Carolina Watch: Panerai 914 Posts: 6,540	No ceramic bezel. Should have kept the aluminum bezel.

2 February 2012, 07:14 AM	#13
Melanotaenia "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jonathan Location: NYC Watch: Explorers and Subs Posts: 620	smaller lugs; the new lugs just don't look good to me; I also missed the cross-brushing on the lugs that the old models had (now it is all just brushed in the same direction) __________________ 16570 -- 16600 -- 16610 -- 116610LV -- 216570 -- 116400

2 February 2012, 07:14 AM	#14
Gharddog03 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Genaro Location: Fresno Ca. Watch: R O L E X Posts: 4,466	Lower price, 42mm, and clear caseback.

2 February 2012, 07:16 AM	#15
capote "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Daniel Location: Sweden Watch: 16570 Posts: 7,315	Aluminum bezel, no engraved rehaut and classic case. Its not too much to ask, is it? A perfect dive watch

2 February 2012, 07:23 AM	#16
Slinkey Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Tony Location: Shawnee, KS Watch: Sub Date M 16610 Posts: 104	Either narrower lugs or wider bracelet (not too wide!). I like the idea of the crystal caseback, but then that kinda of takes away from the tool-watch intention (IMHO). It's cool to be able to see the movement, but then again you're the only one who does. Does the SubC crystal have an anti-reflective coating? I'm thinking it doesn't, BUT IT SHOULD! I have the 16610 and wish it did. It would make reading the date much easier.

2 February 2012, 07:29 AM	#17
snaggle Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Real Name: Paul Location: Florida Watch: SubC, DJII, Omegas Posts: 768	The crystal caseback would be a good idea if the movement actually looked nice... the thing is, on the sub, the movement has no aesthetic look to it, and not much is showed from just what is seen when the caseback is removed.. Rolex are known for not having nicely designed movements, unlike Patek Philippe for example..

2 February 2012, 07:30 AM	#19
EchoBlueUK "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,543	Maybe slightly bigger 42mm perhaps and some less boxy lugs. But on the whole it's 95% perfect.

2 February 2012, 07:32 AM	#20
steubi1 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Real Name: Tom Location: Switzerland Watch: too many Posts: 1,150	Yes, sure. If it looked as sharp and sexy as the good old 16610.... then it would be the perfect watch! Tom

2 February 2012, 07:32 AM	#21
Lion "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Leo Location: Midwest Watch: GMT-II 16710 PEPSI Posts: 21,461	Why not enjoy it for what it is.....an iconic Rolex dive watch!!! __________________ SS GMT-II 16710 PEPSI(Z-serial#) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND BOYS IS THE PRICE OF THE TOYS!!! MontBlanc Meisterstuck Doue Silver Barley MontBlanc Meisterstuck Solitaire Doue Signum Proud Card Carrying Member of the Curmudgeons.....Yikes!!!

2 February 2012, 07:36 AM	#22
petesjag "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: netherlands Posts: 2,177	Pcl s on the lv would be fitting..otherwise im totally pleased with the design.

2 February 2012, 07:50 AM	#23
novan3 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Luck Location: Toronto Watch: yourself Posts: 477	Anti-reflective coating on both sides of crystal would perfect the 116610

2 February 2012, 07:57 AM	#24
kmleffler "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Ken Location: New York, NY Watch: GS SD GMT Posts: 389	A 42mm Sub would be great.

2 February 2012, 08:11 AM	#25
timlaw "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: Tim Location: Worcestershire,UK Watch: Coke 16710 Posts: 894	stainless steel blue dial and bezel. tried on an omega planet ocean titanium liquid metal with blue dial and bezel last night - very nearly bought it - a very very good looking watch albeit same price as a sub c. __________________ Tim. 124060 Submariner, 16710 Coke, 16570 Black dial, Datejust 41 Wimbledon dial, Tudor Black Bay GMT, Tudor Black Bay 58 Blue, Tudor Black Bay 58 925, Tudor Prince Date Chronograph (panda dial)

2 February 2012, 08:47 AM	#26
Z-Sub 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: So Cal, USA Watch: Not a ONEWatch Man Posts: 7,383	thinner lugs and flatten the raised metal ring around the pearl. __________________ SS Submariner Date "Z" SS SeaDweller "D" SS Submariner "Random" TT Blue Submariner "P" SS GMT-Master ll "M", Pepsi Pam 311, 524, 297

2 February 2012, 09:05 AM	#28
RRGHOST1 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: luke standing Location: england Watch: Rolex TT SubC Blue Posts: 3,997	I have a TT Blue SubC and its..........perfect !

2 February 2012, 09:10 AM	#29
HSG278 Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Chicago, IL Watch: 116610LN Posts: 30	No need to change perfection!

2 February 2012, 09:14 AM	#30
The GMT Master "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Chris Location: England Posts: 8,150	A new movement. In my opinion, the 3135 is in need of a replacement - it's been a worthy and venerable workhorse, but it's beginning to look dated now. I'd love to see something with the ingenuity of the cal. 4160 from the YM II, and decoration to match that of the Prince (not to mention a display caseback). Rolex needs to remind the world just what it is capable of when it comes to movements

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