ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

sappie66 · 7 April 2012, 12:16 PM

I am not very familiar with this version of the venerable no-date. What years were they produced? Is it more rare than the COSC version? Do WIS, for one reason or another, consider it to be more desirable or collectable than the COSC version? Do they command a higher price than the COSC version or regular 16610 date sub?

Thanks.

gwalker · 7 April 2012, 12:23 PM

No. Some purests like them more but not really reflected in price.

padi56 · 7 April 2012, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sappie66

I am not very familiar with this version of the venerable no-date. What years were they produced? Is it more rare than the COSC version? Do WIS, for one reason or another, consider it to be more desirable or collectable than the COSC version? Do they command a higher price than the COSC version or regular 16610 date sub?

Thanks.

I would say no modern day Rolex should be thought of as collectible far too many around.And the only difference between any 14060 or 14060m since its introduction with the cal 3000 in 1990 is around 2001 they modded the movement into the 3130 and later around 2008 they were sent for COSC testing so a few more fonts on the dial and thats it.But before models like the Explorer that had exactly the same cal 3000 and cal 3130 were tested at COSC but same movement in the sub were not.Very much back in time like the S.Steel 6263/5 Daytona they were not tested but the all gold ones were but exactly the same movements in both.

travisb · 7 April 2012, 08:31 PM

Some collectors prefer the original look of the 2 line while others (myself included) like the cosc 4 line.

mjclark32 · 7 April 2012, 10:17 PM

Nope, just preference. Get whatever you prefer.

HORNBLOWER · 7 April 2012, 10:25 PM

Two lines for me, keep it simple.

FNFZ4 · 7 April 2012, 11:25 PM

Two liner or the non cosc sub is the classic look.

Like what padi said, from 1990 to 2001 these used the cal 3000 movement. So from 1990 to 2000 they have the model number 14060.

From 2001 to 2005 were the 2 line 14060M using a modified movement cal 3130.

From 2006 to present cosc certified first appeared on later z serials

This is my observation of the model.

Higham5 · 8 April 2012, 04:13 AM

I s it reasonable to expect a pb spring on a random serial no 14060M?

sappie66 · 8 April 2012, 09:29 AM

Thanks for the responses.

LeOnfromtheblock · 8 April 2012, 11:39 AM

I have the 14060M non COSC. The cleaner 2 lined dial with the added bonus of the modified movement.

Alcan · 8 April 2012, 11:43 AM

I waited for the right -T<25 watch in the right condition at the right price. Clean and simple, the quintessential Rolex:

7 April 2012, 12:16 PM	#1
sappie66 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Vancouver Posts: 87	No date, non-COSC sub I am not very familiar with this version of the venerable no-date. What years were they produced? Is it more rare than the COSC version? Do WIS, for one reason or another, consider it to be more desirable or collectable than the COSC version? Do they command a higher price than the COSC version or regular 16610 date sub? Thanks.

7 April 2012, 08:31 PM	#4
travisb 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Travis Location: FL / NYC Watch: Yes.. Posts: 33,489	Neither is more "rare" Some collectors prefer the original look of the 2 line while others (myself included) like the cosc 4 line.

7 April 2012, 10:17 PM	#5
mjclark32 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: MJC Location: PHL USA Watch: IWC, Rolex, AP Posts: 29,232	Nope, just preference. Get whatever you prefer. __________________

7 April 2012, 11:25 PM	#7
FNFZ4 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Real Name: Alfred Location: DC Metro Watch: None Posts: 29,368	Two liner or the non cosc sub is the classic look. Like what padi said, from 1990 to 2001 these used the cal 3000 movement. So from 1990 to 2000 they have the model number 14060. From 2001 to 2005 were the 2 line 14060M using a modified movement cal 3130. From 2006 to present cosc certified first appeared on later z serials This is my observation of the model. __________________ NEED PC HELP? ASK HERE! Watches: Patek 5205G \| Patek 5167A \| 16613 Serti \| 116718 Green \| 216570 Black \| 16700 Pepsi Wish list: Patek 5726/1 \| AP RG Ceramic \| Patek 5712 \| Patek 5130

8 April 2012, 04:13 AM	#8
Higham5 Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Lancashire Watch: 14060m Posts: 100	Liner preference I s it reasonable to expect a pb spring on a random serial no 14060M?

7 April 2012, 12:23 PM	#2
gwalker "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Real Name: Gunter Location: AL/NJ Watch: DSSD; 116610LN Posts: 5,509	No. Some purests like them more but not really reflected in price.

7 April 2012, 10:25 PM	#6
HORNBLOWER "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Real Name: Ben Location: Ireland Watch: 1 OR 2 Posts: 2,640	Two lines for me, keep it simple.

8 April 2012, 09:29 AM	#9
sappie66 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Vancouver Posts: 87	Thanks for the responses.

8 April 2012, 11:39 AM	#10
LeOnfromtheblock "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Australia Posts: 127	I have the 14060M non COSC. The cleaner 2 lined dial with the added bonus of the modified movement.

8 April 2012, 11:43 AM	#11
Alcan 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Al Location: Way Up North Watch: your P's & Q's Posts: 10,473	I waited for the right -T<25 watch in the right condition at the right price. Clean and simple, the quintessential Rolex: Attached Images __________________ Member #1,315 I don't want to get technical, but according to chemistry alcohol IS a solution!

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