Sub Dilemma

[captkevin]

Currently own a 16610 and 16613. I'm thinking of upgrading my 16610 to the Sub c, which I know I will be happy with. My worry is that I won't like my 16613 anymore if I do that because of the upgraded bracelet and clasp. I would upgrade both, but I really don't like the new blue. So is there anyone out there that has the SS Sub C and have the old bluesy and still like it and wear it?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by captkevin

Currently own a 16610 and 16613. I'm thinking of upgrading my 16610 to the Sub c, which I know I will be happy with. My worry is that I won't like my 16613 anymore if I do that because of the upgraded bracelet and clasp. I would upgrade both, but I really don't like the new blue. So is there anyone out there that has the SS Sub C and have the old bluesy and still like it and wear it?

Seems to be high price to pay for just a clasp and ceramic insert as basically its the same watch.Now if you could just source a clasp they will retro fit but the clasp alone is around a £1000 in S.steel which IMHO is crazy money.

[Passionata]

Like both clasps equally


Best
George

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[captkevin]

wow that's way too much for a clasp

[crew]

Originally Posted by captkevin

wow that's way too much for a clasp

x2

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by padi56

Seems to be high price to pay for just a clasp and ceramic insert as basically its the same watch.Now if you could just source a clasp they will retro fit but the clasp alone is around a £1000 in S.steel which IMHO is crazy money.

Hit the nail on the head. The new Sub retails at £5700, which I think is far too much for a half hearted update. The clasp is best thing about the watch, and is a reasonable update on the previous Sub - the only problem is that the rest of the market has moved on so much, you have to question why you would have the Sub at all. There are superior watches out there at price points above and below the Sub now. If Rolex stick with their product lifecycle as well, we're going to be stuck with it for another 20 years

To the OP, if you want to get yourself another Sub, I would recommend going vintage, and pick up an example of the Sub at its very best. The new Sub is a bit like Elvis in his Vegas days, a bit chubby and past his prime - wouldn't you prefer to see Elvis in his heyday?

Chris

[KBM]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Hit the nail on the head. The new Sub retails at £5700, which I think is far too much for a half hearted update. The clasp is best thing about the watch, and is a reasonable update on the previous Sub - the only problem is that the rest of the market has moved on so much, you have to question why you would have the Sub at all. There are superior watches out there at price points above and below the Sub now. If Rolex stick with their product lifecycle as well, we're going to be stuck with it for another 20 years

To the OP, if you want to get yourself another Sub, I would recommend going vintage, and pick up an example of the Sub at its very best. The new Sub is a bit like Elvis in his Vegas days, a bit chubby and past his prime - wouldn't you prefer to see Elvis in his heyday?

Chris

Chris, I have seen you making this statement with a direct comparison to the PO 8500. Is there any other watch below the retail price of the sub that you consider to be currently a better watch?

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by kauebm

Chris, I have seen you making this statement with a direct comparison to the PO 8500. Is there any other watch below the retail price of the sub that you consider to be currently a better watch?

This might be slightly controversial, but I would say the Tudor Pelagos would be a worthy competitor now

[KBM]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

This might be slightly controversial, but I would say the Tudor Pelagos would be a worthy competitor now

On case materials and construction alone? Because even if you consider the 3135 to be a tired movement, I thought the Pelagos used a 2824? Workhorse as it may be, wouldn't it be as tired as the 3135, and even a bit less regarded for?

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by kauebm

On case materials and construction alone? Because even if you consider the 3135 to be a tired movement, I thought the Pelagos used a 2824? Workhorse as it may be, wouldn't it be as tired as the 3135, and even a bit less regarded for?

Correct, but there is a lot more innovation going on with the design of the Pelagos, it's an extremely well thought out tool watch. As a dive watch, it knocks the socks off the Sub. I think another issue I have with the Sub is that it is no longer a tool watch that can be worn as jewellery, it's a piece of jewellery that shouldn't really be used as a tool.

If you look at the Pelagos, it's all about matte, low shine materials, and high contrast on the dial. The markers are blindingly white, and the fact the bezel is fully luminous as well helps. The clasp is nothing short of genius, and, in my opinion, trumps Glidelock, which is my favourite Rolex clasp right now. The Pelagos is the watch the Sub should be, although the movement would undoubtedly be of a higher grade if it had a Rolex badge on the dial. Whoever is designing watches right now for Tudor is doing an extremely good job

[Watchonisto]

Originally Posted by captkevin

wow that's way too much for a clasp

x3

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by r-l-x

x3

x4

[Speed]

Wise beyond your years Chris!!!

[gwalker]

I personally think the upgrades are worth it. I don't have a 16613 but I used to wear one. I think if you got a SubC you would still wear the bluesy for dressier occasions. I think after you try the new sub the old subs clasp will feel inferior but I don't think you would stop wearing it.

[WatchingTime]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Correct, but there is a lot more innovation going on with the design of the Pelagos, it's an extremely well thought out tool watch. As a dive watch, it knocks the socks off the Sub. I think another issue I have with the Sub is that it is no longer a tool watch that can be worn as jewellery, it's a piece of jewellery that shouldn't really be used as a tool.

If you look at the Pelagos, it's all about matte, low shine materials, and high contrast on the dial. The markers are blindingly white, and the fact the bezel is fully luminous as well helps. The clasp is nothing short of genius, and, in my opinion, trumps Glidelock, which is my favourite Rolex clasp right now. The Pelagos is the watch the Sub should be, although the movement would undoubtedly be of a higher grade if it had a Rolex badge on the dial. Whoever is designing watches right now for Tudor is doing an extremely good job

+1 I totally agree w/ Chris (except I know a lot LESS about watches than him!). The Sub is long in the tooth, received a half hearted update and is lagging behind other, arguably better watches which cost $4000 less.

If I were to have my wish for a dive watch, I would take the Tudor Pelagos, add an Omega 8500 movement, add a cyclops, and "wa-la".. the most innovative, up to date, functional dive watch in existence. I would also trade out the titanium band on the Pelagos for a SS band, since the titanium has a duller finish (and I have heard actually scratches easier). Since this watch really does not exist as we know it now, then I would still take a Pelagos over the latest Sub.

(BTW - Because I am not in love with any of the available dive watches on the market, and since each one is lacking in one area or another, I have opted to purchase the 216570 EXP II 42mm, with its upgraded movement and maxi dial/case).

Good luck to you!

[superdog]

Personally, I prefer the aesthetics of the older watches. But the upgrades of the new style are far superior. I would not go from one to the other. New or old in my opinion, but not both.

[KBM]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Correct, but there is a lot more innovation going on with the design of the Pelagos, it's an extremely well thought out tool watch. As a dive watch, it knocks the socks off the Sub. I think another issue I have with the Sub is that it is no longer a tool watch that can be worn as jewellery, it's a piece of jewellery that shouldn't really be used as a tool.

If you look at the Pelagos, it's all about matte, low shine materials, and high contrast on the dial. The markers are blindingly white, and the fact the bezel is fully luminous as well helps. The clasp is nothing short of genius, and, in my opinion, trumps Glidelock, which is my favourite Rolex clasp right now. The Pelagos is the watch the Sub should be, although the movement would undoubtedly be of a higher grade if it had a Rolex badge on the dial. Whoever is designing watches right now for Tudor is doing an extremely good job

You brought up some very good points, Chris. I agree that the Sub's latest upgrades were more aimed at making it more jewelry-like than innovative (save for the glidelock). The Pelagos, on another hand, is a very fresh design, with a nod to Tudor's heritage, which is very nice. I just think they overpriced it, at 5k.