ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
16 February 2008, 06:20 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Canada
Watch: Tritium 14060
Posts: 102
|
Which Submariner?
Hey everyone,
I've been a mechanical watch enthusiast for a few years but am a relative newcomer to the world of Rolex. I've owned a 1953 Eaton's 1/4 Century Club for almost a year but it gets little wrist time because I prefer pilots' and divers' watches. I just got a long-awaited promotion at work and the attendant raise and am thinking it may soon be time to splash out on a Submariner, my grail watch. If I do get one it will be pre-owned. I am interested in opinions regarding the various flavours of Sub. I love vintage watches so am inclined towards a nice 5513 or similar no-date Sub with acrylic crystal. However I also like the idea of having a COSC chronometer and therefore the date model with COSC wording on the dial has an appeal. I am definitely NOT about the bling so no two-tone or LV for me. Basic black and stainless all the way. So I'm interested in opinions about the various models, their merits and drawbacks, and of course photos of members' own watches. I've really enjoyed the few weeks I've been on the Forums, you guys are all great and I'm looking forward to some interesting Sub discussions. Thanks! d. |
16 February 2008, 06:29 AM | #2 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Watch: 126600, 116500LN
Posts: 12,849
|
I have a 16613 and my next purchase will be a 14060, I like the non-date non-COSC model. It's the same movement as the COSC version so whether its certified or not you have one of the very best watches around. I prefer the clean look of the no date, no COSC it's a simple, clean, minimalist look that really says classic to me. a 5513 is going to set you back some coin but I understand your desire. The 14060 maybe away to get the same sort of esthetic without as much of dent in your wallet
|
16 February 2008, 08:43 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Real Name: Mark
Location: U.K.
Watch: Too Many
Posts: 2,097
|
Hi,
I have a 5513 and love it, but I also understand you desire for the COSC rating as I like the 5512, not that it means much in real terms as the non-COSC keeps just as good time if set up correctly. It all depends on whether you are planning to wear your watch daily or not and your budget, but if you go for a vintage date model to wear regularly I'd go 16800 or 168000 (if you can find one) as they are both transitional models, so are short lived (the 168000 for only 9 months), they have sapphire crystals to stop the scratches from everyday wear and they are on the up IMO. Whatever Sub you go for it is not only a Rolex classic, but a design classic |
16 February 2008, 09:02 AM | #4 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Miguel Cornejo
Location: El Paso Tx
Watch: 116500LN
Posts: 488
|
Quote:
And a new Datless Sub will cost you $4,500 which is lees than the vintage Sub... IMHO |
|
16 February 2008, 10:46 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Boy, I certainly share your feeling about vintage Rolex. As to which direction (and reference) to go...I can only give you my opinions based on my experience and preferences.
I think each has it's advantages and disadvantages; Perhaps no other vintage diver speaks to the history of the Rolex tool watch as does the 5513. Certainly their are others that have made their mark and have found favor with the collector, but the plain 5513 speaks to the minimalist tradition that is the "tool watch". Adorned with a simple plain matt dial with no white gold surrounds and no date, the 5513 gives everything one needs and nothing you don't. Certainly not the rarest watch Rolex ever made, it is however one that is very desirable to the enthusiast and collector alike. Some feel any collection of diver's watches is incomplete without a 5513 in the mix. My experience has been that properly serviced and cared for the 5513 (indeed most vintage pieces) are fully capable of performing as they were originally intended. Of course as these pieces were adorned with tritium markers any luminosity is a shadow of it's former self if available at all. As with a lot of vintage Rolex pieces factory support is a question mark. Rolex, it seems, is more and more turning it's back on the various watches that made the company what it is today. (Certainly the subject of another thread). That said, I would not let that stop me if a vintage diver was what I wanted. There are many good people that can service the watch and parts are out there. The real concerns with vintage are condition and pricing. Nice examples exist, but pricing reflects the fact these are finite. Expect to pay for a nice example, but temper the cost with pride of owning something the likes of which we will never see again. If contemporary becomes the watch of your choosing there are a couple examples to consider. The Submariner, either COSC or non-COSC is certainly a worthy successor to the vintage ND and has a movement that is rugged, accurate, and will never cause a servicing problem. That the watch will provide luminosity is certainly a consideration should the watch be used in less that ideal conditions. Many prefer the "clean" look of non-cyclops crystal. Of course the most popular diver in the Rolex inventory at present is the venerable 16610. A classic piece. It's an old reference, even by Rolex standards, but with it's great 3135 movement has proven itself in truly awefull conditions and still looks good when dressed to the nines. I think a couple other references need to be mentioned to have the full picture--the 1680 and it's successor the 16800. Both, in there day were the best Rolex had to offer and many (me included) feel they represent true milestones in the Rolex diving heritage. The 1680, with it's tough as nails 1675 movement was the first diver to introduce a date feature and the 16800 the first to introduce a quick-set date feature among other things. As with most collectables, nice examples exist, but pricing reflects their desirability. Good luck with the quest, and I'm sure which ever wins the day will exactly the one you want. Pics of my examples for comparison, 5513--MK III maxi, The wonderful acrylic crystal, 14060M-COSC, Lume 16610, My favorite--the 1680 WHITE, And in RED, No crystal look like this! The matt 16800--Transitional, |
16 February 2008, 08:51 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Real Name: Paul
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 14,578
|
It sounds as though a 5513 is the order of the day.
Best to go for a very nice example with all the bits and bobs. May cost $8k plus though.
__________________
..33 |
16 February 2008, 09:00 AM | #7 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,514
|
If your hearts desire is a 5513, then nothing else will ever fill that need...
Plan for it.....go for it..
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
16 February 2008, 10:53 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Real Name: gha
Location: Canada
Watch: Rolex DateJust
Posts: 664
|
Man....those beauties look brand new & amazing.......great heritage..gha
|
16 February 2008, 08:20 PM | #9 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,436
|
Quote:
As suggested, however, you'd get an equally precise Rolex with a 5513. If you want to go "semi-vintage", I'd suggest you go for the Sub 14060M with TRITIUM dial. As "Padi56" has stated, this model will become very collectable in near future, and you get the advantage of the sapphire crystal.
__________________
With kind regards, Bo LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw... |
|
16 February 2008, 10:15 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,436
|
I meant the Sub 14060.
__________________
With kind regards, Bo LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw... |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.