Rolex Submariner No date 14060m?

[EmilPDK]

Hey guys!

I've been looking around everywhere for information regarding the Rolex Submariner no date ref. 14060m, and as of now, I've found out that this specific reference included the 2-liner and the 4-liner.

The thing I can't find information about is what changed from the 2-liner to the 4 liner, what year did they introduce the 4-liner, and when did the 14060m 4-liner get replaced with the new ceramic one?

Hopefully there is a few experts that can help me out!

[Alpino]

.

There's no technical difference between 2 lines and 4 lines.

From an aesthetic standpoint the différences are the (obvious) 4 lines, and the engraved rehaut.

From a technical standpoint, the 4 lines includes a caliber 3130 that have been submitted to the COSC control before being installed in the Watch. So the 4 lines is officially certified when the 2 lines isn't. It's important to note that both versions use the exact same caliber 3130 ...

The change occured in 2007 and lasted until 2012 when 114060 was introduced.

[ec51]

From watchuseek user 'Blue Lantern' - he sums it up perfectly:

1. Luminova dials started with the U series (1998). Earlier U-series dials are tritium and marked T < 25. Later U-series dials are luminova and marked Swiss. Then comes the A series (1999), which are exclusively luminova. Most A-series say Swiss, though I've seen one or two A-series that say Swiss Made. Then comes the P series (2000), which are luminova and all say Swiss Made.

2. The 3130 movement started with the P series. It's pretty obvious if a Sub has it--the model number between the lugs will be 14060M instead of 14060.

3. The 4-line (aka COSC) 14060m started at the end of the Z-series (2006). Earlier Z-series Subs are the last of the 2-line dials. Later Z-series Subs are COSC certified, giving you the 4-line dial. Then comes the M-series, all of which are COSC.

Hope that helps. I included dates here and there because they make it read a little more clear to me.

Edit: Thought it'd be helpful to add a little chart I made for myself during a nerdy moment. Of course, dates are estimates.

E 1990 (14060 introduced with 3000 movement, tritium dial marked Swiss T<25)
X 1991
N 1992
S 1993
W 1994-1995
T 1996
U 1997-1998 (luminova dial introduced with dial marked Swiss)
A 1999
P 2000 (14060M introduced with 3130 movement, luminova dial marked Swiss Made)
K 2001
Y 2002
F 2003-2004
D 2005
Z 2006 (COSC 4-line dial introduced)
M 2007
V 2008-2009
G 2010

-------------------

Next came the random serials -- and legend has it, the last batch have the blue parachrom.

[EmilPDK]

Thank you - I appreciate that answer! Was just what I was looking for. Both of you :)

[azguy]

what would a thread be without a pic

Unserviced, unpolished K serial

[brucewayne1959]

And this is why you come on the forums! Brilliant, both you guys! Thanks for the info!

[Gerry62]

Originally Posted by ec51

From watchuseek user 'Blue Lantern' - he sums it up perfectly:

1. Luminova dials started with the U series (1998). Earlier U-series dials are tritium and marked T < 25. Later U-series dials are luminova and marked Swiss. Then comes the A series (1999), which are exclusively luminova. Most A-series say Swiss, though I've seen one or two A-series that say Swiss Made. Then comes the P series (2000), which are luminova and all say Swiss Made.

2. The 3130 movement started with the P series. It's pretty obvious if a Sub has it--the model number between the lugs will be 14060M instead of 14060.

3. The 4-line (aka COSC) 14060m started at the end of the Z-series (2006). Earlier Z-series Subs are the last of the 2-line dials. Later Z-series Subs are COSC certified, giving you the 4-line dial. Then comes the M-series, all of which are COSC.

Hope that helps. I included dates here and there because they make it read a little more clear to me.

Edit: Thought it'd be helpful to add a little chart I made for myself during a nerdy moment. Of course, dates are estimates.

E 1990 (14060 introduced with 3000 movement, tritium dial marked Swiss T<25)
X 1991
N 1992
S 1993
W 1994-1995
T 1996
U 1997-1998 (luminova dial introduced with dial marked Swiss)
A 1999
P 2000 (14060M introduced with 3130 movement, luminova dial marked Swiss Made)
K 2001
Y 2002
F 2003-2004
D 2005
Z 2006 (COSC 4-line dial introduced)
M 2007
V 2008-2009
G 2010

-------------------

Next came the random serials -- and legend has it, the last batch have the blue parachrom.

excellent

[rollee1]

Helpful references.
Thank you

[EmilPDK]

I currently own a 116610LN however I am gravitating more and more towards the older subs, with no date. Can't decide whether I like the 2-lines og 4-lines better - both are beautiful watches nonetheless :)

[997.2]

Awesome
Info. My 2 liner is my favorite watch. You won't regret it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cop414]

And a pic of a G serial 4 line...

[EmilPDK]

Point proven with the two pictures above: "Both are beautiful watches nonetheless!"

My only concern is the bracelet. My brother owns a GMT Master II 16710 and there is a huge difference in the never and older bracelets. Is it something that I should worry about? Or is it just a part of the beauty.

[evlkoala]

I have the year 2000 P Serial 14060 (3000),but it's not 14060M (3130). It must be the last batch before they changed to 14060M mid 2000 ?

[evlkoala]

Originally Posted by 997.2

Awesome
Info. My 2 liner is my favorite watch. You won't regret it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, I traded in my Sub Date 4 lines to 2 liner.

[Foxglove]

I was wondering about this too - thanks for solving it for us!

cheers
ross

[Mishon]

It is a great watch indeed. Here is my 2 liner, Z series from 2006.

[EmilPDK]

Beautiful!

Another thing: since the 14060m series F was produced in two years (2003-04), is it considered less rare and therefore less valuable?

[Alpino]

Originally Posted by EmilPDK

Beautiful!

Another thing: since the 14060m series F was produced in two years (2003-04), is it considered less rare and therefore less valuable?

Each letter serie was 999.999 watches, from which a (probably) constant percentage were 14060M.

It's not because Rolex needed 2 years instead of 1 to sell a full letter serie of watches, that's those particular watches are less (or more) valuable.

What make you think this way ?

[EmilPDK]

Originally Posted by Alpino

Each letter serie was 999.999 watches, from which a (probably) constant percentage were 14060M.

It's not because Rolex needed 2 years instead of 1 to sell a full letter serie of watches, that's those particular watches are less (or more) valuable.

What make you think this way ?

I don't know actually - that makes a lot more sense. Thank you

[ec51]

Originally Posted by EmilPDK

Point proven with the two pictures above: "Both are beautiful watches nonetheless!"

My only concern is the bracelet. My brother owns a GMT Master II 16710 and there is a huge difference in the never and older bracelets. Is it something that I should worry about? Or is it just a part of the beauty.

I love the bracelet on my 14060M.

Don't let all the internet hype about the new bracelets freak you out. Yes, the glidelock is a great thing. But there is nothing wrong with the older bracelets.

Many who never wore these older pieces for more than 2 minutes while trying them on at an AD, conclude that because they feel lighter and "insignificant" -- this somehow means they are cheap and fragile. ....which is hardly the case...

[997.2]

No complaints on the bracelet here. In fact I love how eeasy it is to change out because of the lug holes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EmilPDK]

http://imgur.com/vikDe11 Updating the thread: Look what just arrived

[travisb]

Originally Posted by EmilPDK

Updating the thread: Look what just arrived

Can't see the pic! Congrats though!

[EmilPDK]

Originally Posted by travisb

Can't see the pic! Congrats though!

I've changed it to a link now :) and thanks!

[Gerry62]

U serial - dial SWISS - Cal 3000