ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

S320 · 26 January 2009, 06:15 AM

So this is my second post!

I was looking around to get some info from people who actually own LV or both GMT and LV to shed some light: Is it worth getting a legendary Sub 50th?

My current GMTII is black bezel and an amazing watch that I wear everyday. But I wanted to try something new. I always thought Sub was somehow more superior than GMT. Is it true?

DSJ · 26 January 2009, 06:52 AM

"Superior" is truly subjective. If you dive a lot and deeply value the thicker caseback and Triplock crown, then yes, the Submariner is superior in those regards. If you value the ability to track a second time zone, then the GMT is superior.

gettocard · 26 January 2009, 06:56 AM

To me yes. The Sub feels a bit tougher than the GMT,wich I personally never liked much.
Of course I'm biased,I recently made it to become an LV owner and I love the watch.
But even without the LV thing,I would still choose a "regular" 16610 Sub over a GMT.

Now,if you still like the GMT's style,why don't you consider a GMT II C ? That's the GMT I like,and you would get the maxi dial anyway.

kcmo · 26 January 2009, 06:59 AM

I agree with David. These watches really serve different purposes and are equally incredible in their own right. Ideally, it would be great to own both!

WatchSmith · 26 January 2009, 07:05 AM

I've been a GMT guy for 30 years. Subs are great, but the GMT is my personal Rolex favorite. If you prefer the sub then go for it, but I can't imagine myself ever swapping my GMT for one. If I could own both, sure, but if I can only own one, the GMT's the one for me.

As the other poster said, consider the GMT IIc. Now there's a beauty!

Timber Loftis · 26 January 2009, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triplock

I've been a GMT guy for 30 years. Subs are great, but the GMT is my personal Rolex favorite. If you prefer the sub then go for it, but I can't imagine myself ever swapping my GMT for one. If I could own both, sure, but if I can only own one, the GMT's the one for me.

As the other poster said, consider the GMT IIc. Now there's a beauty!

Well said, and my sentiments exactly. There's a long list of Rolex's I would like to own before ever owning a Sub. It's personal preference.

mike · 26 January 2009, 07:11 AM

More of a lateral move I'd say from a "flier" to a "diver". Each reference has it's strong points.

The multi-timezone capability of the GMT is perfect if you travel or have need of tracking another zone. The maxi-dial of the LV is nice IMO and the ability to substitute a black insert gives a measure of versatility.

Both use the same base movement so that's a wash. As stated, togehter they make a great pair.

landroverking · 26 January 2009, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S320

So this is my second post!

I was looking around to get some info from people who actually own LV or both GMT and LV to shed some light: Is it worth getting a legendary Sub 50th?

My current GMTII is black bezel and an amazing watch that I wear everyday. But I wanted to try something new. I always thought Sub was somehow more superior than GMT. Is it true?

Superior NO, Different, YES... (Two different missions) now in the long run if you are looking for increased value I would guess the LV will be worth more in the long run. With both the GMT and Sub models changing both most likely will increase at some point in value...but the LV is a part of Rolex history. Hope that helps.

jay

rajurama · 26 January 2009, 07:19 AM

GMT 2C is a wiser move! or wait for the new sub ceramic.

AIKO · 26 January 2009, 07:58 AM

Yup, different animals. One not better than the other. My preference is for the Sub LV though.

Tools · 26 January 2009, 08:05 AM

You've got it backwards.........

The Sub is the basic knock-around watch...rugged, dependable.... but it doesn't really do anything but tell the time using the same movement found in a half dozen other models.... Oh sure, it will do that in deeper water.... but who goes that deep..hardly anybody..

The GMT is much more refined and sophisticated...a world traveler with a unique movement. It too tells the time and the date, but it can also keep track of your home time while you travel around the world, and you can jump hours all day long without ever interrupting the time-keeping.....

Plus, if you want a different look, you can change the bezel....

Yes, I would say that changing out for the common Sub is a step backwards...not an up-grade.......

Art 1 · 26 January 2009, 08:16 AM

No.

chenx15 · 26 January 2009, 08:17 AM

keep the gmt and buy the sub. you'll be much happier

charliec · 26 January 2009, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tools

You've got it backwards.........

The Sub is the basic knock-around watch...rugged, dependable.... but it doesn't really do anything but tell the time using the same movement found in a half dozen other models.... Oh sure, it will do that in deeper water.... but who goes that deep..hardly anybody..

The GMT is much more refined and sophisticated...a world traveler with a unique movement. It too tells the time and the date, but it can also keep track of your home time while you travel around the world, and you can jump hours all day long without ever interrupting the time-keeping.....

Plus, if you want a different look, you can change the bezel....

Yes, I would say that changing out for the common Sub is a step backwards...not an up-grade.......

x2

Save some money and buy Pepsi and Coke inserts first !!! This will give you a whole new perspective of the GMT II.

BillA · 26 January 2009, 08:21 AM

Agree with Tools
Have you thought about buying a Pepsi bezel for a look change.
I owned a few Subs, liked them, but when I put the GMT II Pepsi on, it was lighter and felt better to me.

AIKO · 26 January 2009, 08:31 AM

You can keep the GMT and pick up different bezels. Then, you can buy the Sub LV and add a black bezel. Between the two watches, you could have 5 totally different looks.

How many GMT II owners swim in the ocean or pool with your watches on?

WatchSmith · 26 January 2009, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AIKO

How many GMT II owners swim in the ocean or pool with your watches on?

I've never hesitated to take my GMT snorkeling in the ocean or swimming in the pool. It can certainly take a lot more than my swimming activities.

WatchTimes · 26 January 2009, 08:55 AM

Both great watches if you aren't a diver get the GMT
I think its also a bit more comfortable....

Andad · 26 January 2009, 09:09 AM

I also agree with Larry but:

I do prefer the triplock on my Rolex watches compared to the twinlock.

I like my 'M' LV with the maxi dial, green bezel and Rolex rehaute but I also enjoy wearing my 'M' Pepsi with the clear caseback so I can look at the new, improved, better, thicker, de-coupling, PBS, 3186 movement Larry.

IMO, these two watches are completely different.

HAPPY AUSTRALIA DAY

kokovovoru · 26 January 2009, 09:23 AM

I'd say it's more of a new acquisition than an upgrade literally. GMT IIc is more of an upgrade.

mike · 26 January 2009, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triplock

I've never hesitated to take my GMT snorkeling in the ocean or swimming in the pool. It can certainly take a lot more than my swimming activities.

Absolutely.

All mine have been in the water at one time or another.

cocopeep · 26 January 2009, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triplock

I've been a GMT guy for 30 years. Subs are great, but the GMT is my personal Rolex favorite. If you prefer the sub then go for it, but I can't imagine myself ever swapping my GMT for one. If I could own both, sure, but if I can only own one, the GMT's the one for me.

As the other poster said, consider the GMT IIc. Now there's a beauty!

Agreed

Golfster · 26 January 2009, 12:36 PM

One sees upgrade, one sees different, one sees change...many see the end result, they all tell time to COSC standards. A minute is a minute, clicked off on all rolex movements. Of those you proposed on your earlier post, I would say they are two different watches but both nice. The sub is heavier, the GMT feels slimmer, they both feel great. Negligible differences in the grand scheme. Pick what you love.

rijowysock · 26 January 2009, 01:11 PM

i prefer a GMT hand over a green bezel.

springer · 26 January 2009, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSJ

"Superior" is truly subjective. If you dive a lot and deeply value the thicker caseback and Triplock crown, then yes, the Submariner is superior in those regards. If you value the ability to track a second time zone, then the GMT is superior.

How about the ability to track two additional time zones, plus the current time - three total. Now that's my kind of watch.

HDHNTER · 26 January 2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tools

You've got it backwards.........

The Sub is the basic knock-around watch...rugged, dependable.... but it doesn't really do anything but tell the time using the same movement found in a half dozen other models.... Oh sure, it will do that in deeper water.... but who goes that deep..hardly anybody..

The GMT is much more refined and sophisticated...a world traveler with a unique movement. It too tells the time and the date, but it can also keep track of your home time while you travel around the world, and you can jump hours all day long without ever interrupting the time-keeping.....

Plus, if you want a different look, you can change the bezel....

Yes, I would say that changing out for the common Sub is a step backwards...not an up-grade.......

What he said

East Bay Rider · 26 January 2009, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by springer

How about the ability to track two additional time zones, plus the current time - three total. Now that's my kind of watch.

It's true. So much more real life function with the GMT.

larsr · 26 January 2009, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by Tools
"You've got it backwards.........

The Sub is the basic knock-around watch...rugged, dependable.... but it doesn't really do anything but tell the time using the same movement found in a half dozen other models...."

Sorry, but I disagree. The Sub, with its rotating bezel which counts off minutes, is great for timing anything under an hour. I use it all the time actually.
Very handy, cheap man's Daytona!

walds11 · 26 January 2009, 08:43 PM

No, maybe more of a lateral move. I prefer the Sub. It is more robust in my opinion. I don't need a second time zone or the busier dial. With that being said, the GMT would be my second choice. Did I confuse you? :)

S320 · 26 January 2009, 08:52 PM

This is an awesome insight guys. Very well explained by all of you. Hmm.. still thinking.

For some reason I see pepsi bezel GMT a lot more common here in Chicago.

26 January 2009, 06:15 AM	#1
S320 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Saad Location: Chicago USA Watch: Rolex n Omega Posts: 43	Is selling my GMT II to buy LV... an upgrade? So this is my second post! I was looking around to get some info from people who actually own LV or both GMT and LV to shed some light: Is it worth getting a legendary Sub 50th? My current GMTII is black bezel and an amazing watch that I wear everyday. But I wanted to try something new. I always thought Sub was somehow more superior than GMT. Is it true?

26 January 2009, 06:52 AM	#2
DSJ "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: David Location: USA Watch: your step! Posts: 7,882	"Superior" is truly subjective. If you dive a lot and deeply value the thicker caseback and Triplock crown, then yes, the Submariner is superior in those regards. If you value the ability to track a second time zone, then the GMT is superior. __________________ Rolex. The Rolex of watches. 16570 Expy2 Noir, 116710 GMT Master II, 2552.80 SMP

26 January 2009, 08:05 AM	#11
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,514	You've got it backwards......... The Sub is the basic knock-around watch...rugged, dependable.... but it doesn't really do anything but tell the time using the same movement found in a half dozen other models.... Oh sure, it will do that in deeper water.... but who goes that deep..hardly anybody.. The GMT is much more refined and sophisticated...a world traveler with a unique movement. It too tells the time and the date, but it can also keep track of your home time while you travel around the world, and you can jump hours all day long without ever interrupting the time-keeping..... Plus, if you want a different look, you can change the bezel.... Yes, I would say that changing out for the common Sub is a step backwards...not an up-grade....... __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

26 January 2009, 08:17 AM	#13
chenx15 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: somewhere Posts: 2,891	keep the gmt and buy the sub. you'll be much happier __________________ 16 GS Titles 16 AMS titles (1 short of Agassi) 23 Consecutive GS semifinals 17/18 of the last GS finals, 237 consecutive weeks #1 5 consecutive wimbledon + 1 = 6 cups 5 consecutive US open 4 Australian open 1 Sweet french open a crown for every achievement The Greatest Of All Time loves Rolex

26 January 2009, 08:55 AM	#18
WatchTimes 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: JYogi/Jeremy Location: Metro Detroit USA Watch: It's a Rolex! Posts: 5,787	Both great watches if you aren't a diver get the GMT I think its also a bit more comfortable.... __________________ "You won't rise to the occasion - you'll default to your level of training." Barrett Tillman Kentucky Colonel, Tennessee Squire & Combat Leprechaun

26 January 2009, 06:56 AM	#3
gettocard Banned Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Andy Location: EU Watch: them come and go.. Posts: 2,052	To me yes. The Sub feels a bit tougher than the GMT,wich I personally never liked much. Of course I'm biased,I recently made it to become an LV owner and I love the watch. But even without the LV thing,I would still choose a "regular" 16610 Sub over a GMT. Now,if you still like the GMT's style,why don't you consider a GMT II C ? That's the GMT I like,and you would get the maxi dial anyway.

26 January 2009, 06:59 AM	#4
kcmo "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Karis Location: USA Posts: 19,377	I agree with David. These watches really serve different purposes and are equally incredible in their own right. Ideally, it would be great to own both!

26 January 2009, 07:05 AM	#5
WatchSmith 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: USA Posts: 702	I've been a GMT guy for 30 years. Subs are great, but the GMT is my personal Rolex favorite. If you prefer the sub then go for it, but I can't imagine myself ever swapping my GMT for one. If I could own both, sure, but if I can only own one, the GMT's the one for me. As the other poster said, consider the GMT IIc. Now there's a beauty!

26 January 2009, 07:11 AM	#7
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	More of a lateral move I'd say from a "flier" to a "diver". Each reference has it's strong points. The multi-timezone capability of the GMT is perfect if you travel or have need of tracking another zone. The maxi-dial of the LV is nice IMO and the ability to substitute a black insert gives a measure of versatility. Both use the same base movement so that's a wash. As stated, togehter they make a great pair.

26 January 2009, 07:19 AM	#9
rajurama "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Rick Location: Wakanda Watch: amacallit Posts: 2,090	GMT 2C is a wiser move! or wait for the new sub ceramic.

26 January 2009, 07:58 AM	#10
AIKO "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: South Carolina Posts: 1,937	Yup, different animals. One not better than the other. My preference is for the Sub LV though.

26 January 2009, 08:16 AM	#12
Art 1 Banned Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Florida, Canada Watch: Rol/Seik/Tud/Omega Posts: 30,244	No.

26 January 2009, 08:21 AM	#15
BillA 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,878	Agree with Tools Have you thought about buying a Pepsi bezel for a look change. I owned a few Subs, liked them, but when I put the GMT II Pepsi on, it was lighter and felt better to me.

26 January 2009, 08:31 AM	#16
AIKO "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: South Carolina Posts: 1,937	You can keep the GMT and pick up different bezels. Then, you can buy the Sub LV and add a black bezel. Between the two watches, you could have 5 totally different looks. How many GMT II owners swim in the ocean or pool with your watches on?

26 January 2009, 09:09 AM	#19
Andad 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Eddie Location: Australia Watch: A few. Posts: 37,527	I also agree with Larry but: I do prefer the triplock on my Rolex watches compared to the twinlock. I like my 'M' LV with the maxi dial, green bezel and Rolex rehaute but I also enjoy wearing my 'M' Pepsi with the clear caseback so I can look at the new, improved, better, thicker, de-coupling, PBS, 3186 movement Larry. IMO, these two watches are completely different. HAPPY AUSTRALIA DAY __________________ E

26 January 2009, 09:23 AM	#20
kokovovoru "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: CA Posts: 192	I'd say it's more of a new acquisition than an upgrade literally. GMT IIc is more of an upgrade.

26 January 2009, 12:36 PM	#23
Golfster "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: NorCal Posts: 722	One sees upgrade, one sees different, one sees change...many see the end result, they all tell time to COSC standards. A minute is a minute, clicked off on all rolex movements. Of those you proposed on your earlier post, I would say they are two different watches but both nice. The sub is heavier, the GMT feels slimmer, they both feel great. Negligible differences in the grand scheme. Pick what you love.

26 January 2009, 01:11 PM	#24
rijowysock "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Riley Location: 41.89° N, 87.62° Watch: URWERK Posts: 499	i prefer a GMT hand over a green bezel.

26 January 2009, 02:07 PM	#28
larsr "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: USA Posts: 197	Originally Posted by Tools "You've got it backwards......... The Sub is the basic knock-around watch...rugged, dependable.... but it doesn't really do anything but tell the time using the same movement found in a half dozen other models...." Sorry, but I disagree. The Sub, with its rotating bezel which counts off minutes, is great for timing anything under an hour. I use it all the time actually. Very handy, cheap man's Daytona!

26 January 2009, 08:43 PM	#29
walds11 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Real Name: Adam Location: Philly ‘burbs Posts: 5,660	No, maybe more of a lateral move. I prefer the Sub. It is more robust in my opinion. I don't need a second time zone or the busier dial. With that being said, the GMT would be my second choice. Did I confuse you? :) __________________ Adam

26 January 2009, 08:52 PM	#30
S320 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Saad Location: Chicago USA Watch: Rolex n Omega Posts: 43	This is an awesome insight guys. Very well explained by all of you. Hmm.. still thinking. For some reason I see pepsi bezel GMT a lot more common here in Chicago.

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