Reply With QuoteOne of the most common Rolex sports models out there... :)Originally Posted by Middo
Looking for my first rolex, how rare are the dateless subs? Think I am warming more to this variant?
Just to add i am a bit of a rolex biff.
One of the most common Rolex sports models out there... :)
I'd choose One with the cyclops...
At First i didn't liked it, but now i changed my mind. :)
And I need the date function, I'm too dumb to remember..,
I'm trying to decide on this myself and then I also tried on the DSD which i loved. I guess it really depends on whether date is important on a watch to you.
Date! I had the same problem... http://www.tz-uk.com/forum/viewtopic...90&hilit=+date
Just buy them all :D
Personally, I'd go for the 14060 non-date - it is the cheapest entry and if you don't need the date it does look a lot nicer imo.
If you need a date, don't like the cyclops and don't mind a little extra depth and weight to the case then I'd go for the Sea-dweller 16600.
I think going for really nice example of either you are talking about a £500 premium to move up to each; 14060 at the bottom, then the 16610 and then the SD 16600 coming in around £1k more than the non-date. So for the money the non-date takes it for me - but for overall ownership experience I would have either the SD or a Sub 16610 LV.
Money no object get a Deep Sea.
It's just a matter of time...
Just to thread hijack - have Rolex announced an plans to do a cerachrom bezel on the none-date?
It seems odd that the steel Sub date got a ceramic and not the none-date.
Not that I'm complaining - having an 'entry level' sub is no bad thing given the stupid price of the date these days.
Definitely with date... :)
I like them without. Each to his own I guess
I am torn, personally.
I prefer the "no cyclops" look, but a date is essential for me.
I guess if I'm ever in the market, I need an SD :)
I think my personal "order of the pre-ceramic Subs" goes LV, ND, Date.
Don`t forget that the bracelet also differs on the later models. The 'Date' bracelet is nicer and can be adjusted better for a smaller wrist.
Paul
Rare really isn't the right term. Modern submariners are very common, be they with a date or without. In terms of tracking one down through an AD, well that's not too hard either. Just call round a few and i'm sure you'll find one!
The non date also has no SELs.
SS Sub Date and Sea Dweller are better imo. I've always classed the Exp1 and the SubND as the bottom range of the sports series.
IMO, a sub is not a sub without the cyclop! :wink:
Date is important to me in my everyday work but I really prefer the non-date look, cyclop is ruining everything :p
So my choice is : SeaDweller > Sub ND > Sub Date
Sorry if I'm being a bit off topic, but why do people insist that they 'need' the date on their watch? A quick look at your phone/newspaper/tv will tell you what date it is, and it won't change all day!
No such thing as a 'rare Rolex' (unless you go back a while) they make over a million per annum! :lol: There are some relatively rare transition models though.
Another vote for without date ( I can't abide the cyclops). If you must have a date, then the SD is IMO a better option.
Without the date,
iPhone has the date, laptop has the date, news papers has the date,
Watch doesn't need the date.
i had a 16610 and finally sold it because the date bored me.
if i had the cash i would bought a 14060 + 16600 :D
If you can afford it buy the date sub, if you don't get on with it you can easily sell it & buy the non date.
Not a big fan of the cyclops, so no date for me.
It's faster for me to check the date on my wrist than turning on my phone, clicking on the clock or waiting for the tooltip on my computer (as I don't use that much my mouse) :p
And this is the same when I'm in a meeting.
Every time I have a non date watch on the wrist and I'm wondering what day we are, I look at it and I'm like F*** !
If you ask me the non date 14060M is just a way for Rolex to empty there parts bin... Not saying its not a great watch. Just a way for them to use up old movements , bracelets and cases.
I may be wrong.
Apparently, some of the first random numbers 14060M had parachrom spiral so I can't really let you say that :wink:
I don't particularly like the cyclops but I must have that ceramic bezel. That's what I'm trying to save for now - a 16610
A quick look at the clock, phone, PC, etc will also tell you the time, so why wear a watch :) I can never remember the date from one minute to the next, so for me it's a useful feature. Although I can usually tell what day it is, so that feature is less important for me.
For me it would have to be the date. Like a lot of people I can never remember the date from one minute to the next. I don't think I own a watch that doen't tell the date as well.
Paddy
I could not have a watch without a date. It would drive me nuts. I have the SubC and a sea dweller which I think compliment each other.
I would say with date BUT is it possible to get a model with the date but without the cyclops eye?Some things I choose to/can hold in my memory; the date is apparently not one of them so for me it's an imperative feature.A quick look at the clock, phone, PC, etc will also tell you the time, so why wear a watch :) I can never remember the date from one minute to the next, so for me it's a useful feature. Although I can usually tell what day it is, so that feature is less important for me.
Nick
The time changes a fair bit more than the date every 24 hours though..A quick look at the clock, phone, PC, etc will also tell you the time, so why wear a watch :) I can never remember the date from one minute to the next, so for me it's a useful feature. Although I can usually tell what day it is, so that feature is less important for me.
Some people mod their 16610 by knocking off the cyclops. (Or heating it with a soldering iron and scooping it off with a razor)
Which leaves you with something like an SD light.
Would be the perfect watch for me as I'd prefer a cyclops-less Sub with date. Plus it's less chunky than a Dweller... a good thing as I have small wrists.
Same thing as a 1680 with tropic 19 plexi... such a difference.
But I don't think I'd have the nerve to knock the cyclops off the crystal. Would also effect future resale value if you're a flipper.
Pic courtesy of sBmRnR:
much prefer without the cyclops as aboveSome people mod their 16610 by knocking off the cyclops. (Or heating it with a soldering iron and scooping it off with a razor)
Which leaves you with something like an SD light.
Would be the perfect watch for me as I'd prefer a cyclops-less Sub with date. Plus it's less chunky than a Dweller... a good thing as I have small wrists.
Same thing as a 1680 with tropic 19 plexi... such a difference.
But I don't think I'd have the nerve to knock the cyclops off the crystal. Would also effect future resale value if you're a flipper.
Pic courtesy of sBmRnR:
Nick
I prefer the sub to the sub date and really found the SD too floppy for my puny wrists. I like the history of the watch and the balance of the dial without the date feature.
regards
tim
I see the attraction to a no date watch - but for a sub it would be dated and cyclopsed all the way :wink:
I also noticed that the crystal is flat and not domed, or my eyes are getting too old to notice it. Anyone like the domed crystal better?
I'm a bit of a rolex subaholic have a non date sub date sub tt sub tt sub mop serti dial and a16600 sd cannot understand why non date subs are so cheap at the moment and i couldn't choose between any of them (also have a gmt2 and an 18k daytona) wife says I need to be a bloody octopus to get proper wear from them all but then I don't get the handbags and shoes
It has to have the date for me, I have been fortunate to of owned 2 Subs and 1 Sea Dweller, which I sold for the 2nd Sub as I missed the cyclops lens.
The Sub is a classic Rolex watch and you can't go wrong with either. :D
People say why do you need a watch that has a date, when you could look at your phone, paper etc. Well how long does it take to slightly turn your wrist compared to dig around in your pockets and then waking it up to see the date, keep things simple!
hummmm, loving the date sans cyclops. Thanks for your thoughts chaps.
A few months ago I'd have gone for the date version no questions asked, I've always had watches with date functions and thought I'd miss it. But then I bought myself a Railmaster (which has no date) and I think I now prefer it. It's hard to say why but now when I look at my Speedy it seems crowded somehow. Plus it's nice to to have to worry about which half of the day the watch is in when you set the time! :)
My watches are worn in rotation, depending on mood, where I'm going, office/weekend etc. So for practical reasons it's great just to set the time. So my collection's now all non-date :D . I do like the balanced clean look of the no-date dial too.
Ant
And my current set...
I was considering a no-date COSC sub recently. I think it's probably the best looking watch out there, but I decided I wouldn't be able to live without a date (and don't like the cyclops) and ended up with a 16600 which I love.
However I'm now considering getting a different watch with no date (Speedy Pro) so I'll see how I get on with it. If I can cope without the date I can imagine adding the no-date sub to my wish list again.
Oh, this is the picture that initially got me interested in the no-date sub (I must be a sucker for product placement!)
A true Submariner does not have a date window, but i dont care about that and would go for the 1680 anytime, the doomed plexi just rocks my world..
16610 is nice but the applied indexes bothers me, to flashy, and not to speak about the LN, it does not even feels like a Submariner, tried it and yes, it looks and fels just as boxy as the pictures makes it, nothing like the original, nice clasp thou..but no Submariner :evil:
So for me the date function is not important, with it or without it , other things feels more important to me.
A 1680 or a pre 84' 14060 is the Rolex for me, just have to save up and try to find a 79' 1680, nice to have a watch as old(young) as myself :)
I had the same dilemma a couple of years back, loved the cleaner lines of the ND, wanted the date, but not keen on the cyclops. In the end I got a Sea Dweller :D
I like date no cyclops, but would settle for any
No date sub is just gorgeous. Next on my wish list!
I ended up with the Sub (Date) - I had actually been dead set against the cyclops when I was viewing pictures, but when i started to notice them on people's wrist I realised I really liked the extra dimension that it added, so went ahead and bought a 16610 from SC here. What has really surprised me is the price increase in the second hand market. Reality is that either way, they are great watches.
So to sum up, it's all to do with personal preference.
But I still don't know the answer to one important question: what's a biff?
Paying so much for a quality watch I would want a date.
My choice would be a 16600 Seadweller as it has a date no cyclops, though it is my understanding the cyclops can be removed from the glass....I have yet to meet someone that has had this done.
Posting Permissions
