Submariner No Date 114060

[carl]

I guess it's a good thing that it will be quite a while before I can get another watch. I keep lusting after a watch with a blue dial, but in the end I come back to watches with black dials.

I have always loved the Sub No Date. Even the older style with the smaller crown protectors, smaller markers, smaller lugs, and the "clunky" oyster bracelet with hollow center links.

Honestly, though, I prefer the newer, updated model. Although it's the same size, I prefer the beefier look. I think that it's got beautiful enhancements to an old classic. I never really cared for the updated Explorer I, but I have to say that the new Explorer II is a winner. However, when I take an in-depth look, I really think that the Sub No Date beats them all. I love the Sub Date as well, but when I see the symmetry of this dial with the three identical markers at 3, 6 and 9 o'clock, that really does something to me. The ceramic bezel looks great, and I like the idea of the oyster bracelet with the glidlock clasp as well, over the easylink. The easylink is about 5mm either way, but the glidelock will adjust up to 20mm in 2mm increments, which makes more sense. Still, I have never had a problem with the plain Oysterclasp, which I can easily adjust with the spring bars.

Still the same cal. 3130 as in the old model, although updated with the parachrom hairspring. My Explorer I, though, seems to run very well without that.

I think I will treat myself to a visit to my Rolex AD this weekend, where I got my Explorer I three years ago. With that, and my Omega Speedy, maybe the best thing is to stick to the classics.




Sorry to ramble on. I thought maybe a bit of a discussion in this "new" forum would be appropriate.

Cheers,
Carl

[Baco Noir]

Fact #1 - You are afflicted with WIS-itice!  

Fact #2 - You have good taste.  



That said, I couldn't do it.  I like variety in color and function to go with 3 black dials and 2 with no dates.  But, I always enjoy your posts and look forward to going on this journey with you as you work through the decision process.  

[Kiwi]

Great writeup, Carl, as always.

You have indeed good taste when it comes to watches, but urge You to try the new case on first before going for it.

I was so for the new case with my 116613, but now I can't seem to get the old styles off my wrist as the new style is just too

square for me and odd looking.
The improvements are awesome with the glide lock, ceramic, lump,etc.
Just with they would do this all on an old case style.

Good luck and please keep us posted when You visit the AD.

[carl]

Jan 28, 2013 22:39:29 GMT -6 Baco Noir said:

Fact #1 - You are afflicted with WIS-itice!  

Fact #2 - You have good taste.  



That said, I couldn't do it.  I like variety in color and function to go with 3 black dials and 2 with no dates.  But, I always enjoy your posts and look forward to going on this journey with you as you work through the decision process.  

Thanks, Roger! I always think most people must think I'm nuts!   One minute, a "one watch man", next minute only Omega, then on to Rolex.....Anyway, although I post on a number of forums, this is the place I feel most comfortable (whoops, now I'm settled in here, I fell like the good old days back at TKF), so I tend to post just about anything that comes to mind.

In the end, though, all in good fun. Great place to be with guys like you, and I know that I will always get a response!

Cheers
Carl

[carl]

Jan 28, 2013 23:00:59 GMT -6 Kiwi said:

Great writeup, Carl, as always.

You have indeed good taste when it comes to watches, but urge You to try the new case on first before going for it.

I was so for the new case with my 116613, but now I can't seem to get the old styles off my wrist as the new style is just too

square for me and odd looking.
The improvements are awesome with the glide lock, ceramic, lump,etc.
Just with they would do this all on an old case style.

Good luck and please keep us posted when You visit the AD.

Good to see you over here, Mario!

I know what you mean about the case. Even though it's still 40mm, the squared off lugs make it look larger. The thick lugs look as though they almost dwarf the bracelet in a way. Well, I must give it a try anyway, even if I just get it out of my system. After wearing my Explorer I, where the lugs taper almost right in to the bracelet, that square look might seem a bit odd.
I think they quite probably did a better job with the Explorer II in that department. While they increase the lug size a bit, they also increased the lug width. I think it's in better proportion. Having said that, and even tried on the Explorer II, I know that it won't be my watch.

Gotta try the Sub No Date, though, just to see it and feel it on my wrist.

Cheers
Carl

[CHIP]

I like that one a lot but just like Kiwi said, the old case is more appealing to me for some reason.
Not saying the new one isn't, but there is something about the old case that I like more. I just do not know what it is.

[z32turbo]

I love the new style Rolex sport models with the square lugs. The improvements on the bracelets can't be beat. I haven't tried the ND yet but love the look.

[carl]

The Rolex Glidelock Clasp/Glidelock Extension System, originally designed for the Sea Dweller Deep Sea, is another great feature of the Rolex Sub models, including the No Date.

Here is a link to a great article explaining the system in depth:
rolexblog.blogspot.ca/2008/06/upcoming-rolex-sea-dweller-deep-sea.html

The article states:

"One of the most amazing features.....is that it can actually be adjusted without removing the bracelet from your wrist. As a matter of fact you can even adjust the size without opening the clasp, and thus the appropriate nomenclature of "Glidelock Clasp.""

While I think this is wonderful, I personally never had any complaints about the normal adjustments within the regular Oyster Bracelet. I find that once I adjust the bracelet properly, it normally does me all year. It really does not get that hot here in the summer, and I like to wear my watch a bit loose anyway. Usually able to fit my small finger between the closed bracelet and bottom of my wrist.

Another feature I have always really wanted is the Triplock Crown. Don't ask me why, as I don't dive, although I would definitely wear the watch swimming.

The large markers make the lume on this watch outstanding. I am sort of the opinion that a watch should have excellent lume or not have it at all. It was one reason that my lovely Cartier Calibre annoyed me to no end, four tiny markers and the hands. It was the main thing that drove me to the point of selling it. Call me anal, or whatever, but over times it's generally the small things that bug me.







All these observations, of course, are without actually having seen the watch in person, although I did see and try on the new Sub Date many times. As I have the day off tomorrow, downtown to my Rolex AD I will be going  and hopefully they will have one in stock! When the new No Date was first introduced, I tried a couple of times in vain to see it.

Cheers
Carl

[carl]

At the AD...

Shortly after opening time this morning, I was at my Rolex AD. Had the place to myself for about an hour, chatting with the Sales Associate who sold my my Explorer I. Luckily he had a new Sub No Date, so I was able to try it on, and mess around with the Glidelock clasp etc.

Like all watches, it has to be seen in person to really appreciate it. The biggest difference between actually having it on my wrist, and the pics I have seen, is the size. In most pics, the watch is forefront, so the wrist tends to be dwarfed a bit. In nearly all the pics I have seen, even on guys with medium to large wrists, the case appears to extend almost the full width of the wrist. Trying it on, however, I still found that I had a good bit of wrist space between the case and edge of my wrist. That is really a good thing for me.

No imperfections here. The large markers pop off the dial, and the lume is exceptional. I didn't even notice the squareness of the case when it was on my wrist. When it's on the wrist, to me it really seems marginally different to the 14060 or 14060M. The main difference I notice is the size of the markers, and the beautiful ceramic bezel.

Of course, the feel of the crown is the best there is. Closing it does indeed give that "sub hatch" feeling.

I have to say that I really like the Omega Planet Ocean models. I realize that the Planet Ocean WR is 600m, or double that of the Sub. But you really gain a lot of thickness to achieve that. Not being an expert in engineering, mechanics or physics, however, I still feel that the engineering of the Rolex to get the 300m WR out of the 13mm thickness is pretty darn impressive. And that Triplock crown!

The Rolex AD also carries Omegas, so I was able to compare the two watches side-by-side, and I tried a PO on again. I must say that, for the extra 2mm case size and the extra thickness, it's still very comfortable. However, I had a heavy leather coat on with a rather small cuff size, and the Sub definitely fits better. It's more comfortable, even moreso than my Speedy. Sometimes, wearing the Speedy for days in a row I crave wearing a smaller watch. I can see that with the Sub ND that this would not be the case. It's really an ideal size, and I'm glad that they kept it at 40mm case size. Although the Omega AT midsize is only 38.5mm, the Sub does not feel much bigger. The rather large bezel does give more of a wrist presence.

I can safely say that this is an "If I could only have one watch...."

Cheers
Carl

[Baco Noir]

  (I think that says it all.  He gets to try on the ND SubC and PO side by side and we have to take his "word" for it!)

[carl]

Jan 31, 2013 18:06:02 GMT -6 Baco Noir said:

  (I think that says it all.  He gets to try on the ND SubC and PO side by side and we have to take his "word" for it!)

Guess I'm outta here, eh?  Well, I guess that gives me as good an excuse as any for a repeat visit. After all, I won't be getting the watch for quite a while yet.
Actually, Wayne (AD) will likely let me get a pic or two. Ian got some excellent shots in there when I picked up my Explorer I.
What say I don't get banned for the time being, and I'll see what I can come up with?!

Getting a camera might be a good start! Mine seems to have crapped out, all the pics I posted lately are fairly old ones. Guess that's as good an excuse as any!
Cheers
Carl

[aquajoe]

Good posting guys.

However Carl, for some reason I don't think you would be as happy with this watch as you think. Maybe I'm wrong. ???I only "know" you from your posts, but a Submariner just doesn't seem to fit how I imagine you are. Weird huh?

[carl]

Jan 31, 2013 20:58:18 GMT -6 aquajoe said:

Good posting guys.

However Carl, for some reason I don't think you would be as happy with this watch as you think. Maybe I'm wrong. ???I only "know" you from your posts, but a Submariner just doesn't seem to fit how I imagine you are. Weird huh?

[carl]

Sorry, dupe post!

[carl]

Jan 31, 2013 20:58:18 GMT -6 aquajoe said:

Good posting guys.

However Carl, for some reason I don't think you would be as happy with this watch as you think. Maybe I'm wrong. ???I only "know" you from your posts, but a Submariner just doesn't seem to fit how I imagine you are. Weird huh?

Hey Joe,

Thanks for your candid thoughts! It is funny the impressions one gets from just reading posts on the forums.

All I can say is that I am a Libra. We are notorious (at least some) for not being able to make  a decision. I'm 63 years old, and I still can't make up my mind what I want to be when I grow up! Believe me, deciding on a watch is the least of my dilemmas .

A year ago, all I wanted was a small Tank type gold watch. I'm also running out of ways and means to acquire watches, so the next one will have to be the one that will best serve me overall. The gold watch thing has been set aside, at least for now. The smallest watch I have owned is my Cartier Tank Solo, which is even smaller than my 36mm Explorer. The largest was a Breitling Seawolf at 45mm and about 18mm thick. To balance things out (again, a Libra thing) something in between in size but not thick, that can be comfortably worn at any occasion ( except really formal dress occasions, which I never attend anyway, and if I did, I would still have no problem wearing the Sub ).

I really didn't want to leave the AD without that Sub today. It gave me the feeling that, as time goes by, if I had to sell my Explorer, my Speedy and my Cartier, I could likely do that without much emotion.

It occurred to me, while at my favourite cafe today, that I think I would be happiest owning only one watch. But I have to be darn certain which one it will be.

Cheers
Carl