|
Post by urtossen on Jan 29, 2014 9:17:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by iceman on Jan 29, 2014 9:53:36 GMT -6
Thanks for sharing, I've got to say I love mine. Very comfy to wear looks great and to the untrained eye could be any watch, which makes it even cooler
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 29, 2014 19:41:01 GMT -6
Hi Henrik, Thanks very much for that link. I really have to agree, I love this new model as well. He is certainly enthusiastic, especially for one who loves vintage watches so much. I agree with him on everything. Really, I do think it combines the old with the new very well. I love the bulk of the case and, as he says so well, the relationship of the bracelet and the case. Very timely to see your thread. I was just looking at this watch last night and the various reviews. Ian and I both agreed, on our GTG last weekend, that a Rolex in the collection is a must. I truly am missing having a Rolex. There are so many attributes that I really like, mostly things that they don't have rather than what they do have. I love that the caseback is totally plain, and also that the crystal has no AR coating. I have tried the new Sub. I don't think there is any watch that compares as far as the smoothness and winding of that crown. Also, the way the screwed in crown tightens so easily and smoothly, you just know it is making a perfectly tight seal. Anyway, I could go on and on. I had in mind that I MUST get a Rolex, and that it would be the Air King. I can only get one, and there is about $2500 difference between the AK and the 114060. While I love the AK, I admit I am a real sucker for the Triplock and large crown, and also the beautiful Glidelock clasp on the bracelet. Cheers, Carl
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 29, 2014 20:11:48 GMT -6
Thanks for sharing, I've got to say I love mine. Very comfy to wear looks great and to the untrained eye could be any watch, which makes it even cooler I have loved this model from when it first came out. I always liked the Sub No Date, but this one is sublime. I don't have a Rolex right now, and after many beautiful Omegas, I still crave a Rolex. I might make it to the AD on the weekend to see if they have one to try! I won't be able to get one for a while, but it gives me a lot to look forward to! Cheers, Carl
|
|
|
Post by iceman on Jan 30, 2014 3:55:26 GMT -6
Thanks for sharing, I've got to say I love mine. Very comfy to wear looks great and to the untrained eye could be any watch, which makes it even cooler I have loved this model from when it first came out. I always liked the Sub No Date, but this one is sublime. I don't have a Rolex right now, and after many beautiful Omegas, I still crave a Rolex. I might make it to the AD on the weekend to see if they have one to try! I won't be able to get one for a while, but it gives me a lot to look forward to! Cheers, Carl I remember your post's around this time last year Carl. We were both looking at the same watch, you went for the AT & I managed to get a great deal on the Sub. I've had mine a yr well on Saturday it will be a yr to the day. I'm so pleased I went for the new model & I'd not even tried 1 on. It's a great piece
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 31, 2014 0:12:54 GMT -6
I dug up an old thread that I started just over a year ago. Raving about the 114060! The thing is, that I still feel the very same, and the same thoughts have been going through my mind the past few days, exactly the same things that I wrote in that thread! WHY did I not get that watch? I remember it came down to a choice between the Sub and the Omega AT with the blue dial. I guess I was so infatuated with the AT, and I thought it would be a more versatile watch, plus I do love Omegas. Anyway, the AT is now gone, at least up for sale. I decided that I have to have a Rolex. So I am certain now that when my other watches sell, that I am getting the ND! just a matter of time. Here is the link to my old thread: www.wristwatchforums.proboards.com/thread/9224/submariner-date-114060I am going to the AD on the weekend and look at it again, if they have one. It's not just the looks of the watch, but all the engineering behind it, especially the Triplock winding crown. From the Rolex website: "The winding crown screws down against the Oyster case as tightly and hermetically as a submarine’s hatch." And I have never handled a more smoothly working mechanism. Cheers, Carl
|
|
|
Post by iceman on Jan 31, 2014 1:49:35 GMT -6
It's a great watch Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Jan 31, 2014 16:26:31 GMT -6
;)Incredible review he made! Seeing the update after a few more months of use will be cool. It is indeed a nice piece. The 14060M never appealed to me as much as this does. Typically no date watches are not my thing but I would take one of those in a heartbeat if the chance came up!
These updated Rolex watches with the solid center link bracelets, ceramic bezels, supercase, maxidial's etc are to die for. I never plan on selling my 16570 Explorer II but jeez... My logic is when I do get that updated Rolex it will be the best of both worlds having an older model, nostalgia mainly.
If anyone has more pictures of this watch (your own on found on Google) please post them!
|
|
|
Post by iceman on Feb 1, 2014 5:59:46 GMT -6
I've owned mine a yr today Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Feb 1, 2014 11:26:12 GMT -6
I know how nice that feels as a Rolex enthusiast! Congratulations on the first year of many, I'm sure. This is one of those watches that's difficult to flip. Personally, there's nothing I can think of that would get me to give one up!
How do you like the solid bracelet and updated clasp in comparison to the old ones now?
|
|
|
Post by iceman on Feb 1, 2014 11:38:46 GMT -6
I know how nice that feels as a Rolex enthusiast! Congratulations on the first year of many, I'm sure. This is one of those watches that's difficult to flip. Personally, there's nothing I can think of that would get me to give one up! How do you like the solid bracelet and updated clasp in comparison to the old ones now? Never owned a older model, had the GMTIIc but didn't like cyclops. So for me this is the perfect Rolex for me and it's 1 I hope never to flip. As for the bracelet & clasp I find them great, never had any issue with them. The bracelet is very comfy
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Feb 1, 2014 19:53:06 GMT -6
That's what I heard and I remember trying on the GMT some years back. Since you feel the same about this watch as the reviewer, chances are this is a keeper for you. None of the other Rolex no date watches measure up to the iconic Submariner in my books. The more symmetrical dial without the date window, clean look without the cyclops and more sturdy movement (less complex, not as easy to damage).
I love the old watches but can't lie, I'm sort of growing tired of hollow center links. I sonic clean the bracelet weekly and it's a good thing because the amount of dust or what ever else that ends up in there is insane.
To me it seems having solid center links on a dive watch that could be exposed to the elements makes a lot more sense. That being said, it's hard to stay mad at the old models for this as well because of how nice they are.
|
|
|
Post by carl on Feb 1, 2014 23:50:57 GMT -6
I know how nice that feels as a Rolex enthusiast! Congratulations on the first year of many, I'm sure. This is one of those watches that's difficult to flip. Personally, there's nothing I can think of that would get me to give one up! How do you like the solid bracelet and updated clasp in comparison to the old ones now? I went down to the Rolex AD today and tried the 114060 for the first time in over a year. I usually go for aesthetics first, then mechanical and engineering aspects next. This time, it's the engineering, especially of the Triplock crown and winding mechanism, and the beautiful bracelet with the Glidelock clasp. Both of those only on the Subs and Deepsea. I must have spent at least 10 minutes just unscrewing, winding and playing with the winding mechanism. At the risk of sounding boring, I won't go over the details again. I realize that all this is designed with the diver in mind, and the ability to operate the mechanism while wearing gloves. Nevertheless, even though I'm not a diver, I find the details greatly appealing. The looks of the watch are stellar, and the ceramic bezel and polished dial look a fantastic match. Contrasted with the large markers. A dial so symmentrical without the date window. I even tried a Yachtmaster with the Platinum dial. While it's a gorgeous watch, it just doesn't have the same appeal to me. And, it doesn't have the Glidelock clasp. At 40mm, it just does not seem like a big watch. And it's not too thick. The strap is very comfy, although I can't say any more comfy than my Explorer I was. It had a personality all it's own, with the hollow links. That new glidelock clasp is excellent, with adjustments in 2mm increments,up to 20mm. As it should be. I found the Easylink on my Milgauss was either way too tight or too loose, at a single adjustment of 5mm. I ended up never using it at all. and pretended it wasn't there, and manually adjusted the Oyster Bracelet. The Sales Associate I used to deal with is no longer there. But a charming young Chinese lady took care of me. She has a wonderful knowledge of all the Rolex models, and really knows what she is talking about. She was wearing a 29mm Lady Datejust herself, with a Jubilee bracelet, fluted bezel, and gorgeous pink dial with diamond markers. Here I go rambling on again! Cheers, Carl
|
|
|
Post by rw16610 on Feb 2, 2014 14:43:36 GMT -6
I went down to the Rolex AD today and tried the 114060 for the first time in over a year. I usually go for aesthetics first, then mechanical and engineering aspects next. This time, it's the engineering, especially of the Triplock crown and winding mechanism, and the beautiful bracelet with the Glidelock clasp. Both of those only on the Subs and Deepsea. I must have spent at least 10 minutes just unscrewing, winding and playing with the winding mechanism. At the risk of sounding boring, I won't go over the details again. I realize that all this is designed with the diver in mind, and the ability to operate the mechanism while wearing gloves. Nevertheless, even though I'm not a diver, I find the details greatly appealing. The looks of the watch are stellar, and the ceramic bezel and polished dial look a fantastic match. Contrasted with the large markers. A dial so symmentrical without the date window. I even tried a Yachtmaster with the Platinum dial. While it's a gorgeous watch, it just doesn't have the same appeal to me. And, it doesn't have the Glidelock clasp. At 40mm, it just does not seem like a big watch. And it's not too thick. The strap is very comfy, although I can't say any more comfy than my Explorer I was. It had a personality all it's own, with the hollow links. That new glidelock clasp is excellent, with adjustments in 2mm increments,up to 20mm. As it should be. I found the Easylink on my Milgauss was either way too tight or too loose, at a single adjustment of 5mm. I ended up never using it at all. and pretended it wasn't there, and manually adjusted the Oyster Bracelet. The Sales Associate I used to deal with is no longer there. But a charming young Chinese lady took care of me. She has a wonderful knowledge of all the Rolex models, and really knows what she is talking about. She was wearing a 29mm Lady Datejust herself, with a Jubilee bracelet, fluted bezel, and gorgeous pink dial with diamond markers. Here I go rambling on again! Cheers, Carl Rambling? Hardly, I really enjoy a discussion of fine watches! This includes hearing various thoughts or overviews of the piece. It seems like you also appreciated many of the aspects mentioned in the review and by many other people. There's something special about the Submariner dial not hacked up to make a date window. Have a look at these listing images a trusted American eBay seller has up: Amazing! The thing about the easylink is it only seems to work well for a certain percentage of wrists. For some there seems to be no balance with it in many cases. Sometimes when it's REALLY humid out I do wish my Explorer II had something similar to make it a tad bigger on the fly. They took this to the next level with the new dive clasps, indeed. Dive watches seem to have this strange appeal to them. Even before I could swim I was in love with dive watches. The contrast of the rotating bezel to the dial like you mention, the engineering of the entire thing where it can withstand tremendous forces from the water pressure while protecting the movement and the history behind them! In the era before dive computers and such, these were it. Had it not been for the 116710 LN GMT Master II having a nice triplock crown and the obvious addition of the multiple time zome feature I would still be caught up on a Submariner date. This picture is a portion of what a watch u seek member posted comparing this watch to another: For me I don't really rotate watches, I'll wear one until I'm bored of it essentially. The date tends to slip my mind when filling out forms etc so I do appreciate having it on my wrist BUT, my oh my... A no date Rolex dive watch goes right back to it's roots. Factor in the lovely chromalight blue lume and it's tough to want anything else.
|
|
|
Post by urtossen on Feb 2, 2014 15:01:36 GMT -6
Wonderful reading guys. I've had 16610, 116610LN, 116710LN and now 216570. The Sub will always be the most iconic /favourite model for me. I think GMTIIc looks the best though. I wish I had the money to own 3 at a time My next Rolex must be a Submariner again . . . . and the great thing with Rolex - we dont lose our savings, we invest
|
|