No amount of ceramic or fancy clasps can compete

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

Agree with OP. I tried a new Sub on at my AD, and it did not give me the same feeling as my 16610.






I don’t think it looks as good on me, either.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The SubC doesn't look as good on you, or anyone else.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I have to disagree.
6 digits are way over engineered and power reserve wasn't an issue with the 5 digits nor was shock resistance in any measurable way.

It's marketing, make an X% 'improvement' in several areas and the masses will run out to own the latest and greatest. Repeat. A properly maintained 5 digit will outlast it's owners.

The 5 digits were a distillation of the essence of what was required to do the job well and then some, but they just needed the 6 digit dials and hands to top it all off.
Don't get me started on the dodgy movements which are commonly found in the 6 digits.

I noticed that issue was left out of the post you responded too, a bad movement is kind of a big deal.

I can see a SubC on wrists much over 7", but IMHO under that 5 digit is the way to go.

[Sigmak]

A fantastic piece indeed.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by JacksonRain

I don't really fully understand these threads. I mean, it's cute to take pride in what you own and wear, but even for five digit owners, they know that the watch is intrinsically and objectively inferior to the modern 6 digits.

The old with Less power reserve, oftentimes less resistant to shock, more prone to being magnetized, inferior clasp (yuck), inferior bracelet and make (double yuck), cheap $70 aluminum bezels (don't give me the cracks regarding ceramics please... Pros and cons comparisons are not even close).... New ones have brighter loom, better legibility, Superior Crystal etc

I guess just enjoy the charm and nostalgia but we all know the "truth"


Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

I don’t understand these “my watch is better than your watch” threads either. It’s like being on the playground back in 3rd grade with a bunch of 9 year olds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JacksonRain]

Originally Posted by espanol

Condescension much? Yuck



If we only enjoyed watches that we technically 'superior,' then we'd all wear smart watches...

No

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[JacksonRain]

Originally Posted by Krash

I don’t understand these “my watch is better than your watch” threads either. It’s like being on the playground back in 3rd grade with a bunch of 9 year olds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My response exemplifies that approach as well, but I have some fun with it and give a clearly different perspective. Some of it is subjective, there is no absolute answer, of course.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[JacksonRain]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I have to disagree.
6 digits are way over engineered and power reserve wasn't an issue with the 5 digits nor was shock resistance in any measurable way.
The 5 digits were a distillation of the essence of what was required to do the job well and then some, but they just needed the 6 digit dials and hands to top it all off.
Don't get me started on the dodgy movements which are commonly found in the 6 digits.
Sometimes less is more but what would I know. I predominantly wear a 116660 DSSD

Anyway I put it to you, that you'll do better if you stop snorting the Koolade.

Slowly evolving with small advancements with each new generation; that's what we seen from Rolex for many decades. the modern sub is intended to and in many ways is superior to the submariners of two and three generations ago for example.

Even though I am messing around with my snarky response, in all honesty, most people here know that I'm right as my points are valid.



Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by JacksonRain

Slowly evolving with small advancements with each new generation; that's what we seen from Rolex for many decades. the modern sub is intended to and in many ways is superior to the submariners of two and three generations ago for example.

Even though I am messing around with my snarky response, in all honesty, most people here know that I'm right as my points are valid.

Not on this thread.

You don't mind an ahem, questionable movement?

[JacksonRain]

Originally Posted by East of Eden

Not on this thread.



You don't mind an ahem, questionable movement?

I do when I look down at my BLRO and see how slow it's gotten in the last 4 years.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by JacksonRain

I do when I look down at my BLRO and see how slow it's gotten in the last 4 years.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by JacksonRain

I do when I look down at my BLRO and see how slow it's gotten in the last 4 years.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

I wish Rolex would admit their new movements are flawed, scrap them, and go back to the tried and true 31xx movements. I know it’s a fantasy…. Sigh!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

I wish Rolex would admit their new movements are flawed, scrap them, and go back to the tried and true 31xx movements. I know it’s a fantasy…. Sigh!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There would still be deniers here.

[Smobews]

It’s all good, except I can’t get over the hollow end links and flimsy clasp. The rest is spectacular.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by Smobews

It’s all good, except I can’t get over the hollow end links and flimsy clasp. The rest is spectacular.

Understood, but I think those are positives, makes it lightweight, they don't move around on your wrist as much. Have never heard of a failure due to the 'flimsy' parts.

[illiguy]

Originally Posted by Daniel23456

Folks,

Wearing 6 digits back to back with 5 digits daily.

No amount of sturdiness or ceramic can compete with the beauty & warm & comfort o the 5 digits.

In my eyes there’s no comparison, the 5 digits are the better executed watches and my preference at the end of the day.

Photo of my trusty subby:

Love the 14060M COSC. Great picture!

[GolfJunkie]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fishingbear]

Lots of 5 digit love in my collection