View Single Post
Old 7 October 2022, 12:50 AM   #15
SOG DIVER
"TRF" Member
 
SOG DIVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Real Name: LtCol R
Location: Mtns-NM-MT
Watch: 1680Red-551214060M
Posts: 233
Since writing this review of the 14060M, and giving Paul Altieri full credit for his
insight into the detailed caliber improvements for service and accuracy-my opinions of this reference have not changed. Like cars and personal tastes, watch choices are subjective, but may have objective comparisons.
Since the 14060 was-in a since -the continuation of the now vintage 5512-5513 references, the 14060M resembles the 5512. Starting as a late 1950s 2-line Submariner,
It became a 4-line chronometer about 1962 when Rolex introduced the 5513. Cases and crystals could be interchanged between the two references. Many later 5512s have 5513 casebacks.

A good CW21 watchmaker can adjust a 14060M 2-line non-chronometer to maintain
COSC chronometer accuracy standards. The watch reference is that well made.
I prefer the M suffix variant because one is getting a superior caliber watch reference,
at a relatively fair price.

So- if you like the idea of retaining a tough tool watch that has a modern choice of chronometer or non-chronometer caliber, has drilled lugs, and still can be found.... the
non-date 14060M might just be your huckleberry.
SOG DIVER is offline   Reply With Quote