Submariner or Submariner Date. The definitive survey.

[Vlke]

Have the SubC 116610 modern sub date and been thinking of getting a 14060M vintage sub. Not a need, of course, but a great pairing imo.

[BNABOD]

[JP.]

Tie.

From the 4-digits: 5513
From the 5-digits: 16610 (imho the best watch Rolex ever made)

[mussi]

114060 for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AJV_36]

Originally Posted by doramas

I'm not just talking about the current references, I'm talking about the Submariners of all times.

Which one do you want? The Submariner, more faithful to the original or the Submariner Date, more practical?


5313 / 1680




14060 / 16610




114060 / 116610

I like having the date and I LOVE my 116610 and wear everyday, the only other Rolex I really want is the GMT. Now with that said if money allows one day I wouldn’t mind adding one of the sea dweller models, and I also think that the 114060 is a classy and clean looking watch. Very sharp, and again if money allows would definitely add it, just for a change up to my daily worn date model and or (one day) my GMT. So 116610 currently gets my vote but very hard not to love the 114060 as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[173rdabn]

Since I've retired, I find the date is essential. I just can't remember the date and the day is totally beyond me.

[pikers]

I voted with my $. 114060 all the way.

[Benzsiam]

Sub (w/o date) looks better, more balance and symmetrical.

[Chester01]

Sub date, hand down. I dont wear my watches as jewelry, I wear a watch for function (no im not one of these people that feels the need to tote my cell phone everywhere) and the sub date gives you the same look, time, ability to measure elapsed time, and the date. I don't care how much these people say, i remember the date. No one remembers the date all the time, this is especially the case when folks get older or retire. There simply is no real argument for the sub over the sub date as the sub date can do everything the sub can.

[watchmework]

While I can appreciate the symmetry of the Sub, which I owned....ultimately I just needed the date function so my vote is for the Sub Date.

[Jpccarguy]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Sub date, hand down. I dont wear my watches as jewelry, I wear a watch for function (no im not one of these people that feels the need to tote my cell phone everywhere) and the sub date gives you the same look, time, ability to measure elapsed time, and the date. I don't care how much these people say, i remember the date. No one remembers the date all the time, this is especially the case when folks get older or retire. There simply is no real argument for the sub over the sub date as the sub date can do everything the sub can.

+1

Purely an aesthetic choice, as I see it.

[alphasports]

Originally Posted by Yess

I want the date. But I want the date less than I dislike the Cyclops. So that means it's a (no date) Sub for me.

This

[dricig]

My favorite combines the best features of the subs.
Seadweller 16600, deeper, , date function, no cyclops, clean looks.

[danyvw]

While I love the symmetry of the Sub I prefer to have a date in a watch, so my vote is for the Sub date.

[v1triol]

Submariner for me. Not a fan of the cyclops-bulb.


As we are discussing two models, quick question about the cases,
- 116610 and 114060 are the same case,
- 14060 is smaller and thinner than 16610,
- what about 5513 and 1680?, are those the same or different cases?

[Bigblu10]

The date function is essential for me. Couldn't live without it.

[B2 Stealth]

Love the clean look of my classic Submariner--never considered the date version. That being said love my GMTII BLNR! Different watches, different looks which both seem to work.

[BumbleB]

Got one for my son, it’s in the safe for the next 8 years




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FlintLockwood]

I’ve been fortunate to have owned both and I have come to the conclusion that Submariner Date is a far more practical watch.

[Joearch]

Both great watches. Luckily have both. Sealdweller is also such a strong contender. Best of both worlds?

[sutats]

114060. It has a sharp and clean design and made to last and has a relaxed appearance compared with its date equivalent which is better suited for slightly dressier or formal occasions.

[RakerSnaker]

The Sub is great with or without Date! I don't think you could go wrong either way.

I chose a Sub Date because I find the date to be useful and the cyclops is such an iconic Rolex feature - it definitely adds some flash to the watch.

[enjoythemusic]

Date is for GMT, not sub.

[Overwound]

Submariner. The only divers with a date from Rolex that I would buy are the 40mm Seadwellers, both 5-digit and the SD4K.

[mjarolex]

I would never buy any watch without a date.

[Kevan]

Just voted and 83/83 evens!

[htrap2294]

I like and appreciate both - that being said, I voted for ND. That might be because I don't have a Sub in ND form. I should work on fixing that.

[htrap2294]

Originally Posted by BumbleB

Got one for my son, it’s in the safe for the next 8 years




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is an awesome move! Younger dude here, and I can say the feeling of having a trusty Rolex passed on from your dad gives me the feeling that I can accomplish what I want in life.

The only way I can describe it is when I wear it, I feel he is with me thru life's adversities.

[Mr. Superlative]

114060 every day. The Sub date is not as symmetrical as the classic Sub, that pure icon will never look better than a Sub Date.

[Nairn1980]

I love the 114060 but honestly you really cannot go wrong either way.

I can check the date once in the morning and not forget it, so that’s no issue to me. However i know some people maybe struggle with this, so the date may suit them better.