ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
17 November 2017, 06:08 AM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: EU
Watch: SD
Posts: 583
|
Vintage if you've owned it since then. I have looked at many older watches but I want the watch to look close to mint. If not then the stories on the watch aren't mine and if it does, its a shame to put the scratches on now when it's done so well for so long. Thus modern to wear, vintage to own.
__________________
116520 116710LN, 116710BLNR 16600 V NIB, 116660, 116660, 116600, 126600, 126660, 126660, 126603 126610LV |
17 November 2017, 08:01 AM | #32 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Real Name: Kenny
Location: northern ireland
Watch: SDs, Subs & GMTs
Posts: 5,127
|
Pros and cons with both though equally great watches. I am fortunate to have picked up both and rotate them fairly regularly. Would no longer risk the 5513 in water though...no need to take the risk!
|
17 November 2017, 08:23 AM | #33 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Home!
Posts: 3,307
|
Modern for me
|
17 November 2017, 08:29 AM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,838
|
Too close to call - both look great
|
17 November 2017, 09:58 AM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Dallas tx
Watch: 16610,1675,16030
Posts: 1,135
|
“On a similar note, I even prefer the old thin and very lightweight bracelets with folded links over the solid handcuffs that come with current models.”
Hah! Handcuffs. I’m using that... |
17 November 2017, 11:37 AM | #36 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Real Name: Kevin
Location: Cape Cod
Watch: Submariner 114060
Posts: 1,891
|
I like durability and comfort. I prefer the new one 114060
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
17 November 2017, 01:04 PM | #37 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 2,030
|
Vintage all Day! I don't like the WG surrounds on the Modern Subs nor the shiny dial and bezel.
|
17 November 2017, 01:11 PM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 1,322
|
I've always preferred applied indices over painted markers, but definitely a tough call. Trying to ignore the inherent value of a nice vintage piece, I probably could be convinced I aesthetically like the modern one more, but it's a very tough call.
|
17 November 2017, 02:01 PM | #39 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Northwest
Posts: 1,335
|
Modern for me. I like everything about them, not least of which the Glidelock clasp, it's a marvel.
|
17 November 2017, 02:42 PM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: YL
Watch: Submariner
Posts: 701
|
Vintage all days for sub.!
__________________
Instagram: litwing23 |
17 November 2017, 07:02 PM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: End of the World
Watch: PP & Rolex
Posts: 1,970
|
Was a modern man and owned 3 ceramic subs. However become sick of the glossy ceramic look and “block” case. Going to pickup a 14060 soon I think
|
17 November 2017, 07:06 PM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Here
Watch: SpeedyPro Explorer
Posts: 235
|
I like the vintage one, but if I were to pick one, for practical reason I would get the SubC, cause it's going to be my every day watch.
|
17 November 2017, 07:30 PM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Earth's Blue Sky
Watch: LOVE
Posts: 308
|
|
17 November 2017, 08:13 PM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 6,522
|
I’m an antique collector but when it comes to watches I will pick a 2020 model if I can. To me the newer the less service, the less messing with the way Cmh, the less polishing and the more “here and now” I know I might be the odd duck here
|
17 November 2017, 08:27 PM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Watch: 16710, 16628
Posts: 7,755
|
Any no holes 16610 is the sweet spot for me, but that is the super sweet spot!
__________________
GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL ( D- Serial #) ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4 |
17 November 2017, 08:41 PM | #46 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 Patron
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 63,323
|
5513 of course!
__________________
SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT |
22 November 2017, 05:17 AM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Italy
Watch: Rolex Panerai
Posts: 7,106
|
5513 vs 114060 ?
14060 !
__________________
|
22 November 2017, 05:58 AM | #48 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Lee
Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48
Watch: What's on my wrist
Posts: 33,249
|
I hate to say it because I'm not fond of the 114060 however the newer watch is much more functional and less risky in use than the older.
|
8 December 2017, 09:25 AM | #49 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Real Name: Louis Nick Ric
Location: Michigan, USA
Watch: Blnr, Expll, Subs,
Posts: 10,159
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk |
|
8 December 2017, 01:43 PM | #50 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Real Name: Steve
Location: TO CAD, HCMC VN
Watch: MP 18946
Posts: 7,292
|
I prefer modern to bang up and vintage to admire. I wouldn’t wear a vintage piece in the pool but anything modern I do without question.
|
8 December 2017, 01:52 PM | #51 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 114
|
I like the overall design of a lot of vintage models over more recent designs but I would always buy modern over vintage for quality of finish, improved materials, better movement, etc.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
8 December 2017, 02:00 PM | #52 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Real Name: Marco
Location: Location,Location
Watch: Your Step
Posts: 277
|
Was just comparing my Kermit with my 116610LN last night. I love the Kermit, but I can't deny the awesomeness of the ceramic bezel and those massive lugs.
So modern for me. |
8 December 2017, 03:48 PM | #53 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 729
|
To me it's a blessing to own any Rolex Submariner and appreciate each one for what is is. The whole vintage vs. modern comparison makes no sense. I currently own a 5512 and a 5513 Maxi to scratch my vintage itch and a new ceramic Sub (no date) as my daily "beater" as well as a 16613 TT (black dial of course) for more formal wear.
I think I have all bases covered and am quite happy with every reference for varying reasons |
8 December 2017, 08:02 PM | #54 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: David
Location: London+Guangzhou
Watch: ing watches
Posts: 2,603
|
I like both. The modern Sub with its ceramic bezel is a thing of beauty. Yes, the lugs are a little wide but it doesn't look so bad on the wrist. Its the ultimate Sub incarnation (at least until the next one) - precise and beautifully engineered. I also have a 1977 Sea Dweller "Great White" (part of the Sub family) - yes it rattly, clunky etc but has bags and bags of charm and more character than the modern incarnation with its super dome acrylic crystal and matt dial. Both are beautiful but if I had to chose one I'd keep the vintage.
__________________
Rolex Sea Dweller 116600, GMT Master II 16710 (Pepsi) and 116710 BLNR, Daytona 116500LN, Submariner 14060M. |
9 December 2017, 12:53 AM | #55 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,650
|
I appreciate the 5513 but prefer the 114060 by a mile. No right or wrong choice, its what you prefer.
__________________
Rolex 116613LN Rolex 16610LN Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 41mm Omega Geneve Tag Heuer Aquaracer WAY2112 Orient Ray 2 |
9 December 2017, 02:43 AM | #56 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 629
|
From these two I'd say 5513.
In general I would choose 5-digits or less references. For maximum useability the 5-digits represent the best balance between moder attributes and classic looks. I have tried to like the ceramics, but failed every time..... |
9 December 2017, 12:24 PM | #57 |
Facilitator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Real Name: Steve
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 33,199
|
The 5513 was a great watch in its day, but that day is long gone.
As a curiosity piece the 5513 is very collectable as its number dwindle due to its expiry date and that explains its price. On the other hand, the 114060 is a today watch with modern day refinements in just about every area for continuous daily practical usage, month after month, year after year. I'd buy both, but the modern day watch is what one would wear.
__________________
Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy ROLEXploitation - yeah I'm a victim |
9 December 2017, 12:44 PM | #58 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5,615
|
I'd always pick any 5-digit or older Sub over the SubC, which I wouldn't even wear. The Subc is too heavy and aesthetically, uh, questionable, to put it nicely.
The SubC is the first Sub to be designed during the era of ubiquitous dive computer and cell phone usage, and its "look at me" jewelry vibe shows a bit. I think the same can be said of most 6-digit Rolex watches, and it's just not something that interests me. How's that for an opinion? |
9 December 2017, 01:20 PM | #59 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Watch: 16710, 16628
Posts: 7,755
|
Quote:
__________________
GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL ( D- Serial #) ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4 |
|
11 December 2017, 04:18 PM | #60 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Real Name: matt
Location: USA
Posts: 551
|
5513 for me. Don't care for the new case
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.