114060 How Thin Does it Wear?

[Photovideopro]

Interesting responses everyone. I really appreciate it! I just wish ADs had stock right now. I haven't tried one on in months. Hard to make a decision off of pictures.

[Andrejb]

7.4 inch wrist


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JacksonStone]

A lot of it is perspective. Having owned a lot of Breitlings before getting my Sub, and still owning the much thicker Omega SM300, the SubC doesn't seem thick at all. (Although it does wear thicker than an Aerospace, but that's an outlier.) Since you're coming from a Tudor, you might feel differently. You've had ample opportunity to try on the Sub, so you're in a good position to decide for yourself how you feel about it.

[JR16]

Originally Posted by Quailhunter

I greatly prefer the fit of my GMT II to the Sub C. I thought the Sub clasp was much bulkier than that of the GMT. Fit is a very personal and subjective thing so try the watches on before buying.

I would agree with this as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[cjohns]

Here is my 2 cents worth,,, having owned both a 114060 and 2 14060s the watch doesn't wear thin. It wears thinner than a car tire or a Breitling but that being said I'm almost 60 and have owned a 16710 for over 20+ years so I think you can find where my allegiance might lie... I recently picked up a 126300 and the first thing I did was take off that god awful clasp and put on a "tuna can"clasp.Looks like it was meant to be there.And just remember the 114060s clasp is even a bigger slab of a scatch magnet piece of stainless, ick !!..Just my HOP from an old fart...

[Nikrnic]

I Think the 114060 is perfectly perportioned. I had a black bay red and that was a little thick to me although it had great presence.

[Tmac478]

I have a 7.5" flat wrist.
Here's mine :

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by mjclark32

Compared to the Tudor it should wear slimmer, but if you want a thin watch look outside of a diver.
That said, I wear a sub (16610) 99% of the time and it’s absolutely fine.
Good luck!

+1 for 16610


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Photovideopro]

Resurrecting this thread to say that I bought a 114060 and it definitely wears slimmer than the Black Bay ETA. At times it feels very thin for a diver, depending on wrist position. No regrets!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by mailman

the 114060 is a great watch. In my experience it doesn't wear thin at all. Not tall like a 116600, but still not slim.

Bonus question answer...yes you can tell a difference in height, comfort and weight. I prefer the 5 digit subs overall. Imo, the only benefit of all of the 6 digit subs are the maxi dial and hands. Ymmv

+1

[Loevhagen]

The 114060 wears fat, compared to a 16610, 16710, 1675, 16750, 16713, 16618, etc.

[Chadridv]

Originally Posted by Photovideopro

Resurrecting this thread to say that I bought a 114060 and it definitely wears slimmer than the Black Bay ETA. At times it feels very thin for a diver, depending on wrist position. No regrets!

Congrats! Let’s see some pics