What I Do Not Like About The Sub 114060

[Rsvrider]

I agree, other than the internal improvements I would rather have something like this pic, but in 42mm! Love that the bezel outdoes the case and the sensuality of the lugs, even the crown guards are sexy!
Rolex is turning Bell Ross a bit....

[kenhiraihnl]

From April issue of Watchtime magazine...I prefer the pointy crown protector version...reminds me of my 5512...hehehehe...
(taken with my iPhone4s)
-Ken

[LWRN]

They should have, they could have, if only they would have. At the expected price point, this Submariner makes no sense for the end user, in terms of practicality, function and value. If it is priced at least 1000USD lower than the 116610, that would make for a more compelling argument.

[77T]

Me thinks it fits the new Rolex strategy to maximize margin on every case they mill.

[wokafu]

i was excited over the maxi dial/ceramic bezel on it but when its out im kinda dissapointed..maybe im sick...??

[MortgageGuy]

Agreed Larry. As to the other post I would love and I mean LOVE to see some red writing on the dial of a new sub. Unfortunately I just don't think it will ever happen

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by wokafu

i was excited over the maxi dial/ceramic bezel on it but when its out im kinda dissapointed..maybe im sick...??

It seems to me that Rolex delivered exactly what you and many others asked for to at "T."

[5517]

It wouldn't follow tradition for the new ND to be 42mm when the Sub-C is 40mm. It's always been a bit smaller at 39.5mm with a slightly different bezel. From largest to smallest it's the dweller, sub-date and then the sub. Now Rolex have the DSSD, Sub-C date and Sub-C ND, but it seems that the new sub is the same size as the Sub-C.

Many people would have preferred a 42mm Sub-C ND but I'm just saying that it wouldn't make sense to be larger.

[snaggle]

Hmm, I don;t know, I feel I much prefer the new ND Sub. I feel it looks better and surely would feel better on the wrist too! Each to his own though, and the good side is, you can still get the 14060 as they are still available!

[valentine]

I'd buy it amd have the CGs removed. THAT would solve my issues

[Andad]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I guess you could say that I am in a state of quiet resignation.

We all knew that this was coming and it turned out exactly as I expected that it would, just a little sooner.

I have my randomly-numbered 14060m, which I am told is a 3130 with the blue Parachrom hairspring, so I'm pretty happy.

I was at the AD a week ago and the watchmaker and I were talking about Basel and what to expect.

In the meantime, I was trying on several watches for the heck of it and I tried on one of the Sub-Dates for the first time that I can remember and I had to admit that there were qualities of the watch's appearance that were compelling, although the over-sized lugs still seem superfluous.

I do agree that the 114060 is now just another Sub and while I avoided ever calling the earlier Submariners "No-Date Subs," I think that now the term is appropriate. It's just that Sub with no date.

In terms of what I don't like, I really have to admit again that because this was inevitable and long expected that one simply has to accept it for what it is and what they did was better than just killing it off.

I think the change has made a lot of people quite happy for all the wrong reasons, but they are the future of the line.

x2 Grady.

The Submariner was in need of a bracelet upgrade. I like the ceramic bezel but and the movement upgrades will continue but the maxi case was a mistake.

[OneMoreSi]

Fantastic update.

[kenhiraihnl]

I'd like to see a poll to see how women who wear Subs feel about the 14060M vs. the new 14060C. I think they would lean toward the M (looks over function). But I could be wrong, as I've been wrong about womens' preferences so many times. LOL.

[Icetlv]

It's more expensiv than the Explorer II ?

What is the reason ? Explorer II has date, second time zone, paraflex, ....

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Icetlv

It's more expensiv than the Explorer II ?

What is the reason ? Explorer II has date, second time zone, paraflex, ....

Subs are always more expensive than the Explorer II's and GMT's.

Stuff isn't priced because it has this or doesn't have that.. They are priced on what the market will bear.. Subs are more popular and sell quickly- they are priced accordingly.

[Dr. Robert]

Larry/Tools......say it ain't so....& I quote...."I don't care so much about the lug holes"
That made the tool watch look!
Now the Swiss elf who ran the lug hole drilling machine is out of work, bah humbug.
P.S. It's not so much the look of the new subs for me.....it's the increased weight....not comfy for me, I can't see why making stuff heavier makes it mo bettah?

[sierra11b]

Originally Posted by Gharddog03

Should of been 42mm.

Back when the Maxi came I out I would have disagreed but now that I love my Exp42 and have flipped my GMTIIC (which I thought wore unbalanced and too top heavy) I couldn't agree more.

By now more people would have warmed-up to 42mm than those that might never warm-up to the Maxi case. There still would be the 40mm diehards that just said no way but judging how my Exp42 fits vs the Maxi, and the legibility of the dial, I bet a 42mm Sub would have been much better received by today's standards.

[withthesword]

if i had all kinds of money, the only thing i would do to the new 114060 is swap out the dial and hand set for the non-maxi type. i'm still adamantly against the maxi dial and handsets. they look cartoonish in size and make the whole package look as such. that's just my opinion anyways. i feel like with everything getting all bloated and expanded it's lost all of the classic sleek lines and proportions.

i'm a fan of the maxi case and i've started warming up to the ceramic bezels, but i just can't get to liking those new dials and hands.

i guess that's why i just can't let go of my 16610.

Best Regards,

Matte

[Darlinboy]

I'm a fan of the new Sub!

Will probably pick up a "gently loved" example in a year or two, when the "bleeding edgers" & "flippers" have worn the new off the first production run, and moved on to something else.

[Gundam]

Originally Posted by Tools

I agree here.. With this move, they will put the 114060 at a price point only a few hundred below the Sub Date. At that price point, you can have a GMT II, Exp II42, or get the 116610 for only peanuts more in cost..

this positioning doesn't really put the 114060 where the scales will tip in it's favor for anybody but the person who absolutely must have this model.. I fear this is not a large percentage of current watch buyers..

The Sub has always been a few hundred below its corresponding Sub Date in price, as far as I remember. The 16610 was not a great deal more expensive than the 14060m.

And it was never as good a seller as the Date. When I bought my 14060m a few years ago, it had been sitting in the AD for over a year (almost 2 years, I believe it was) and he was desperate to sell it; I got a small but reasonable discount.

[jdpny]

"The maxi case is the worst designed case ever to come from Rolex."

Glad I've got my (regular) Sea-Dweller!

[Linzjnr]

Originally Posted by Puffy

that would look quite nice...

but without lug holes. they don't belong on a modern day watch imo

WOW, how is it that just by making one word red it changes it's whole look.

It looks fantastic

[Gundam]

Originally Posted by Linzjnr

WOW, how is it that just by making one word red it changes it's whole look.

It looks fantastic

Which begs the question why Rolex ditched it. Did they run out of red paint?

[bluemartinifan]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

I really like it, but I have always been a big fan of the new ceramics. The one glaring omission I see, is that Rolex missed the opportunity to really make it really special. This is basically a 116610 without the date. I think it would have been a much bigger hit, if the word "Submariner" was in red, or they preserved the lug holes, or even if they went back to the two-line style of dial text. Just one (or all) of these features would have really made it shine as a unique successor to the 14060M. Without anything to differentiate it from the 116610 (except the lack of a date) I find it to be a bit boring.

This is very well said. I owned a 14060 2 liner and it is the only watch I regret selling (I actually sold 2 of them ) - I own the GMT Ceramic and the case and lugs do not bother me at all - I love the watch - your comments about making 1 or 2 nods to the past like lug holes or red writing is right on

I do miss this one...

[Speed]

At the time...no one really cared for the red lettering. That's my understanding.

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by capote

The maxi case is the worst designed case ever to come from Rolex. Slowly it has worked itself through the sport line. Sub ND was the last of the great classic cases.

I agree with you. The bracelet is simple too small for this fat case. It's a shame that they finally offer a bracelet worth paying for and then don't bother to upsize it to match the new case.

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by mike

To be honest I'm a tad bit suprised Rolex even carries the reference and didn't discontinue it. One wonders outside of WISdom how many they sell compared to the date version.

Rolex doesn't strike me as sentimental in the least. I am glad they did as at least it does speak somewhat to the companies heritage.

My thoughts exactly

[cptmike03]

I hate the maxi case and new larger bezel insert (to each his own though) and wish they would have at least kept the 14060M in the lineup. At the very least, it would have given people the option of buying a less expensive sub as a "gateway" sports rolex. Also wish they would have kept the explorer at 36mm too.

What really bothers me about the new sizes are that they are made for cosmetic only reasons. They do nothing to improve the function of the watch. It really moves the watch into pure jewelry status instead of it's tool watch roots. Ruins the entire history of this tough watch worn by adventures, 007, explorers, and elite military forces.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by cptmike03

What really bothers me about the new sizes are that they are made for cosmetic only reasons. They do nothing to improve the function of the watch. It really moves the watch into pure jewelry status instead of it's tool watch roots. Ruins the entire history of this tough watch worn by adventures, 007, explorers, and elite military forces.

Why fix what isn't broken?

[cptmike03]

Yeah, why change your iconic classic?