Is the Submariner overrated?

[Polarexplorerii]

Originally Posted by stmoore

He should share these thoughts the next time he is scarfing down a free rolex dinner.

$9,000 on the Glashutte Original SeaQ? Nope. The Oris? Wow.

[DoctorA]

No it’s not!

[Submariner 1]

Submariner is the iconic dive watch. The one that all others are measured against. I am lucky to own a 114060 and I love the way I feel when wearing it.

[Chewbacca]

Good video btw. Thanks OP.

[gtnator]

No. It’s bulletproof, looks great, and feels great. But most importantly, the best James Bond wore it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[glamorama]

No it's not overrated in my opinion. I never owned one but it just seem to be the perfect watch with all its history, design and versatility.

It was never about what is the 'better' watch.

[Brady2117]

I agree, the sub is THE Rolex classic timeless dive watch. Overrated..maybe by those who can't get on due to long wait list or just plain hard to get. I have a bluesy and DJ41 and the black sub just goes with everything and never gets old. That's my two cents.

[iTreelex]

not as much as the daytona lol. But imo no. Love the sub!

[bay-dweller]

The sub is not over-rated, but those other watches are under-rated. So I guess RELATIVELY speaking the Sub is over rated.

Some people like under-rated stuff because it makes them feel unique, or like a trend setter/ taste maker.

Do you and enjoy this hobby.

[TswaneNguni]

Biggest bargain in watch world at MRSP .

[JChips]

Originally Posted by csaltphoto

Just about any dive watch is overrated these days, given that there is no use for a mechanical dive watch in modern scuba/saturation diving/etc.; much less for one that costs more than all the rest of your gear combined. Sure, you can bring it with you diving (I do) but it has no more practical functionality than a sextant on a modern naval ship. It's the best buggy whip; a Dunhill lighter on a non-smoking flight.

However the Submariner was, and probably will be for the foreseeable future, the quintessential dive watch. And beyond that it is a really good watch; accurate, rugged and designed to outlast the owner. Combine that with a worldwide service network, reasonably priced service and long service intervals.

Pricing? Heck, mine has appreciated in value at least 30% since I bought it 2 years ago. There is price and there is value. And the market sees the value in the watch.

Are there better tools available for diving, or any other types of time keeping, these days ? Absolutely. Agreed 100%.

With that said, I’ve spent the better part of my career in units that have nearly unlimited budgets, fantastic gear and, still, having and using a Sub seems to be unofficially required.... not many guys that don’t own and use one every day.

Maybe it’s tradition ? Or maybe it’s the fact that one is none and two is one ?

I’ve seen so much so-called great high tech gear go t*ts up when you actually need it, but the Rolex seems to keep running just fine. There’s some sense of dependability and reliability built into it and dudes trust it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JChips]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

This is what it all boils down to.

And Rolex prepares for it in propping up Tudor.

Is it overpriced if people are willing to pay the price for it ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Phooi]

Originally Posted by Rexplorer214270

I know this may be somewhat of a loaded question, and full disclosure I have a SubC Date, I absolutely love it. I thought of this while watching a Bark and Jack video where Adrian was making the case that the Glashutte Original SeaQ Panorama Q Date was better than the Sub/Sub Date. I also know some may argue the Oris 65 diver or the Blancplan 50 fathoms. So is the Submariner just getting by on reputation and perceived retained value as not only a dive watch but say as daily wearer as well?

Define better. Looks, function, design, etc? Of course. But I’m sure if you forced him to choose only one, he’d end up with a Sub. Remember, he’s there to make money on YT. To do that he needs views...

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by JChips

Are there better tools available for diving, or any other types of time keeping, these days ? Absolutely. Agreed 100%.

With that said, I’ve spent the better part of my career in units that have nearly unlimited budgets, fantastic gear and, still, having and using a Sub seems to be unofficially required.... not many guys that don’t own and use one every day.

Maybe it’s tradition ? Or maybe it’s the fact that one is none and two is one ?

I’ve seen so much so-called great high tech gear go t*ts up when you actually need it, but the Rolex seems to keep running just fine. There’s some sense of dependability and reliability built into it and dudes trust it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with this too. Like Trijicons/Elcan are some extremely well built and hard wearing tools but nice to have irons for back up. If you have to know the time... I'd still pick Rolex.

[Maxy]

Nope, it is actually under-rated. Beyond all the marketing and hype, beneath its still a fantastic dive watch!

[teabags001]

Depends on the current market. If you have to pay market price being over 11k for a new one I would say yes and no. No as in your money will always be there even at 11k as retail plus tax is somewhat close.

I would say yes if you compare it to a SD43 that has a retail price of $11,700 new and you can get them from ADs a lot easier with a lot of people reporting very short wait times. It’s a 50th anniversary model with RED lettering. A future classic in the making with Tons more wrist presence for not much more then a grey market sub.

A submariner at retail or below retail will never be overrated imo because it’s the most iconic watch ever made. Although no one wants to talk about it value retention as well as instant recognition does play a major part of why the Rolex brand is so popular. The secondary market drives Rolex to the top of must have watches today not the retail market.

The other watches you listed like the 50 fathoms and Oris are nice. And value wise might be better per say dollars per specs of the watch. But we are talking about luxury watches. A $10 timex has a better value proposition then any watch. But that is a different thread for another time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by JChips

Is it overpriced if people are willing to pay the price for it ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Possibly.

But and because, it’s not a watch alone anymore. Rolex is now part of the asset class. And I doubt people are ‘willing’ to pay, they just have to because it’s seen as an investment. There’s a psychology to it and let’s not forget something, if Rolex believes a sub is worth $5k over MSRP, they’d charge for it.

What they’re doing is creating scarcity to protect the brand from dips they saw in the 90s and the housing bubble.

Again, it’s not about watches. It’s about the brand and creating demand to those who’d never consider buying a $15k watch, in order to hedge against dips.

But there are those who’d pay $15k for a wearable investment and drive a $300 per month vw. Just look at the threads..? Many seem like they can’t put in the effort to understand or negotiate their cell contract and bill or a mortgage renewal but they want a PhD in Rolex? Cmon, man. Order a watch and wait a bit at MSRP. Nobody is forcing anyone to pay above.

This is now beyond watches and a hobby.

[Macnavara]

I think bark and jack is over rated

[Thor95]

Three years in and I honestly love mine more now than the day I got it. It could truly be someone's one and only watch.

[Kirsty87]

No. It's a great watch, with oodles of history...and it looks awesome...and it retains value...


...and most importantly, it does not have a stupid 4 o'clock window!

[eightball76]

I think the whole watch market is getting ridiculous...... I remember buying my first submariner for under £2K which at the time was a stretch but still possible for a young mechanic. Now its £6.3K so wouldn't be an option had I been 24. With the challenge of getting hard to get SS models I have been looking at other brands, I picked up at SMP last year for £3.3K and I think its a great watch, I've just seen that if I want a new SMP in SS with a 321 movement then I need to pay £13K plus (assuming you are able to find one)...... absolute madness, so with that in mind Rolex doesn't seem too bad

[Frank McKay]

It’s Underrated.

[SearChart]

Blancpain

[Binky1]

I bought my Sub just over 30 years ago for £1300 I think...not sure what it’s worth now but I reckon if I sell it I would re coup buying and servicing costs and maybe inflation? So I get a free-ish, tough as old boots rather nice diving watch! But it’s going to get passed down when I peg it.

Obviously a dive computer is more useful but a Sub makes a great backup.
Electronics can fail. When I passed my BSAC in the late 80s I’m pretty sure dive computers weren’t around. When I did my first dive late 70s we didn’t even have BC vests just weights And that dive was with Michel Metery in Martinique who knew a fair bit about diving,...excuse the name drop! To the point ...always have
A back up and a back up plan.

I have watched one B & J video, I don’t think much of them and wouldn’t watch anymore...agree with former thread....over rated.

Apart from Seamaster and Pelagos ....there is no other diving watch I would consider at around that price point (msrp)....so imho not over rated one bit.

[Tombstone]

I own a ceramic no date, I have a 50th Ann. Sub as well. They used to be the kings. They now live in my safe. The new Omega 300m Sea Master is better than the Rolex Sub. It’s only problem to many it does not say Rolex on the dial. I bought the Omega and it was on my wrist for six months straight. I will always keep my Subs but I don’t have the love I once had for them. Strangely my Explorer II black dial 40mm is my favorite Rolex I own right now.

[JP.]

No it's not overrated.

This is what I wrote in my review:

"Submariner is not the most original choice, far from it. Some watch collectors consider it unimaginative and mundane… nor it is anything special from the horological standpoint. It’s not the most expensive Rolex, nor it’s the most desirable (as the production numbers are so high), nor it’s as difficult to obtain as say, Cosmograph Daytona. But even the naysayers can’t deny its iconic status in the watch world. It’s the most copied watch in the world.

There are a lot of discussions how brand XXX has made much better bracelet or clasp than a Submariner. Or how the model XXX is “much better done” than a Submariner. Well yeah, but they’re still not the Rolex Submariner – and never will be.

There is a whole industry built around Submariner homages. It’s THE model that most manufacturers aspire to have in their lineup – and a measuring stick that all dive watches get compared to, like it or not."

Rolex 16610 review

[Frank McKay]

Originally Posted by JP.

No it's not overrated.

This is what I wrote in my review:

"Submariner is not the most original choice, far from it. Some watch collectors consider it unimaginative and mundane… nor it is anything special from the horological standpoint. It’s not the most expensive Rolex, nor it’s the most desirable (as the production numbers are so high), nor it’s as difficult to obtain as say, Cosmograph Daytona. But even the naysayers can’t deny its iconic status in the watch world. It’s the most copied watch in the world.

There are a lot of discussions how brand XXX has made much better bracelet or clasp than a Submariner. Or how the model XXX is “much better done” than a Submariner. Well yeah, but they’re still not the Rolex Submariner – and never will be.

There is a whole industry built around Submariner homages. It’s THE model that most manufacturers aspire to have in their lineup – and a measuring stick that all dive watches get compared to, like it or not."

Rolex 16610 review

Well said.

[Jamhot]

I have never bought a Submariner throughout my watch collecting history so I don't get the appeal. But it is pretty obvious some people on here just think of it as an asset to buy and sell rather than just liking the watch n

[campfire]

Nope, not for me.

[mailman]

No.