New here, please advise on first Sub purchase!

[Etschell]

I own both the bb and the subc.

Get the subc. You will not be let down. You can always add a bb later.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by JeanGenie

That's a cool piece of info. Next question for you: is the new version with the in house movement too thick at 14.5mm or whatever it is?

ETA BB is 12.5mm thick and SubC is 12.7mm, so virtually the same. The BB flat caseback makes it look thicker, but it is more stable/comfortable on the wrist, IMO. The new inhouse BB is thicker. Get a used ETA.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

ETA BB is 12.5mm thick and SubC is 12.7mm, so virtually the same. The BB flat caseback makes it look thicker, but it is more stable/comfortable on the wrist, IMO. The new inhouse BB is thicker. Get a used ETA.

Its the crystal tbh.

I dont mind the thickness of the new bb fwiw.

[Jack T]

A five or six year old 14060, which I own, properly cared for will still look great. I have the new bracelet and clasp on my Explorer, it is a nice upgrade, but the aluminum bezel on my 14060m still shines like new. If it's the case and dial that draws you to the older model, there are some good ones out there.

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by Etschell

Its the crystal tbh.

I dont mind the thickness of the new bb fwiw.

Neither do I. The BB is a magnificent watch and incredibly good value. But it scratches a different itch to the Sub. If you got it I still think you would hanker after a Sub. Best get a BB later on down the line as a second watch.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Etschell

Its the crystal tbh.

I dont mind the thickness of the new bb fwiw.

It's mainly the Sub's convex caseback. The BB crystal is only slightly domed.

[MCO1]

Originally Posted by JeanGenie

Actually, the Black Bay, with its nice matte look and lack of crown guard has tempted me sorely. It's very subtle- just not sure I can handle the snowflake. And once I start down this path of thinking, I begin to wonder if there is ANY modern Rolex for me. Only other one I'd consider is the Explorer I.

It's a good thing I don't have the cash yet!

I might go down the Explorer 1 road a bit further you might find it is the solution. I have owned a 14060M for several years and I enjoy it...I too have difficulty with the 114060 for the same reasons as yourself. I also have a 39mm Explorer and it is very similar in size, shape and aesthetics to the 14060M. I prefer it though because of the new bracelet and modern feel. Food for thought!

[JeanGenie]

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

Neither do I. The BB is a magnificent watch and incredibly good value. But it scratches a different itch to the Sub. If you got it I still think you would hanker after a Sub. Best get a BB later on down the line as a second watch.

It DOES scratch a different itch. That's the thing! As folks are pointing out, a slightly used but well cared for 14060 might make sense because it is the dial and case shape I love most about it, all things being equal.


Can a new bracelet from a 114060 be fitted to a 14060m?

[watchmaniac]

I posted a thread like this years ago. I went with a 16610. Wore that for a couple of years then went straight to a Hulk. The clasp is a work of art. Can't believe Rolex stayed with the same design for decades. It worked don't get me wrong, but other watch companies were coming up with some nice clasp designs. Love the new case and maxi dial. Can't go back to the older cases and design.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Wcdhtwn]

If you want a Rolex get a Rolex. Any other brand, Tudor included, isn't going to satisfy the desire for a Rolex. Absolutely nothing wrong with Tudor, came close to buy one more than once.

If you prefer the 5-digit models then that's what you should get. Don't talk yourself into a 6-digit, if you don't like the boxier lugs and larger case now, you never will. Yes the 6-digits have some advantages but they won't make up for a watch that doesn't look as good on your wrist as you'd like it to.

Good luck and enjoy the hunt!

[kd_submariner]

If you're not a fan of the aesthetics of a 114060, then it'd be torture to spend that money wearing something you won't love. ThoughI have a 114060 and love it, my vote is 14060

[JeanGenie]

Hey folks -

I wanted to pick up this thread again because I’ve been doing a good deal of hunting and mulling over what you’ve all said. I’m starting to think the right move for me might be to go for an older Sub from the 80s or early 90s – possibly my birth year, which is ’84. A fellow member suggested to me HQ Milton, where there appear to be some decently priced options.

My main question is this: how much of a headache, financially in particular, would I enter into going for a 30 year old Sub? Is that considered vintage at this point? It’s hard to know the service history on a lot of the pieces I come across; how much would an RSC charge approximately for a watch that age? (I know it depends on what needs replacing, etc)

This doesn’t quite solve my original problem of still having to shell out a high percentage of the amount of a new Sub for a much older one, but I’m realizing I really can’t do the new case shape – tried it on again recently at an AD and was immediately disappointed. Pretty much puts the nail in that coffin for me.

I’m think around low $5000’s (or, dare I say it, high $4,000's) for a decent piece from the mid 80s to early 90s. Is this reasonable?