Rolex 14060m 2 liner vs 4 liner

[springbar]

The two-liner, not only for the prettier dial but also for the clean rehaut.

[daveo5]

Very nice looking 5512. I owned one a number of years ago. The movement was a different caliber than in the two liner 5513. Remember sending it to RWSC Dallas for service. They did what they could but advised that a shortage of parts made it hard to service. The 14060M COSC non-date was the reincarnation, with updated movement. The 5512 had a short production run and was replaced by the Sub with date and COSC.

[nick c]

I like the 2 liner much better, it’s my 5c

[ink3027]

I went back and forth on this and settled on the 2-liner. Love the look of the cleaner dial. Either way though, you can't go wrong, just get the one that calls to you.

[Gerry62]

2 liner is definitely way cleaner. I prefer it

[F131F]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

As Peter has noted many times, the movements in the 2-liners, while not certified by COSC, were more than capable of such accuracy and your experience confirms that.

I just picked-up a 14060A 2-liner 10 days ago and it's running just as accurately as my other recently purchased models. I was told this watch is an "A" from 1999 and has a 3000 movement. Can someone tell me what the difference is from the "M"?

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by F131F

I just picked-up a 14060A 2-liner 10 days ago and it's running just as accurately as my other recently purchased models. I was told this watch is an "A" from 1999 and has a 3000 movement. Can someone tell me what the difference is from the "M"?

I'm pretty sure that the 14060M has the 3130 movement. You should be able to Google that. I'm busy now and cannot.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[F131F]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I'm pretty sure that the 14060M has the 3130 movement. You should be able to Google that. I'm busy now and cannot.

Found this:

"In production until 1999 when it transitioned into the ref. 14060M, an outwardly identical watch but housing the upgraded Cal. 3130, the purist’s preferred Sub managed to blend contemporary technology with the best of Rolex’s vintage identity."

[Michaeli Paulo]

Total newbie here, everything I know about Rolex watches I learned here over the last two months!!! Ha, ha!

I initially was going to get the 114060, as I wanted the “latest and greatest” in Submariner technology.

When I instead decided on the 14060M, (due to it’s more classic design,) I still wanted the latest and greatest, so I chose one produced just before the reference moved to the 114060. (Since I liked the engraved rehaut on the 114060, I was glad to be able to get it on the 14060M. To me, the engraved rehaut is such a refined detail; something they didn’t have to add, but looks so great and I’m they did.)

So the most recent “”classic” Submariner happened to be the four liner. If it had been a two liner instead, I would have been equally satisfied. Two or four both look good to me, and as GradyPhilpott previously mentioned, there are vintage four liners, as well.





Both fantastic looking watches!!!

Michael

[Subconscious]

I had no idea the 4-liner was rarer of the two, but even after knowing this now I still prefer the cleaner dial on the 2-liner version.