The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 4 April 2020, 11:37 PM   #1
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
14060m vs 16610: Choices

So I am going round in circles on which pre-ceramic submariner to buy and finally decided to get either the 14060m or 16610.

I will get one of the later models of either possible and hopefully a full set in good condition - so this will either:

16610 (2007/2008/2009); or
14060m (2010/2011/2012).

I have been through the pros and cons of each and recognise that the 14060m has hollow end links (as opposed to the SEL’s on the 16610) and have toyed with the thought of whether I really need a date complication for a daily watch. The engraved rehaut is on modes I'm looking at so I am happy with this.

However, as a daily wearer I want the option to change straps often and so this is an important consideration.

Strap changes will be easier on the 14060m (due to lug holes that aren't on the later 16610's), I also feel like it looks better on straps (NATO, Zulu, leather etc) from online pictures. It just looks a bit sleeker and the 16610 may look a bit too 'busy' with the date window.

I know I am overthinking this and I can't really go wrong with either but I don't want buyer's remorse and go through the process of buying again.

If I did get the 16610, I could always get the tweezers that help changing the strap easier on no-lug hole models but I just don't want it to look too busy and regret it.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 12:03 AM   #2
watchmework
"TRF" Member
 
watchmework's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: DC
Watch: 126710BLRO, 116600
Posts: 7,869
These are two really great references...it sounds like you should determine what's more important to you having a date or the lug holes. I myself would prefer the date...and the additional time it would take to swap out bracelets with the SELs vs Lug holes should be marginal with a Bergeon 7825 tweezer. I also don't think the 16610 looks busy at all on a strap but that's just me. Good luck with your decision!
watchmework is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 01:34 AM   #3
Tools
TRF Moderator & 2024 Patron
 
Tools's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 42,991
Either choice is a good one.
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....)
NAWCC Member
Tools is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 05:36 AM   #4
illiguy
2024 Pledge Member
 
illiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: UTC/GMT -5
Posts: 3,447
Tough decision, but no wrong answer here. Best of luck. Would suggest “buying the seller” and, all things being equal, condition of watch is more important than anything else.
illiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 05:42 AM   #5
Zoran
"TRF" Member
 
Zoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Real Name: Zoran
Location: EU
Watch: 1655 Mark 1
Posts: 1,010
Either are great but for me the 16610 was more comfortable because the 93250 bracelet and the date function.
Swapping straps was easier indeed on the 14060 because of the lug holes.
If I had to choose today, I would go for the 14060 and swap straps on it!
__________________
Zoran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:01 AM   #6
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran View Post
Either are great but for me the 16610 was more comfortable because the 93250 bracelet and the date function.
Swapping straps was easier indeed on the 14060 because of the lug holes.
If I had to choose today, I would go for the 14060 and swap straps on it!

Even as a one watch daily wearer?

I keep coming back to the latest, best condition 16610 I can find...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:08 AM   #7
Zoran
"TRF" Member
 
Zoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Real Name: Zoran
Location: EU
Watch: 1655 Mark 1
Posts: 1,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawler View Post
Even as a one watch daily wearer?

I keep coming back to the latest, best condition 16610 I can find...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, due to easy changing of the strap/bracelet/nato it would make a flexible and versatile watch; the date is something I could live without, especially on the later 4-line dial that is perfectly symmetrical

Have you tried both on? If I remember correctly, the 14060 was a bit flatter on the wrist, but I could have imagined that as well...
__________________
Zoran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:48 AM   #8
Crazy Lugs
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 855
16610 is such a design classic, it’s hard to argue against- even as the owner of a 14060M and 114060. I’ve always wanted to try one as a daily driver- the 93250 bracelet is a huge upgrade IMHO.

However, I just can’t deal with the cyclops on a sub. I have no problem at all with cyclops on a 16710 or 126710 GMT, but I really do prefer the sub dial clean.
Crazy Lugs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:49 AM   #9
Crazy Lugs
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran View Post
Yes, due to easy changing of the strap/bracelet/nato it would make a flexible and versatile watch; the date is something I could live without, especially on the later 4-line dial that is perfectly symmetrical

Have you tried both on? If I remember correctly, the 14060 was a bit flatter on the wrist, but I could have imagined that as well...
The 14060 indeed wears a hair smaller in diameter and most definitely sits lower on the wrist than the 16610.

OP- I’d go with the 16610. You won’t regret it.
Crazy Lugs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:52 AM   #10
Zoran
"TRF" Member
 
Zoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Real Name: Zoran
Location: EU
Watch: 1655 Mark 1
Posts: 1,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Lugs View Post
The 14060 indeed wears a hair smaller in diameter and most definitely sits lower on the wrist than the 16610.

OP- I’d go with the 16610. You won’t regret it.
Thanks! So it wasn't my imagination
__________________
Zoran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:53 AM   #11
Nikrnic
"TRF" Member
 
Nikrnic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Real Name: Louis Nick Ric
Location: Michigan, USA
Watch: Blnr, Expll, Subs,
Posts: 10,159
I've always preferred no dates on my Subs. I have a 114060 and another 14060m late dated random which will always be a keeper.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Nikrnic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 06:54 AM   #12
GHEN
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Gahanna, Ohio
Posts: 47
Why not an earlier 16610 WITH lug holes?

GHEN
GHEN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 08:08 AM   #13
JP.
"TRF" Member
 
JP.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Juho
Location: Finland
Watch: Submariner 16610
Posts: 1,903
I've owned 14060 and I still own 16600 and 16610.

In my opinion the best choice of the three is always 16610, especially if you have a bit bigger wrist. All three are still amazing watches though.

But I explain it here in detail:
https://luxurywatches635.wordpress.c...-rolex-to-get/
__________________
My Luxury Watch Reviews Blog
JP. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 08:16 AM   #14
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP. View Post
I've owned 14060 and I still own 16600 and 16610.

In my opinion the best choice of the three is always 16610, especially if you have a bit bigger wrist. All three are still amazing watches though.

But I explain it here in detail:
https://luxurywatches635.wordpress.c...-rolex-to-get/

Thanks for this - great article.

The below is a picture of a 14060m and 116610LN I tried on around 2.5 years ago.

If the 16610 is a similar size to the 14060m, do you think I can pull off the size on my wrist size?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 09:35 AM   #15
SA1
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 287
I have a 4 line 14060M. It’s a great watch.
SA1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 11:53 AM   #16
MagPI
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoran View Post
Either are great but for me the 16610 was more comfortable because the 93250 bracelet and the date function.
Swapping straps was easier indeed on the 14060 because of the lug holes.
If I had to choose today, I would go for the 14060 and swap straps on it!
If you have a tweezer style spring bar tool - such as the Bergeon 7825 or Rolex 3200 - it’s actually much easier to change bracelets/straps without scratching your lugs on the non-drilled through cases.
MagPI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 12:08 PM   #17
illiguy
2024 Pledge Member
 
illiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: UTC/GMT -5
Posts: 3,447
No dog in this fight, but the 14060M looks perfect on your wrist. The 16610 would wear the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawler View Post
Thanks for this - great article.

The below is a picture of a 14060m and 116610LN I tried on around 2.5 years ago.

If the 16610 is a similar size to the 14060m, do you think I can pull off the size on my wrist size?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
illiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 04:35 PM   #18
Ihatecheese
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: London
Posts: 978
The date version may be more useful for a daily watch.
Otherwise another thing to set every time you wear !

Good to play with the watches again if you have the option. The bracelet on these older style watches isn't so great compared to the newer versions. I appreciate the drilled lugs on my 14060m. Personally I'm not as fond of the dive watch style at the moment but I'm sure given a sunny day on a beach in the future the love will be rekindled!
Ihatecheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 05:44 PM   #19
LLmrol
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 143
14060m all day!
LLmrol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 07:26 PM   #20
jakjuventus
"TRF" Member
 
jakjuventus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Bangkok
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawler View Post
Thanks for this - great article.

The below is a picture of a 14060m and 116610LN I tried on around 2.5 years ago.

If the 16610 is a similar size to the 14060m, do you think I can pull off the size on my wrist size?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Both are great on your wrist, if this is ur everyday watch I would suggest to get the Submariner with date.

You tried it on 2.5 years ago, wow, how could you resist for this long.

I thinks it’s the time now.
jakjuventus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 07:38 PM   #21
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakjuventus View Post
Both are great on your wrist, if this is ur everyday watch I would suggest to get the Submariner with date.

You tried it on 2.5 years ago, wow, how could you resist for this long.

I thinks it’s the time now.

I ended up getting the SubC Date - selling it and going backing for a year through 20 countries with a trusty G-Shock (as pictured below).

Now back and lusting for another that actually fits my feminine sized wrists!

The SubC Date was just too blocky for me (although technically it is a superior watch).




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 08:05 PM   #22
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
This was my SubC Date - lovely watch but just wore too big for me unfortunately.

It felt a bit like a Lego block but if I had bigger wrists I would have absolutely kept it!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 April 2020, 10:55 PM   #23
Glock2710
2024 Pledge Member
 
Glock2710's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Real Name: Jimmy
Location: Central, Florida
Watch: 14060M
Posts: 267
Tough to go wrong with either one. I prefer the clean dial without the date/cyclops so went with a 14060M. I searched and found one to match the year my wife and I were married. Good luck on the hunt, that is part of the fun!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Glock2710 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2020, 12:23 AM   #24
Finslayer83
"TRF" Member
 
Finslayer83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tennessee
Watch: DW-5600
Posts: 1,584
Owned both at the same time.

Only have one now - you can always remove that cyclops



Finslayer83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2020, 12:30 AM   #25
Johny
"TRF" Member
 
Johny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: john
Location: Scotland
Watch: sub 16610Lv
Posts: 13,523
Hi op.

The Anniversary submariner has some interesting features.
__________________
"AFTER DARK" BAR AND NIGHT CLUB GM.
Johny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2020, 12:33 AM   #26
Gee2789
"TRF" Member
 
Gee2789's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Texas
Watch: 1967 Doxa 300 no-T
Posts: 108
I've heard that the 14060 is just a thinner watch than the later 16610 watches. Here's a thread that compares a 14060 vs a 16610

As a result, the 14060 would be my preferred choice. But i have a relatively small wrist and prefer a sleeker feel to my watches.
Gee2789 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2020, 12:49 AM   #27
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
Does anyone have both watches that they can compare on their own wrist?

Be interesting to see if it looks like a difference size wise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2020, 02:42 AM   #28
illiguy
2024 Pledge Member
 
illiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: UTC/GMT -5
Posts: 3,447
Check out this thread: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=112776
illiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2020, 04:08 AM   #29
faimag
"TRF" Member
 
faimag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: US, SG, DK, GR
Watch: Reverso
Posts: 3,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawler View Post
Does anyone have both watches that they can compare on their own wrist?

Be interesting to see if it looks like a difference size wise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
they look and wear exactly the same in my eyes; the 14060 is just a tiny bit thinner.
faimag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 April 2020, 03:46 PM   #30
lawler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: GB
Posts: 73
Looks like I'm picking up a 14060m

Thanks all!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.