Why is "SUB NO DATE" not certified?

[steel4me]

I do not find this writing on the 14060 or 14060M's dials:

"Superlative Chronometer ... Officially Certified"


Why???

[toph]

because until this year it was not COSC ( swiss timing institute)tested meaning it was not an officially certified chronometer. However this changed last year and the most recent 14060M does have this on the dial as it is now an officially certified chronometer.
simple as that

[Wingshooter]

Originally Posted by toph

because until this year it was not cosc ( swiss timing institute)tested meaning it was not an officially certified chronometer. However this changed last year and the most recent 14060m does have this one the dial as it is no an officially certified chronometer.
Simple as that

x2

Just as an aside. The 14060M has the 3130 movement and the 14060 has the 3000 movement. So you can find 14060M with COSC but never a 14060.

[steel4me]

so rolex would not send the model out for official certification? Any reason why???

[toph]

Originally Posted by steel4me

so rolex would not send the model out for official certification? Any reason why???

yes. secondly i have no idea as it is the exact same movement that is now COSC.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by steel4me

so rolex would not send the model out for official certification? Any reason why???

Probably no reason other than tradition.

The 14060 was the replacement for the 5513 Sub after the longest production run in Rolex history (almost 30 years)....and none of them COSC certified or painted..

[karmatp]

Lets not forget the 5512 which was from the 60's and had the COSC writing and cert, after that the 5513 came out without it.


COSC no date



My last no date-non-COSC model....same movement.

[astcell]

Is there a no date sub that HAS the chapter ring writing but does NOT have the cosc writing? I want one.

[redshirt1957]

Originally Posted by astcell

Is there a no date sub that HAS the chapter ring writing but does NOT have the cosc writing? I want one.

Down boy down. You just got the 16800, take a deep breath and enjoy..

[erasuretim]

the 14060m is the sub - just "the sub" it is not the "no date sub" its just "the sub" its not lacking in anything [like the date -which it is designed not to have] because a diver when he goes under water doesn't need to know what the date is.

The sub [that's the 14060m and its predecessors] didn't have a date window till they bought out the "subdate" which did.

So to summarise the 14060m is a sub not the "no date sub"
the 16610 is the "subdate" and not "the sub".

Sorry if i sound like a but it makes me when people refer to the 14060m as the "no date sub".

I will now go and find a quiet corner for a lie down.



Tim

[BiG JeEzY]

Not to mention the older Air Kings. They also did not have the COSC certification and the writing "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified." I agree that Larry's reason is correct, they did it because of tradition. But I also believe that a lack of the date feature had something to deal with it. That's because the Air King has never had a date and still doesn't today.

The older non-COSC Air Kings would have the word "Precision" inscribed on the dial.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by steel4me

so rolex would not send the model out for official certification? Any reason why???

Quite simple cost its quite expensive to test each individual bare un-cased movement with the Swiss COSC.But fact all Rolex movements made since the 1940s on could easily pass the COSC test,IMHO the COSC test is now a pure marketing ploy.And with very careful regulation most movements made today could pass the COSC test.
The European DIN test for mechanical watches or the Japanese equivalent to the COSC test is to a far higher standard that the Swiss COSC -2 Sec to +4 Secs per 24 hours.And in the 1980s with the Daytona 6263/5 range only the all gold models were COSC tested the S.steel models were not ,but exactly the same Cal 72 movement in both.

[C. Davidson]

Originally Posted by steel4me

I do not find this writing on the 14060 or 14060M's dials:

"Superlative Chronometer ... Officially Certified"


Why???

I always thought that the movements for the non date subs were sent for certification, like most other Rolex movements, but Rolex didnt want to advertise this, hence no writing "Superlative Chronometer" on the dial. They did this (as i was lead to believe) as an added incentive to get people to upgrade to the date version.

[DSJ]

Originally Posted by erasuretim

the 14060m is the sub - just "the sub" it is not the "no date sub" its just "the sub" its not lacking in anything [like the date -which it is designed not to have] because a diver when he goes under water doesn't need to know what the date is.

The sub [that's the 14060m and its predecessors] didn't have a date window till they bought out the "subdate" which did.

So to summarise the 14060m is a sub not the "no date sub"
the 16610 is the "subdate" and not "the sub".

Sorry if i sound like a but it makes me when people refer to the 14060m as the "no date sub".

I will now go and find a quiet corner for a lie down.



Tim

I actually agree with you, but getting others to sign on will be even harder than getting people to stop calling the rehaut a "chapter ring."

[karmatp]

Originally Posted by erasuretim

the 14060m is the sub - just "the sub" it is not the "no date sub" its just "the sub" its not lacking in anything [like the date -which it is designed not to have] because a diver when he goes under water doesn't need to know what the date is.

The sub [that's the 14060m and its predecessors] didn't have a date window till they bought out the "subdate" which did.

So to summarise the 14060m is a sub not the "no date sub"
the 16610 is the "subdate" and not "the sub".

Sorry if i sound like a but it makes me when people refer to the 14060m as the "no date sub".

I will now go and find a quiet corner for a lie down.



Tim

I feel thew same way but find it more frustrating to say sub then people are like, "were is the date?" I usually say Sub and I bet most assume that it is the sub date. Sometimes it's just easier to say no-date to get the point across.

[mcubed]

Originally Posted by karmatp

I feel thew same way but find it more frustrating to say sub then people are like, "were is the date?" I usually say Sub and I bet most assume that it is the sub date. Sometimes it's just easier to say no-date to get the point across.

I do the same thing, but perhaps it is time we stopped. and just call the 14060 the submariner. If people get confused...too bad

[HYDROMAROC]

Originally Posted by padi56

Quite simple cost its quite expensive to test each individual bare un-cased movement with the Swiss COSC.But fact all Rolex movements made since the 1940s on could easily pass the COSC test,IMHO the COSC test is now a pure marketing ploy.And with very careful regulation most movements made today could pass the COSC test.
The European DIN test for mechanical watches or the Japanese equivalent to the COSC test is to a far higher standard that the Swiss COSC -2 Sec to +4 Secs per 24 hours.And in the 1980s with the Daytona 6263/5 range only the all gold models were COSC tested the S.steel models were not ,but exactly the same Cal 72 movement in both.

It's not as if Rolex is absorbing the cost of each test... I would have to believe it's built into the price of each watch...

[Tools]

Originally Posted by DSJ

I actually agree with you, but getting others to sign on will be even harder than getting people to stop calling the rehaut a "chapter ring."

Or to stop calling the GMT a freakin' Coke....

[Toxicant]

Originally Posted by Tools

Or to stop calling the GMT a freakin' Coke....

Yeah, it's a Pepsi