Hello!

I am lucky engouh to be able to enjoy a big pile of watches, some being collectible and these days, worth some money. Two of them do not leave the safe enough. Also, I'd like to try again to enjoy a modernish Rolex*. I set up a meeting next Friday with a local dealer who enjoys a good reputation; the guy has a regular flux of Rolex in his shop and we thought about doing a straight trade, my two collectibles against one Rolex. Price wise, I was thinking about a 14060 and a 16600. Ideally a 5113 or a 1016 could be nice but probably priced very much higher for a nice example so I am forgetting these two.

It will come down to the exact state of watches I will see (tritium patina, case, accessories) anyway but it would be nice to pick the collective brain here for answers to a few questions beforehand. I'm not really a Rolex expert, I know things but they are not my specialty.

- I understand the sea dweller 16600 is much more uncommon than the 14060?

- how different do they wear? the 16600 looks both heavier and thicker, but I like the shape and the cool engraving on the case back; I also find the case more sculpted, curved back, higher crystal. Probably unwearable on a NATO unlike the sub.

- does anybody tried an aftermarket sapphire with AR coating with it? Also, does a Rolex service crystal has internal AR these days? (imho it really should but who knows with these guys)
I must admit, the glare did bother me on my 16570...
I know @JwRosenthal tried a plexi on his 14060 and that is interesting... Tempting even.

- the 14060 may be easier to maintain long term? I'm not after 4000ft of WR for the SD but I wonder if the valve could be problematic concerning the WR.

- are there any important subvariants of the models I should be aware of ?

A thread without pictures is not worth looking at so I'm adding these from google to illustrate :



The kind of picture that tempts me: Mercedes tritium and not much bling.



* I had a Exp2 16570 luminova that I did not keep: nice case but the lume was horrible and I found the dial lifeless; also, GMT + cyclop + lots of lines on the dial is a bit much... so I'm looking at older, cleaner tritium 1990s models, to have some added charisma (not big on bright white indexes).

 

A tricky choice indeed. The 14060 wears nice and easy. With the simple classic Oyster case lines and clean dial it has nothing more than it needs. In my opinion is a true evolution of the original. @JwRosenthal example with the plexi does look very cool! The 16600 is similar but the SD wears differently on my wrist. Having owned both these references I can say that they are great watches. The one I really regret selling however is the 14060.... Unfortunately I have no pictures to share of either.

 

All good solid choices, And I'll put the 16800 as a option. It does have the cyclops which doesn't bother me , but I know some aren't keen on it .

 

plexi and a tropic- game changer.


The plexi was more than a novelty- it was transformative. The dial looked flat and the indices small with the sapphire, it’s what a 14060 looks like so it is what is and nothing wrong with that.

But the plexi added a depth and dimension to the dial that insane, indices popped and glossy dial shimmers like….a gloss dial should!


Best part is it’s completely reversible.

 

@CPRwatch Very nice indeed. I thought about those "transitional" models but I don't think I will encounter them. Rolexes are not rare but in my area (not the US) I don't think I will encounter uncommon references. I'll keep my eyes open.

 

There I fixed it for you.

All jokes aside my vote is for the no date sub unless you got 21 inch pythons like hogan and forearms like pope-eye.

 

Don’t be jelly- haters be hatin’

 

14060 all day for me

 

Here are some pictures of a 1997 14060 this dealer has in stock (website is being revamped, he told me he'll have more to show). No idea of the patina because the light is too harsh. Food for thought...

 

Judging patina on these is tough in photos as they are in that edge of turning colors so can look stark white in some light and creamy in others.

 

I have a 14060 myself (with a grey insert), but that plexi makes it more beautiful, how can I get a plexi for my 14060 @JwRosenthal?

 

I’ll PM you the link

 

A little gloss dial under plexi pop food for thought- this super dome has taken a few hard knocks- nothing a little poly watch can‘t take care of.



And yes, this is heresy from a Rolex collectors perspective- but why the hell not- it’s my watch, Rolex isn’t the boss of me - and I can stop anytime…wait, I am taking about a crystal right?

 

I think taking the crystals might be the problem .

 

definitely the 14060, i still regret letting mine go

 

Looks like a nice piece. My guess is there will be no patina, as is the case for most tritium 14060 pieces.

 

That’s like someone asking about this


And you offer up this


I know which one I would choose

 

lol- we will have to agree to disagree. But point is valid, the newer model (Sub or Porsche) is indeed “better” than its previous incarnation in most ways. But there is a charm and character that the older models have (sub and Porsche) that is undeniably beguiling.

 

This post is tone-deaf on so many levels that I don't even know where to start. If you don't appreciate the specific stylistic features of the 5-digit Subs, that's fine, but this sort of dogmatic comment is just silly, and disrespectful of people with different tastes than you. Some people feel that these models hit all the right notes as a transition between vintage features and the modern pieces that some consider monstrosities. And the price comparison is simply incorrect, if you're talking about actual market values. What makes $7k fair and $10k ridiculous? You can't get any complete and decent Sub for anything near $7k currently. However, you can still easily get a decent 14060 for several thousand $ less than a new model.

 

Haha, I figured you'd quote MSRP. What a joke.