You must be kidding. Go buy one tomorrow for that price. We are talking about market value.

 

I don't have any more time to spend on this idiotic exchange.

 

There are times I miss my 14060 but I do get a smile on my face each time I see @JwRosenthal share it. The 14060 is a pleasure to wear and wears really well on a leather strap.


If I were to go back and do it all again, I would go with the Sea Dweller. I wouldn't ever need the 4000ftwr but if I am honest, the Sub was far more than I ever needed. I like the presence the SD commands and like you, I enjoy how the case is shaped. I am biased to the no date aesthetic of the 14060 but I also enjoy the date window of the SD without the added cyclops. I'm drawn to "tool" watches and the SD embodies that as it is that. Gotta find one with creamy tritium


And to the NATO, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised. Not my picture, but I do know the person in it.

 

Looks amazing on NATO !

 

Not wrong (and no need to go back and edit your posts- stand by your convictions!), just a different point of view. There are many fans of the newer models on this forum- many own both modern and neo-vintage. The older models has a slimmer case profile which I personally find appealing.

Do I find the current used market absurd- absolutely. Back in the early 00’s I could walk into any decent jewelry store / AD and have subs thrown at me all day long for $3.5k…and get flat champagne and copious flattery. But the landscape is a bit different today and so we have to deal with the reality of a sellers market and inflated values.
Most people can’t walk into a dealer and walk out with a sport Rolex today. Unless you have an “in” with the dealer, you will be waiting months if not years for a phone call that may never come- so grey market at massive markup is the only way to many to get a new Rolex..if they actually want one.
My tastes lean toward vintage not becuase of some misplaced nostalgia, but becuase I prefer the proportions and esthetics- it’s just my personal taste and luckily I am not subject to the whims of a pretentious manufacturer who is trying to punch way above their weight class.
Rolex lost the script for many us is after the early 00’s, luckily these things were made in the millions so there are plenty to go around.

 

I was chatting with the local seiko (and also grand seiko) OB personnel last week: they just had a customer looking to buy a GS because the next door AD (literally 10m away) not only being quite haughty, unsubtly suggested buying jewelry before having access to a Rolex. The guy had the cash, but did not like this one bit, and just walked away... A good way to alienate your customer base, killing your local reputation in the process; problematic in case of any downturn, or if Rolex drops you. Also, that's illegal. They really should be more subtle.

@Scarecrow Boat : informative post, thanks!

 

It's your money but a 14060 is great for diving.

 

Truly, can’t go wrong with either choice.

The 14060 sub will absolutely feel lighter and easier on the wrist. SD will feel slightly heavier (some may consider this as a plus).

In terms of collectibility, seems like a SD sans cyclops is now a thing of the past since modern SD all have them now. So in that sense, a 16600 with lug holes, no cyclops, and tritium lume might be more sought after in the future (my opinion).

If you can swing it, pick up both .


If you have to pick one, go Sub 14060 (the tritium dial ones will be the next 5513).

 

Personally, I would prefer the 14060 I like the clean open look of the face. The date is nice don't get me wrong but I guess it's just personal preference.

 

Well, I think it is going nicely. I left my collectibles to be evaluated in detail, and I was shown some great samples. In particular, a 16610 with some tritium patina setting in and a perfect case. A luminova 16600 with also a great case. (all being in the same ballpark as a 14060, 10-12keur in good shape with the accessories).

It solidified my opinion: I will wait for the next batch of arrivals in the shop, there will be some 1st rate tritium 14060 available in a few weeks. The 16610 feels too busy, the 16600 would be great if I did not already have some other heavy divers and chronos. I think I will enjoy the thinner 14060 more.

Thanks to all that provided input! I will report back if/when the deal goes trough, hopefully with some cool pics and wrist shots.

 

I don’t think you can go wrong with any of them. You know what to look for, you aren’t a newb at this. It’s just what feels right on your wrist and what looks appealing for dial layout. And of course price/vs condition.
As I wear my watches, I would rather not pay the premium for full kit perfection- let the crazy collectors have those. Lightly worn with original finishes and watch/bracelet only is fine by me.

 

Some update...

I was burning out lately so I took some time off the forums. Of course, the initial quest was sidetracked in the meantime: I opted for a 1680 and added some to the trade.

Somehow, I'm not impressed when I see pictures of the 1680 reference but in real life, I like the paragraph of text, the date bubble, the tall plexi, etc. I'm surprised because on paper, it did not make the short list. And I really don't like the 16610 and later iterations : it must be the way it catches the light.

It is really important to hold a watch to know if it works, or not.

Both me and the dealer are awfully busy so we will finalize the paperwork in January. It will be a great way to start another year in an otherwise morose context. A quick and dirty picture :

 

A sub without WG surrounds is way more aesthetically pleasing and fits the tool vibe better imo.

Why oh why could there not have been a few years of 14060 and 16600 transitional dials that retained maxi plots without WG surrounds like the 16800?

 

Indeed, but I think the thing that really differentiate between old and new is the plexi -> uncoated flat sapphire transition. See @JwRosenthal 's experimental 14060 fitted with a plexi: instant vintage, the metal surrounds look nice, and you can actually see the blackness of the dial, instead of having it greyed out by the reflections in the sapphire.

Also, why oh why were they so cheap that they could not bother with some anti reflective coating back then... I wonder why a fully AR coated 14060 crystal is not a popular aftermarket add on.

 

Totally agree and it’s why I did the crystal swap- it was an absolute transformation and made that dial pop. The factory sapphire left me cold on the watch…it was cool, but I wasn’t in love. Now it’s one of my favorite watches.

 

I’ve had a 16610 (close enough to the 14060 that perhaps I could chime in) and an 16600.

The 16610 left me “meh,” and I went through two of them. There’s an argument to be made that a 14060 may have been more appealing, and cleaner.

The 16600 is, IMO, the quintessential Rolex diver, and I sharply regret getting rid of mine (especially given the prices now). I loved the taller profile, thicker crystal which protrudes nicely from the bezel, and that it’s much rarer. If you know, you know, and I’ll have another one someday.

So…my vote is clear.

 

You have a several good choices to pick from. I have had since new, 1984, a 16660 that wears similarly to the 16600. My SD replaced a Sub that was stolen and I've never looked back. I've gone through several other Rolex watches since those days but, have and will keep the SD until it belongs to my Son. Enjoy your choice, you really can't make a bad one from the samples shown.

 

While I prefer no-date Subs, I totally respect your choice of a 1680 over a sapphire model, and that looks like a nice example.

 

I’ll just leave this right here. Hopefully it influences your decision