WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
So I am looking at picking one of the pre-ceramic Submariners up. I used to own a ceramic Date model (116610LN) but it was just too big for my feminine sized wrist.

After going through several other watches, I have now come back full-circle and realise that I need to get one of these models to satisfy the itch.

Now - my choices are between:

16610 (date version) preferably 2002 k-serial.

This model benefits from solid end links and has the full submariner look with the cyclops date window.

14060M (no date version) preferably the latest model before the new ceramic was brought in - so around 2011/2012.

This model benefits from the upgraded hairspring, engraved rehaut, classic submariner styling, 4 line COSC certified.

Both models have the lug holes which is important for strap changes (that’s why I only looked at 2002 16610 as the latest model as they lose the lug holes after that year).

Both models are similar prices but I don’t know what to go for...my head is saying the 16610 as it’s the full package with the cyclops but my heart says the 14060M for the classic looks.

Any suggestions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
I’ve owned both. I sold my 16610 because it was modified with aftermarket parts before I purchased from a jeweler in Beverly Hills. The links on the band were loose as well. Several years later I purchased a mint condition 14060M with all the original stuff and from a known Rolex shop.

IMO both are classics. Wherever you purchase double check for original parts and try to get with the box and paperwork.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,801 Posts
Do you want your watch to tell you the date? If you didn't miss it before with the no-date then I would go 14060M. BTW I believe the ref # you mentioned above was the date model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Do you want your watch to tell you the date? If you didn't miss it before with the no-date then I would go 14060M. BTW I believe the ref # you mentioned above was the date model.
Good spot. I had the ceramic date model - amended the post.

I am really struggling with how to decide...

I am now also looking at later iterations of the 16610 after 2002 and up to 2010. I now understand that strap changes can still be made without lug holes but it’s just a bit more of a job to do this.

What benefits would I get going for a late model 16610 over a 14060M - better bracelet - anything else?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,479 Posts
I had and sold a 114060 and bought a 2001 14060m two line dial. It looks so simple with the clean dial. I've always preferred no date watches and I'm not a fan of the cyclops on the Sub although it looks fine on a GMT or DJ.

Here is my Sub taken today :)

IMG_3415.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
It’s difficult to pick a watch for another man.

I understand your liking for the cyclops; it’s iconically Rolex and is like a little gem sitting on the crystal.

However, the five digit no date is special because it’s the last of the “tool watches.” There’s little need for the date if you are underwater. That “specialness” trumps the date.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
Personally, not a fan of no date watches, especially the Sub. BTW, I bought my 16610 in mid-2000 and it has the SEL bracelet with holes in the case. No idea what the serial number series is. The no-date thing is a forum meme. I knew one guy 30 years ago who had a no-date because he couldn't spend the additional money for the complication.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,936 Posts
Shaun, one thing not yet mentioned, all of the 14060's have folded end links whereas the later 16610's (as you know) have the SEL's (that point is a little ambiguous in your post and others reading may like the info)

The 14060/14060m kept the holes case and folded end links until it ceased production. Whether that's a concern or not only you can really decide

2 great watches, I'd lean towards a late model 14060m but I might change my mind tomorrow

GL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
867 Posts
I think the SEL and the cyclops of the 16610 make it slightly more desirable and uniquely Rolex versus the 14060. Both are great watches.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Do the solid end links of the 16610 make much of a difference over the hollow end links of the 14060/14060m?

This is the one point I am struggling with....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,479 Posts
I haven't compared the two, but on the wrist the 14060m wears like a dream.

Do the solid end links of the 16610 make much of a difference over the hollow end links of the 14060/14060m?

This is the one point I am struggling with....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: TatsNGuns

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
You all make very compelling points.

My search now starts for a clean, full set, late-model 16610 with the engraved rehaut.

Thanks for all your help - any steer what would be a good price for such a model?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,596 Posts
Had both at the same time.

Depending on which M, I prefer it. I love the 2 lines of text version, and holes cases. Other than that, the date is nice to have, and so are SELs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,479 Posts
Good luck on the search and I look forward to an incoming soon :)

You all make very compelling points.

My search now starts for a clean, full set, late-model 16610 with the engraved rehaut.

Thanks for all your help - any steer what would be a good price for such a model?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
14,559 Posts
I own several iterations of date and no-date Subs. They are all awesome. TBH, you aren’t going to go wrong with any Sub either being a 4 or 5 digit model. 5513, 1680, 16800, 14060m, 16610, and 16610LV.......those or the ones I own. I love them all. I also have a 116619 as my only ceramic insert sub. It’s nice, but TBH.....I wear the 4 and 5 digit models more.

My only advice would be to purchase the nicest and cleanest watch you can afford.....not necessarily the newest, but the nicest unmolested watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
867 Posts
Do the solid end links of the 16610 make much of a difference over the hollow end links of the 14060/14060m?

This is the one point I am struggling with....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’ve only owned one hollow end links Rolex, a 14270. I don’t think it’s a huge difference compared to the SELs, of which I’ve owned several, but they do give the watch a slightly more substantial feel. Given that you’re spending a not insignificant sum of money on it, that’s something to consider.
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top