Rolex p/x 1997 14060 for new 114060M

Rolex p/x 1997 14060 for new 114060M

Author
Discussion

38911

Original Poster:

764 posts

150 months

Wednesday 29th July 2015
quotequote all
Been given the opportunity to p/x my 1997 Rolex 14060 for a brand new 114060M. £2k cost to upgrade.

Really like the idea of a more modern bracelet + the new bezel.... is this a decent deal?

LukeBird

17,170 posts

208 months

Wednesday 29th July 2015
quotequote all
Is your 14060 a full set, service history?
If it has both, no, if it doesn't, yes.
I appreciate that's a broad comment, but that's how I'd see it.

38911

Original Poster:

764 posts

150 months

Wednesday 29th July 2015
quotequote all
14060 has box (though not sure if it's the original one) and papers (with serial number). No service history but keeps spot on time.

freshkid

199 posts

191 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
New one is much better. Bracelet adjustment + ceramic bezel make it more comfortable and much more resilient to everyday wear and tear. Seems a fair enough deal.

Riff Raff

5,087 posts

194 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
freshkid said:
New one is much better. Bracelet adjustment + ceramic bezel make it more comfortable and much more resilient to everyday wear and tear. Seems a fair enough deal.
That's a bit of a generalisation. I sold all the recent Rolex I had with the new bracelets (Sub, Sea-Dweller and GMT II) and have gone back to wearing an older 16610. OK, there isn't as much fine adjustment in the bracelet, but because it's got the old style hollow links plus the folded steel clasp, it's much, much lighter, and therefore for me, more comfortable. OK, I agree that the overall quality 'feel' of the new models is better, but the older models wear better for me. Plus, I still haven't got used to and don't like the blocky cases.

freshkid

199 posts

191 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
Ok I find the heavier bracelet makes the watch less top heavy so it feels much more comfortable to wear than the old jangly ones. Plus you can't beat that slick 'snick snick' sound when you hold it in your hands.

Of course if you're after pure aesthetics it comes down to what you prefer...but I put comfort and durability above that for an everyday watch.

audidoody

8,597 posts

255 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
Buy the new one if you must (like others here I prefer the 'classic' case and bracelet) but don't p/x or sell your 14060. It's a better investment than any savings account you could find.

If it was me I would be either buying the new one on interest-free finance or buying it with an interest-free-for-purchase credit card (e.g. Tesco) and paying it off over 18 months (or longer by transferring the balance at the end of the interest-free period to another CC)

You have to be fairly disciplined and not use that card for anything else.

Edited by audidoody on Thursday 30th July 10:30

38911

Original Poster:

764 posts

150 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
Is the 18 year old 14060 any more of an investment than a new 114060M? I assumed they would both hold/appreciate equally and relative to each other?

The 14060 "owes" me £3,400 which is what I paid a year ago. The £2k cost to change means the 114060M will have cost me nett £5,400 which I know is about £750 more than the going rate for a new one... but I would hope the 114060M will remain worth, say £1k more than the 14060?

Or am I letting the appeal of a new ceramic bezel, engraved rehaut and better bracelet cloud my judgment?


Edited by 38911 on Thursday 30th July 14:36

chris56

556 posts

178 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
38911 said:
Or am I letting the appeal of a new ceramic bezel, engraved reheat and better bracelet cloud my judgment?
This ^



audidoody

8,597 posts

255 months

Thursday 30th July 2015
quotequote all
38911 said:
Or am I letting the appeal of a new ceramic bezel, engraved rehaut and better bracelet cloud my judgment?


Edited by 38911 on Thursday 30th July 14:36
Your man maths is admirable.

"Better" bracelet? Perhaps. Some prefer the lightness and durability of the stamped metal bracelets which were happily worn for 50 years. The new ones have more soldered joints.

Much more informed opinion here:

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/new-rolex-submarin...

SlimJim16v

5,617 posts

142 months

Friday 31st July 2015
quotequote all
I have Seikos with better bracelets than the old Sub/GMT. As soon as they make a 'coke' GMT, I'll be trying one on.

As to the OP, it depends if you think it's £2k better. If you can afford to, keep the (it's better than savings) and get the 114060 too.

aeropilot

34,302 posts

226 months

Friday 31st July 2015
quotequote all
SlimJim16v said:
If you can afford to, keep the (it's better than savings) and get the 114060 too.
This.

I have for the past 12 months been toying with part ex'ing my owned from new 16610 Sub for a new 114060 Sub.

Only real reason is with my ageing eyesight, even with the Cyclops, the date function is now superfluous unless I put on my reading glasses, and the bigger Maxi dial hour markers and nicer lume of the cermamic models is something I prefer to the older models. The 'better' bracelet is neither here nor there with me, and the only thing that's stopped me is the ugly wide lug case which I really don't like. That's why I've not taken the plunge as yet.
I'm now coming around to the fact that, as you say, my 'full set' 16610 which was also one of the very last random serial ones from 2010, is probably better than savings in the long term and I'm probably now looking to just get a new 114060 instead and see how I get on with it, and get rid of which ever one I dislike the most at some point in the future.
Other option is to chop in the 16610 for a mint maxi dial 5513 scratchchin (if I could find one)

Nigel_O

2,859 posts

218 months

Saturday 1st August 2015
quotequote all
If you shop wisely and talk to certain well-respected individuals from these forums ( wink ), you should be able to bag a brand new 114060 for around a grand more than your 14060 owes you

I'd agree with comments above - keep the 14060 if you can stretch the finances - you can always offload one or the other if you need the cash at a later date

nikaiyo2

4,672 posts

194 months

Saturday 1st August 2015
quotequote all
aeropilot said:
This.

I have for the past 12 months been toying with part ex'ing my owned from new 16610 Sub for a new 114060 Sub.

Only real reason is with my ageing eyesight, even with the Cyclops, the date function is now superfluous unless I put on my reading glasses, and the bigger Maxi dial hour markers and nicer lume of the cermamic models is something I prefer to the older models. The 'better' bracelet is neither here nor there with me, and the only thing that's stopped me is the ugly wide lug case which I really don't like. That's why I've not taken the plunge as yet.
I'm now coming around to the fact that, as you say, my 'full set' 16610 which was also one of the very last random serial ones from 2010, is probably better than savings in the long term and I'm probably now looking to just get a new 114060 instead and see how I get on with it, and get rid of which ever one I dislike the most at some point in the future.
Other option is to chop in the 16610 for a mint maxi dial 5513 scratchchin (if I could find one)
5513 in any condition smile

To me the 114060 is almost brutish and completely lacks the delicacy of the earlier subs, don't get me wrong it is still a great watch, but aesthetically the older models are far more pleasing.
Watches of distinction in Lymington usually have a decent 5513 or 2 in stock...

jogon

2,971 posts

157 months

Saturday 1st August 2015
quotequote all
Had both at one point but sold the 14060 and kept the ceramic and its my daily watch now. Very happy with it.


Nigel_O

2,859 posts

218 months

Sunday 2nd August 2015
quotequote all
AAAAaaaargh! - OCD attack.... Put your bezel straight!

Just like mine - also a daily wearer since the day I bought it from Dom Hackett in January this year