Can't beat a no date Sub
Discussion
Good Morning,
I am starting to think that the Non date Sub is the most attractive and best value watch Rolex makes. It is a good size, clean, classic and good value???
After yesterdays announcement of the new Sea Dweller I am still undecided if I really like it. Even the new Daytona's are not perfect. However I can not think of much wrong with the Non Date Sub.
I am starting to think that the Non date Sub is the most attractive and best value watch Rolex makes. It is a good size, clean, classic and good value???
After yesterdays announcement of the new Sea Dweller I am still undecided if I really like it. Even the new Daytona's are not perfect. However I can not think of much wrong with the Non Date Sub.
Jumpingjackflash said:
Good Morning,
I am starting to think that the Non date Sub is the most attractive and best value watch Rolex makes. It is a good size, clean, classic and good value???
After yesterdays announcement of the new Sea Dweller I am still undecided if I really like it. Even the new Daytona's are not perfect. However I can not think of much wrong with the Non Date Sub.
The pre-ceramic model is better IMHO. The last one with the chronomater movement ideally. Rattly (but tough) bracelet, otherwise a perfectly proportioned tool watch.I am starting to think that the Non date Sub is the most attractive and best value watch Rolex makes. It is a good size, clean, classic and good value???
After yesterdays announcement of the new Sea Dweller I am still undecided if I really like it. Even the new Daytona's are not perfect. However I can not think of much wrong with the Non Date Sub.
It's highly subjective as to how good the current NDc looks OP, for me it's too chunky despite being the same case diameter as the previous model. If you like it then go for it, plenty of people will share your opinion.
Clean, classic and good value? It's certainly clean, it might not be quite as classic as the previous generation, and I'd say "yes" to it being good value on the basis that it's a well engineered watch that should last a lifetime and retain a high percentage of its retail value - and it's that last part that nails home the value element even if the initial cost price is high.
The bracelet certainly is better on the current model, night and day compared to the 14060.
Clean, classic and good value? It's certainly clean, it might not be quite as classic as the previous generation, and I'd say "yes" to it being good value on the basis that it's a well engineered watch that should last a lifetime and retain a high percentage of its retail value - and it's that last part that nails home the value element even if the initial cost price is high.
The bracelet certainly is better on the current model, night and day compared to the 14060.
Jumpingjackflash said:
Good Morning,
I am starting to think that the Non date Sub is the most attractive and best value watch Rolex makes. It is a good size, clean, classic and good value???
After yesterdays announcement of the new Sea Dweller I am still undecided if I really like it. Even the new Daytona's are not perfect. However I can not think of much wrong with the Non Date Sub.
I like mostly everything about it bar the blinginess. It is very noticeable but less so on the exorbitantly priced rubber strap I bought for it. At least the bracelet is a huge improvement on the tinny rubbish they fitted on the pre-ceramic model. I am starting to think that the Non date Sub is the most attractive and best value watch Rolex makes. It is a good size, clean, classic and good value???
After yesterdays announcement of the new Sea Dweller I am still undecided if I really like it. Even the new Daytona's are not perfect. However I can not think of much wrong with the Non Date Sub.
It's true that the no date does have an elegance. Very nice.
It is less useful though, one thing I like about the Seiko and Orient automatics is the day+date feature.
My problem is my Seiko 5 sports desert military is the easiest watch to see (day or night) and quite slim to wear.
I'll get my coat...
It is less useful though, one thing I like about the Seiko and Orient automatics is the day+date feature.
My problem is my Seiko 5 sports desert military is the easiest watch to see (day or night) and quite slim to wear.
I'll get my coat...
raceboy said:
Since buying one I've found it's made a lot of my other watches redundant, I think I could actually get by with just the Sub and a G-Shock to cover all my horolgical requirements.
True, This in a way makes Rolex more affordable.People buy lots of watches - skirting around buying a Rolex - and end up spending far more time and money than if they'd just gone out and bought a Rolex for everyday use in the first place LOL.
The only problem I've had actually doing this with Rolex is that whenever I go look all the bling ones are at the front (for the shallow minded people with more money than taste I assume) and the nice subs are quite difficult to find. Can't recall where I last looked - perhaps near or in Selfridges - but I never managed to locate the place where they kept all the elegant designs. Seems easier to find good looking Tudors now which is a shame as for me, it's still not a Rolex. Still fancy a nice date Sub or Yacht-master.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff