Rolex Sub 14060m Questions

[waser]

Looking for some guidance from those more informed than me in all things Rolex. So I’ve had a Sub C and while it was technically impressive and wonderfully engineered I wasn’t taken by it. Probably due to the square shape. Funnily enough I find the case for the BLNR fine.

I also had an older 1680 for a short while which I should have really kept but I sold for some silly reason a few years ago at a time I didn’t really feel comfortable with a vintage watch on my wrist.

For a while I’ve wanted a nice 5513 but the prices are now out of reach so my eye has been drawn to the 14060m models as a happy medium.

Apologies if this has been discussed before, I did search to no avail. But what’s the consensus on the following:

- 2 liner vs 4 liner model? I think I have a preference for a 2 liner as it harks to the vintage era.
- how much would a mint fully boxed and papered one set me back now?
- any general tips on what to search for in a good one?

I’m not looking to make a profit during ownership. But I’d like to not lose any money as this hobby has frankly cost me too much over the years as it is lol. So value retention is a key consideration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wallasey Runner]

The 14060m as you say is the classic 40mm case and is a wonderful watch. The main difference between 2 and 4 liners is of course the price. You could hopefully get a full set 2 liner for £4.5k, but a decent 4 liner will set you back a little over £5k. My old 4 liner was listed on SC this week for £5.1k and sold quickly. It was in absolutely superb condition though.

The 4 liner was only made for a few years, so there are generally fewer of them and therefore the prices do tend to be a little higher. No different to the old 5512 v 5513 years before.

Good examples of both 14060m watches are getting harder to get hold of and sell really well when listed. Prices logically will continue to rise, so get in quick whilst you can.

[johnthemull]

Hi
There are a good few threads on the 14060m. Heres one for a taster;
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...t=rolex+14060m

Prices are going up all the time on this model so residuals are not an issue.
I prefer the two liner myself as it gives more prominence to the purity of the dial.
I have been flirting with the idea of getting one but to be honest I have concerns about the prices in the used market.
Sometimes you wonder are you buying at the sharp end of a bubble.
I have just bought a new explorer so that will have to keep my rolex itch scratched for a while.
Some of the websites I was lurking on are;
https://www.watches.co.uk
http://www.watchfinder.co.uk
http://www.chrono24.com

They are stunning watches in my opinion. If money was no object I would be straight in.
Good luck
John

[Woody74]

I would imagine you are looking at between £4.5 - £5.5 K for a mint example with all the trimmings (dependant on from whom or where you buy). As regards 2 versus 4 lines then I think it is just personal taste - some like the cleaner look of the two line dial but personally I like the four. May still also be worth considering a late 5513.....they can be had for slightly more cash but not a vast difference. Good luck.

[Tokyo Tokei]

Perhaps rarer than the 4-line 14060m (which don't seem that rare, unsurprising given how many watches Rolex churned out in recent history) is the 14060 with tritium dial that is actually Luminova. Legend has it that Rolex moved to using Luminova around 1999 but still had some T<25 dials around, so they just used these and applied Luminova not tritium. Someone smart will come along shortly to prove this is all bonkers. But really, all the non date things look good to me. Even, gasp, the most recent chunky one is okay. I bought the 2-liner 14060 mainly because it looks a bit cleaner, and my copious text on dial requirements are adequately met by my 16600.

This preamble is of course just an excuse to post a picture of my tritium-not-tritium 14060, from 1999:

[waser]

Thanks for the comments so far. When it is said the 4 liner is rarer what sort of ratio are we talking about?

Just doing a scan on watchfinder and some of the 4 liners are north of £6k!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wallasey Runner]

Difficult to know the split. As detailed the 14060 tritium came first them changed to the 14060m and these ran for about 15 years. The 4 liners only ran from about 2007 to 2011 or 2012 when the Ceramic model replaced both watches.

I understand it is basically the same watch, the 4 liners were actually tested to gain the SCOC accreditation and extra text added to the dial, but the 2 liner is from the same batch of movements, just not put through testing

Check Haywood's site, he uselly has these in stock.

[Laccola1980]

The 14060m as you say is the classic 40mm case and is a wonderful watch. The main difference between 2 and 4 liners is of course the price. You could hopefully get a full set 2 liner for £4.5k, but a decent 4 liner will set you back a little over £5k. My old 4 liner was listed on SC this week for £5.1k and sold quickly. It was in absolutely superb condition though.

The 4 liner was only made for a few years, so there are generally fewer of them and therefore the prices do tend to be a little higher. No different to the old 5512 v 5513 years before.

Good examples of both 14060m watches are getting harder to get hold of and sell really well when listed. Prices logically will continue to rise, so get in quick whilst you can.

All Rolex seem gorgeous!

[Laccola1980]

Hi
There are a good few threads on the 14060m. Heres one for a taster;
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...t=rolex+14060m

Prices are going up all the time on this model so residuals are not an issue.
I prefer the two liner myself as it gives more prominence to the purity of the dial.
I have been flirting with the idea of getting one but to be honest I have concerns about the prices in the used market.
Sometimes you wonder are you buying at the sharp end of a bubble.
I have just bought a new explorer so that will have to keep my rolex itch scratched for a while.
Some of the websites I was lurking on are;
https://www.watches.co.uk
http://www.watchfinder.co.uk
http://www.chrono24.com

They are stunning watches in my opinion. If money was no object I would be straight in.
Good luck
John

Good collection!

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps rarer than the 4-line 14060m (which don't seem that rare, unsurprising given how many watches Rolex churned out in recent history) is the 14060 with tritium dial that is actually Luminova. Legend has it that Rolex moved to using Luminova around 1999 but still had some T<25 dials around, so they just used these and applied Luminova not tritium. Someone smart will come along shortly to prove this is all bonkers. But really, all the non date things look good to me. Even, gasp, the most recent chunky one is okay. I bought the 2-liner 14060 mainly because it looks a bit cleaner, and my copious text on dial requirements are adequately met by my 16600.

This preamble is of course just an excuse to post a picture of my tritium-not-tritium 14060, from 1999:

Lovely dial!

[chrisparker]

For a while I’ve wanted a nice 5513 but the prices are now out of reach so my eye has been drawn to the 14060m models as a happy medium.

An early 14060 is the nearest thing you'll get to a 5513 at a reasonable cost. Here's mine from 1990, the Tritium lume is now ivory coloured while the bezel pip is pale yellow, and bezel very slightly fading.

[waser]

Some lovely examples in the pics posted. I like the idea of the semi vintage tritium dial but I'm sort of thinking if I went for that I'd go all the way for a 5513. Decisions decisions.

Any ideas when the engraved Rolex rehaut come into the range? I'd prefer one without.

[Tokyo Tokei]

Any ideas when the engraved Rolex rehaut come into the range? I'd prefer one without.

During the Z serial (2007 ish) I think.

[Laccola1980]

The 14060m as you say is the classic 40mm case and is a wonderful watch. The main difference between 2 and 4 liners is of course the price. You could hopefully get a full set 2 liner for £4.5k, but a decent 4 liner will set you back a little over £5k. My old 4 liner was listed on SC this week for £5.1k and sold quickly. It was in absolutely superb condition though.

The 4 liner was only made for a few years, so there are generally fewer of them and therefore the prices do tend to be a little higher. No different to the old 5512 v 5513 years before.

Good examples of both 14060m watches are getting harder to get hold of and sell really well when listed. Prices logically will continue to rise, so get in quick whilst you can.

Luxurious!

[waser]

During the Z serial (2007 ish) I think.

Thanks.

So do 4 liners only come with the engraved rehaut?

[Laccola1980]

The 14060m as you say is the classic 40mm case and is a wonderful watch. The main difference between 2 and 4 liners is of course the price. You could hopefully get a full set 2 liner for £4.5k, but a decent 4 liner will set you back a little over £5k. My old 4 liner was listed on SC this week for £5.1k and sold quickly. It was in absolutely superb condition though.

The 4 liner was only made for a few years, so there are generally fewer of them and therefore the prices do tend to be a little higher. No different to the old 5512 v 5513 years before.

Good examples of both 14060m watches are getting harder to get hold of and sell really well when listed. Prices logically will continue to rise, so get in quick whilst you can.

Classic!

[bobdog]

5513 just for comparison and to make your decision harder or even easier!

[Wallasey Runner]

And a similar aged watch, only a 5512

[Wallasey Runner]

Thanks.

So do 4 liners only come with the engraved rehaut?

In my experience yes.

[waser]

Go away you two lol

If my budget stretched to a 5513/5512 I'd jump at something like the ones you have. Lovely.

[waser]

In my experience yes.

Do the cases of 14060m models have bevelled lugs? I see a few examples on Chrono24 that appear to have them and some don't. A sharp case is a must for me.

[Wallasey Runner]

Do the cases of 14060m models have bevelled lugs? I see a few examples on Chrono24 that appear to have them and some don't. A sharp case is a must for me.

Yes, I think so. Seems to be a pretty standard thing on all Rolex.

[Tokyo Tokei]

Go away you two lol

If my budget stretched to a 5513/5512 I'd jump at something like the ones you have. Lovely.

Don't be swayed by these vintage enablers! At some point the lume will fall off the dial and/or hands and you'll have the dilemma about whether to replace with luminova ones or look for used parts. Been there with my old 16753. Rolex wouldn't service it without replacing the dial. Get a newer luminova 14060 or 14060m and apart from the more robust plots with gold surrounds, you'll have no concerns about servicing the dial or hands for years and years.

Uh oh here is another picture...

[Wallasey Runner]

I think the message to the OP is all no date Subs are great. Just buy the right one for you, looks, price, completeness of set etc.

[waser]

I guess that is sound advice, let the hunt begin! Having thought about it today I don't think I'm too bothered about whether it's a 2 or 4 liner. The case condition and full set is more important to me. I'll go with a Luminova dial just for the ease of servicing and care moving forward.

[KingKitega]

I myself went for the 2-liner - the classic reincarnation of the original. But you can't really go wrong with either.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

[Omegamanic]

4 liner for me. Some of the looks of the 5512 in a more useable day to day watch at around a quarter of the price.

[waser]

I've settled on a 4 liner, want the newest and best condition I can find at a resonable price.

[walkerwek1958]

My posts on Rolex threads are often not well received because I point out facts that others prefer to overlook........but as one who's taken the odd watch or two apart I've got the dubious privilege of seeing things from a wider perspective.

Firstly, I like the 14060 and I think it's a wise choice. I only ended up selling mine (a 4 liner) because I couldn`t get the bracelet to fit properly, my 6.75" wrists are somewhat square and I couldn`t get the 6 side short enough without resorting to having a fixed link split and removed. Frustratingly, the 16610 bracelet fits me fine, because the link ajoining the clasp is approx 3mm shorter and it makes all the difference on my strange wrists. Anyone with a bigger or flatter wrist is unlikely to have this problem.

The point I`m going to make relates to the age of these watches. In deciding what to buy people overlook the fact that they're comparing a watch at around 8-10 years old with a watch that could be 30 years old. People get all dewy-eyed about tritium lume etc and deliberately buy a far older watch in order to have this feature, or a 2 liner versus a 4 liner because the dial looks cleaner, and to me that makes no sense at all. Provided the case hasn`t been badly polished Rolex Subs are very good at hiding years of hard wear, especially if the bezel's been replaced; this is a good point but it also can disguise a watch that's had a long hard life with a very worn movement. Bracelets hide the wear less well, but folks will overlook a worn bracelet in their quest for that attractive aged lume or two-line look.

If you were looking for a car would you prefer an 8 yr old to a 30 yr old?.......I know it's not quite the same but a 30 yr old watch is still a 30 yr old watch, it'll have some wear and tear that can`t be corrected by normal servicing.

This is one quirk of the Rolex market that doesn`t seem to apply to other brands, the market tends to treat old Rolex models like commodity items and a certain model has a set value almost regardless of how old it is. This always strikes me as illogical.

Needless to say, my strong advice is to buy the newest available provided the condition's right. Look for a good 4 liner that's had a gentle life. The condition of the bracelet will often be a good indicator to how the watch has been looked after. Ideally, a recent Rolex service with correct refinishing should be a plus. Look very carefully at the quality of any repolishing/refinishing work, 'tramlines' in the polished sides is a sign of poor work and I hate to see it.

I`m not dismissing older watches, I own plenty of old watches myself, but when there's the chance to own one that's still in the first flush of youth I`d take it. Same argument applies to Speedy Moonwatches but it's not what some folks like to hear. It's a big mistake to take age out of the equation, and you're paying almost as much for a watch with far more miles on the clock!

If the right watch comes up without box and papers, I would buy it and adjust the price. Good watch with no b & p makes more sense than mediocre watch with full set in my view.........not what many like to hear.

Paul

[waser]

Thanks for your informative post Paul. Really appreciated and will take those points into consideration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sahara]

Don't be swayed by these vintage enablers! At some point the lume will fall off the dial and/or hands and you'll have the dilemma about whether to replace with luminova ones or look for used parts. Been there with my old 16753. Rolex wouldn't service it without replacing the dial. Get a newer luminova 14060 or 14060m and apart from the more robust plots with gold surrounds, you'll have no concerns about servicing the dial or hands for years and years.

Uh oh here is another picture...

Just about perfect, love the two liner and look better on a strap

[mowflow]

I never got hung up on the 2 line or 4 line decision. I bought the watch I was happiest with at the price I was happiest paying.

I'm always a bit surprised when people get hung up on having that certification when they all run within the standards.

Few pics just because why not.



Sent from my Swift 2 Plus using Tapatalk

[RBear1981]

I had the 2 liner and prefer it aesthetically. Technically there’s no difference. On a relatively small face tho, less writing is better I say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robbyman]

14060 will do you fine they can be found still with stickers on. I bought a 16610 from 2010 with stickers and it really is something to get such a price if you can.

[Ozzie]

I also prefer the uncluttered look of the two liner. I wish there was less print on most of my watches.


Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app

[JeremyO]

I’ve also got a two liner and prefer it to other iterations.

It cost £1970 when purchased in 2004 and should I ever need to sell it am sure I won’t lose any money. Mind you, it’s got full box and papers and is regularly serviced every 5 years.

[Tokyo Tokei]

It cost £1970 when purchased in 2004 and should I ever need to sell it am sure I won’t lose any money.

I think so too, though to be fair that £1970 in 2004 would be worth £3645 today had you just parked it into Swiss Francs and left it. Less fun though.

[scooter]

A gratuitous photograph of my 2001 14060M taken by Tony (LTF) several years ago.



scooter

[mowflow]

I think so too, though to be fair that £1970 in 2004 would be worth £3645 today had you just parked it into Swiss Francs and left it. Less fun though.

The Rolex is probably worth £4500 at least so it seems it was a pretty good purchase.

[KingKitega]

Agreed the 14060m is a classic, and ubiquitous Rolex. They do pop up here on SC so a bit of patience will be rewarded.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

[waser]

A gratuitous photograph of my 2001 14060M taken by Tony (LTF) several years ago.



scooter

That looks great!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JP Chestnut]

Firstly, I like the 14060 and I think it's a wise choice. I only ended up selling mine (a 4 liner) because I couldn`t get the bracelet to fit properly, my 6.75" wrists are somewhat square and I couldn`t get the 6 side short enough without resorting to having a fixed link split and removed. Frustratingly, the 16610 bracelet fits me fine, because the link ajoining the clasp is approx 3mm shorter and it makes all the difference on my strange wrists. Anyone with a bigger or flatter wrist is unlikely to have this problem.

You can remove the fixed link off the clasp without splitting a permanent link. You simply destroy the rivet that holds it to the clasp. You can then either re-rivet the clasp to the first permanent link on the bracelet, or rivet the shorter attached link off an old sub clasp. Either option is fully reversible, and I'm sure within your capabilities. You can also just fit a 16610 clasp...

Too bad you sold it.