Reply With QuoteM for the updated movement and full bridge but you won’t really notice it day to day.Originally Posted by Mysqueek
The real question is two lines or four and the correct answer is two.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you could choose, which one would you pick
I will be on the lookout for a five digit no date Sub soon and wanted to get your opinions on which is best and why
M for the updated movement and full bridge but you won’t really notice it day to day.
The real question is two lines or four and the correct answer is two.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've had the two and four lines and much preferred the four lines. It was made for a shorter period during the last few years of production and generally is a little bit more expensive than the two lines, but a better punt for the future...who knows?
14060 for sure... biased because I'm after one of those:)
14060M four line no question
I had this same question when I got my first Rolex. Went with the 14060M 2-liner as its 'purer' and closer to the 5513. Try to get the later ones with solid end links too. 4-liner will be more expensive given rarity, and may be the better investment piece.
Absolutely no question.
just look at 5512’s compared to 5513’s. The 4 liners are at least, if not more rare in comparative numbers to the 2 liner 14060’s.
One of my all time top 5 watches. Probably top 3.
It's just a matter of time...
Is there any way of getting solid end links for the earlier 14060Ms? Or does anyone make one that fits? I've always thought the folded links looked cheap and not what one would expect on a Rolex
M, its the watch i regret selling the most...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I’m amazed at the love for the four line version, as for purity reasons I would have said 2 lines for sure!
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Most of the love for four lines here has been based on rarity and future value considerations.
Aesthetically, to me at least, the two wins hands down. Less clutter and more balanced.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I also believe that the 2-line is more balanced. And there are plenty of 5-digit references with lots of writing on the dial.
As for rarity, how about a 14060 with Tritium-marked dial but actually luminova from when Rolex were using up the last of their T dials? Not so many of these around:
I chose the 2-liner above as it offers a change from the 4 lines on my Seadweller. But there aren't any bad choices with a 14060(M) so go for whichever era you like best, and choose on condition.
TT
Me too, very surprised.
Absolutely, I think it's a classic.
I’m not so sure. I much prefer the look.
Most people couldn’t give a stuff about the 14060 when it was new, it was the poor relative to the other dive watches and GMT’s - same price as an Explorer - and they both sat on shelves while the others sold.
But yes, it’s rarer. & for me has the vintage look of Steve McQueen’s 5512, but with a more modern twist - so it’s cool :)
I only place the 16600 and 16610LV above it, whereas the 2 line might just break my top 10 on a very good week.
It's just a matter of time...
2 liner for me
Had one and let it go but will get another hopefully.
I've had both and the 2 liner left me wanting.
So I sold it and paid a 1.3k pemium for a 4 liner.
It was my best watch decision, as its my favourite watch and one (I hopfully) will never sell.
Both are outstanding watches and you can't go wrong either way. It is a matter of personal preference, but I like the 14060m 4 liner. Of all the watches I have bought, sold and traded over the years, it is the one I have had no desire to sell.
The condition of the watch is probably the most important factor when you buy IMHO.
Didn't think any of the 14060 series came with SELs ? I'd always go M variant for the upgrades to the movement, probably a 4 line.
I think you're right there. Can't even be retrofitted with SELs either - even the later 4-liners. I was confused with the 16570, 16710 both of which had SELs from 2001/2002 onwards, so thought Rolex had rolled that out with all their 5 digit references.
I have to admit - I prefer the look of the non-date sub variant - a very clean, crisp design.
A couple of questions - What are ‘solid end links’ ? I’ve never looked at a Rolex and noticed anything by way of solid/hollow? End links.
What is an unmarked, as new 14060M (four line) full set worth these days?
I briefly owned a 4 liner, only problem I found was getting the bracelet to fit and that’s why I sold it. I have 6.75” square wrists and I couldn’t get the 6 side of the bracelet short enough so the watch wouldn’t sit nicely. Compared to the 16610 bracelet the link adjoining the clasp on the 6 side is longer and that makes a big difference to the fit on a wrist like mine. Ironically I ended up with a 16610 and it fitted nicely (that one’s long gone too).
I find the 2 liner/ 4 liner debate amusing, what people overlook is the relative ages. Buying a 4 liner gets you a newer watch which is likely to have less wear and tear. As the watches are now over 10 years old its less of a factor but the principle of buying the best condition available still applies. Condition varies hugely, heavily refinished examples with worn bracelets are best avoided, so are watches that have had a busy life with no service history. Treating these watches like commodity items is flawed, considering the age no two will be the same; buy on condition of the watch itself and don’t worry if the box and papers are missing, condition of the watch should be paramount.
Far nicer watches than the 6 digit heavy- cased monstrosities of recent years.
SELs are solid part of the bracelet that connects to the watch. Found in later rolex models I think, hollow ones rattle when moving your wrist around, which is a charming signature of older rolexes not to everyone’s liking. Regarding which to choose, I’d have the 14060m, because of luma nova lume and the rolex engraved rehaut, its a nice detail. Im keen on one but 8.5k plus is a lot of dough!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Last edited by OllieG; 23rd December 2020 at 12:10.
With the risk of getting the hayforks out and from someone who owns a five digit sub... at today's prices I would consider the new model. Arguably a better watch (movement, SEL, glidelock) and looks better with the maxi dial imo. Luckily we buy these things with our heart :)
I agree with this
D
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Each to their own and all that and good luck with your jumping through hoops to get one.
I completely understand people who want the latest watch because logically it is an upgrade of the previous version, but when I look at some pictures of modern Rolex bracelet clasps they look bloody aweful. They might be the dogs and do all kinds of great things on the adjustment front, but they seem to cover a great chunk of the back of the wrist and stick out as well. On smaller wrists it is not a pretty sight.
I'm sure a load of fanboys will jump on me for these comments, but I would rather have this clasp any day of the week.
As another 14060m owner, I tend to agree and have my name down with my local Goldsmiths for the new one. Question is, how long it’ll take to arrive and I guess that’s the rub. Lots of five digits around for much less than the premium-inflated cost of the new subs that are immediately available. Having said that, the five series has a character of its own and is a different enough watch to stand alongside the new model in a collection - a bit like the 16600 and the 116600.
No, I get that. I really like the lightness of ye olde bracelet on my 16570 Exp II.
This 2001 14060M, because it's mine.
Photographed by learningtofly
scooter
There is merit in what you say. But one thing that cheeses me off about the new subs, is the 21mm bracelet. Deeply dislike it.
But if it were a choice between these two no dates, it would be the one that is in the better condition, and I would probably go for the most recently manufactured too. I think that makes it a 4 liner.
There's a bit of a gap there. Is that due to stretch? That doesn't look like a submariner bracelet. Can I ask what watch it belongs to Wallasey Runner? Certainly fits the underside of your wrist well.
I’m not so sure. I much prefer the look.
Most people couldn’t give a stuff about the 14060 when it was new, it was the poor relative to the other dive watches and GMT’s - same price as an Explorer - and they both sat on shelves while the others sold.
But yes, it’s rarer. & for me has the vintage look of Steve McQueen’s 5512, but with a more modern twist - so it’s cool :)
Agree on the SM 5512...mine is a peach.
I only place the 16600 and 16610LV above it, whereas the 2 line might just break my top 10 on a very good week.
14060M two liner for me. I had one that I used to trade for a 16610LV, got more than double what I originally paid for it. I miss it a bit but would not be buying another at todays prices.
Thanks and good spot, it's not a Submariner bracelet. It is a 30 year old 78360 bracelet with 503 end links that belongs to my 16520 Zenith Daytona. There is a little stretch, but not too much.
Out of interest, that stunning 5512 pictured a few posts ago is on my wrist
Two line models look so much better in my mind. I'd take modern over vintage every time, but the ceramic submariner's only weakness is all the script on the dial - if it had 2 lines it would be my perfect watch
Completely agree. This year's Sub with 2 lines - perfection.
2 line model for me as it looks more balanced.
There can be only one …
SELs, lug holes, luminova, uncluttered dial – just perfect, and pretty much where Rolex stops for me.
M 4 liner. I love mine and not just because it’s looking a decent investment. It’d be the last to go.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If only I was able to get a 124060...
LovelyThere can be only one …
SELs, lug holes, luminova, uncluttered dial – just perfect, and pretty much where Rolex stops for me.
Tritium and it would be perfect
2-liner on NATO. Looks great and Does away with the bracelet debate too.
I'd be happy with either but I just happen to own this 4 liner :
It is Ken & not been on my wrist for sometime!..Thanks and good spot, it's not a Submariner bracelet. It is a 30 year old 78360 bracelet with 503 end links that belongs to my 16520 Zenith Daytona. There is a little stretch, but not too much.
Out of interest, that stunning 5512 pictured a few posts ago is on my wrist
Purely subjective but I would opt for the 4 liner.
However if I was looking for a Sub, I would now think seriously of the latest model, it is now very attracive and slimmed down. I can see it being a future classic.
Last edited by Mick P; 23rd December 2020 at 20:07.
Love the simplicity of 2 lines no date of my 1996 Tritum 14060, put it up for sale earlier this year but seen sense and pulled it as not likely to find another as nice or complete, probably the fullest of full sets!
Last edited by murkeywaters; 23rd December 2020 at 20:14.
I've not seen one of the new Sub in flesh....... but from what I've read is does sound more in line with the 14060.
Hopfully one day I will get call from the AD!!
You can't go wrong with either one.
In my opinion (after 15 Rolex watches) is that 16610 date version is the best of them all. But it's a tough call between 14060 (which I also owned).
The only reason I prefer the date is that it has a big bigger and more solid wrist presence.
That comes from the cyclops and bigger dial.
Been digging around in the safe due to this thread. It’s a cracking little watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
