Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum - View Single Post

watchbureau · 26 July 2009, 02:05 AM

Hello All

,

Like many of you are doing or have done at one time, I've been shopping for my first Rolex.... I thought long and hard (in watch collector time that's about the power reserve of the average watch) and decided it had to be the submariner. I've been a long-time fan of diving watches and appreciate the history as well as the Bond connection. The reason for the post is to share the experience (an my opinions) to potentially help others in this situation.

I started with the white explorer II. I wanted something different than the black and blue faced watches I currently own. Why did I deviate from it? I spoke with a number of individuals who've owned this watch and found many sold due to the fact that, while, the white was quite attractive, the wrist time didn't happen as expected. So I went for the black-faced explorer II (tried the explorer 1, but wanted something a bit larger).

I then spent a considerable amount of time at 2 AD/ODs with the explorer II (also looked at the GMT IIc, GMT-Master II and submariners).... What happened? I just did not like the crown on the explorer and the GMT-Master. I found too much play in the crown, the crown to be small, and the screw-down engagement not to my liking...

. (my opinion, obvously). I excluded the GMT IIc due to budgetary reasons and I did not want another bulky/heavy watch at this time. I kept picking up the subs....

I chose the submariner.

Why did I choose the submariner (sub no date) over the submariner date? Well, frankly, I don't like fussing with date setting. I like to have it but don't need that function. Also, while the cyclops is iconic and identifiable, the nodate sub just looked cleaner. What sealed the deal is that it also was less expensive and had better "balance" on the wrist. I've been a long-time fan of substantial bracelets, such as Omega's, but what appealed to me is the no nonsense action of the venerable sub clasp, the lighter weight, and the even lighter weight of the hollow end links on the sub nodate. I just really appreciate the substantial look of the watch while feeling so comfortable. I had previously thought this to be a weakness of this watch, but now find it be its strength.

What sealed the deal was the holes case. I just had to have that.

Lastly, why did I choose the COSC over the non-COSC? Well, I wanted the certification, but mostly, it was because I wanted the engraved chapter (rehaut) ring. I liked the Z series Sub nodate non-COSC dial but had to have the engraving. I also wanted the newer watch.

So that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. Hope this spurs some thoughts for others who might be thinking of their first purchase. What's next? Datejust or Turnograph, then the GMT IIc or new Maxi-case sub!

BTW, I purchased on TRF (see who's who) ! woohoo!

Steve

26 July 2009, 02:05 AM	#1
watchbureau "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Steve Location: MICHIGAN STATE Watch: 1675 Posts: 488	14060M M Series Purchase Story Hello All , Like many of you are doing or have done at one time, I've been shopping for my first Rolex.... I thought long and hard (in watch collector time that's about the power reserve of the average watch) and decided it had to be the submariner. I've been a long-time fan of diving watches and appreciate the history as well as the Bond connection. The reason for the post is to share the experience (an my opinions) to potentially help others in this situation. I started with the white explorer II. I wanted something different than the black and blue faced watches I currently own. Why did I deviate from it? I spoke with a number of individuals who've owned this watch and found many sold due to the fact that, while, the white was quite attractive, the wrist time didn't happen as expected. So I went for the black-faced explorer II (tried the explorer 1, but wanted something a bit larger). I then spent a considerable amount of time at 2 AD/ODs with the explorer II (also looked at the GMT IIc, GMT-Master II and submariners).... What happened? I just did not like the crown on the explorer and the GMT-Master. I found too much play in the crown, the crown to be small, and the screw-down engagement not to my liking.... (my opinion, obvously). I excluded the GMT IIc due to budgetary reasons and I did not want another bulky/heavy watch at this time. I kept picking up the subs.... I chose the submariner. Why did I choose the submariner (sub no date) over the submariner date? Well, frankly, I don't like fussing with date setting. I like to have it but don't need that function. Also, while the cyclops is iconic and identifiable, the nodate sub just looked cleaner. What sealed the deal is that it also was less expensive and had better "balance" on the wrist. I've been a long-time fan of substantial bracelets, such as Omega's, but what appealed to me is the no nonsense action of the venerable sub clasp, the lighter weight, and the even lighter weight of the hollow end links on the sub nodate. I just really appreciate the substantial look of the watch while feeling so comfortable. I had previously thought this to be a weakness of this watch, but now find it be its strength. What sealed the deal was the holes case. I just had to have that. Lastly, why did I choose the COSC over the non-COSC? Well, I wanted the certification, but mostly, it was because I wanted the engraved chapter (rehaut) ring. I liked the Z series Sub nodate non-COSC dial but had to have the engraving. I also wanted the newer watch. So that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. Hope this spurs some thoughts for others who might be thinking of their first purchase. What's next? Datejust or Turnograph, then the GMT IIc or new Maxi-case sub! BTW, I purchased on TRF (see who's who) ! woohoo! Steve Last edited by watchbureau; 26 July 2009 at 03:39 AM.. Reason: COSC