The Dive Watch Connection

Lay it on me. I'd LOVVVVE a mint 1680 Red but the budget isn't there right now with college payments for two.

Make them pay their own way through school and buy yourself a DRSD!

Probably not the advice you were looking. So, to redeem myself, I'd suggest a nice vintage Tudor sub rather than a Rolex. The prices are much more reasonable, but still rising since the vintage Rolex Subs have become stupid expensive.

I don’t really know what the question is except a clean one that hasn’t been fucked with

5513/14060

BBK357 wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:11 pm

I don’t really know what the question is except a clean one that hasn’t been fucked with

Exactly. The question you gotta ask is, what Sub is a future vintage classic. Then buy that if you can find it clean, and unfucked with.

gr8sw wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:37 pm

5513/14060

14060/14060M is a future classic

BBK357 wrote:I don’t really know what the question is except a clean one that hasn’t been fucked with

Kinda like the ideal woman


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Captdave wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:02 pm

BBK357 wrote:I don’t really know what the question is except a clean one that hasn’t been fucked with

Kinda like the ideal woman

FYI, these Tapatalk emojis always show up as broken images in a web browser.

An early tritium 16610 is probably the right in the middle of “desirable in the future” but “not too expensive”.

The last really good option was the matte dial transitional model. Those were $4500 for a full set in perfect condition a couple years ago. Everyone hated them because they weren’t plexi. Now they’re over $10,000 for something similar, but I haven’t seen a good/complete example in a long time.

to late

Sea Dwellers seem a better buy to me than Subs these days.

One of my top watch related regrets was selling my super clean 16800 I bought for $6000 from Kirill. That was 3 years ago. Now over $10000. I hate even looking at pictures of it.

^^^ Perfect dial and hands. They've probably been fitted to a laser wielded case to create a box and papers knock out.

gr8sw wrote:5513/14060

^ this
2-liner no date sub is what you want

4 digits are too expensive now, and most 5 digits are quickly getting there. If you can find a nice 16600 for under $7K, I'd jump on it (some of you might know that I'm a big fan of that reference).

Threads like this are tough. Really makes me wish I'd hung onto my 114060, 1665, and Tudor snowflake...

No desire to own an inferior Sub for more money than a new one. Glad I don't have this "vintage road rash" disease

Panerai7 wrote:No desire to own an inferior Sub for more money than a new one. Glad I don't have this "vintage road rash" disease

This °°°^^^^↑^^^

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Panerai7 wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:49 am

No desire to own an inferior Sub for more money than a new one. Glad I don't have this "vintage road rash" disease

To each their own, as the saying goes.

I love the nostalgia and "thing" that vintage brings. Ultimately, I'd love to have one from my birth year, 1969. We'll see.

Bradystraps wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:43 am

Panerai7 wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:49 am

No desire to own an inferior Sub for more money than a new one. Glad I don't have this "vintage road rash" disease

To each their own, as the saying goes.

I love the nostalgia and "thing" that vintage brings. Ultimately, I'd love to have one from my birth year, 1969. We'll see.

Absolutely, have at it, to each is own

You need to make a few decisions before purchase. Plexi or sapphire? Applied or painted indices? Date or no?

If no date, plexi, and painted indices - 5513 (I think a few of the really late 5513's have applied indices).

If no date, sapphire, and applied indices - 14060. This is probably your best bet from a budget standpoint.

If date, plexi, and painted indices - 1680. It's worth remembering that 1680's don't have a quickset date.

If date, sapphire, and applied indices - 16800 (early 16800's have painted indices), 168000, or 16610. Personally, if you fall in this category, I'd just do a 16610 - better movement and less expensive.

Given the current market, you're going to pay through the nose no matter what you choose. And, given the prices, I'd want to be really sure what I was buying before putting down any money on a 5513, 1680, 16800, or 168000. Anything from 1969, assuming it's legit and in good shape, is going to be very, very expensive.

There are quite a few websites out there with some good information, including drsd.com and 5513mattedial.com. Some of the folks in the vintage section on TRF are pretty knowledgeable (though they can be needlessly grouchy). If you find an example you're thinking of, you could try running it by them for a look.

Panerai7 wrote:No desire to own an inferior Sub for more money than a new one. Glad I don't have this "vintage road rash" disease

Agree. I would say try a BB58. If you really want a Sub, then 14060M.

I guess at this point an Explorer or previous model of Explorer II would be a nice way to get a vintage-ish Rolex at a not super crazy price.

Here's a link to a TRF thread on 1680 white text dials that may be helpful.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=513941

And I agree that a good, older Explorer (114270) or Explorer II (16570) is a great option, but vintage Explorer (1016) and Explorer II (1655 or 16550) prices are also crazy.

matt.wu wrote:

;( x1000

^^^Very cool watch. Not exactly a bargain basement alternative, though.

I should have mentioned, MUST have a date function.