Bought my Submariner in 1964; still accurate and attractive.
You can't go wrong with a Rolex.

Speedy all day long. Vintage with the hesalite face. Yes it's soft and will scratch but it's what a speedy is supposed to look like. It polishes out very easily and looks classic.

quote:

Originally posted by showpro:
Nice Seamaster Dusty! Maybe I should put that into the mix.

https://www.omegawatches.com/w...5-mm/21530442103001/

I'd definitely consider it. I've owned 2 Seamasters since 1999. Love them. The Speedmaster is a good lookin' watch, though.

quote:

Originally posted by showpro:
h2oys, my local coin dealer has a used Sub just like the one in your picture. Decisions, decisions.

Curious as to what they are asking as that two tone Sub is my Grail watch. Still out of my budget at this point in life.

If you have other dive watches, get the Speedy.

If you're only going to have one watch, get the Sub.

I don't like the current Submariner case as much as the older, more sleek versions.

I'd get a vintage Sub. Or the Speedy.

If I can throw a wrench into this convo...

I was recently in a similar position, but I was focused on only the Ceramic Bezel Sub (with date).

I can tell you this watch is impressive but the more I read up on the history of Rolex the more I gravitated toward the GMT2.

I ended up calling an audible at the store and went with the GMT2 Ceramic Bezel, about the same money.

I am very happy with my purchase and am now contemplating getting a two-tone GMT2 for special occasions.

Of course all of this is just subterfuge when we start talking about the Daytona, which is just not in my price range at the moment.

Just my thoughts.

I'd go Sub. I don't find chronos very legible. If you're going Speedy, pick one up gently used and save a boatload.


In truth, both are fantastic and storied watches. There is no wrong answer!

Submariner. Unless you want to grab one of the automatic Speedmasters. They're very hard to beat, but I'm not a manual watch fan no matter the history. I also find plexiglass on a multi-thousand dollar watch a bit insulting.

quote:

Originally posted by Appliance Brad:

Curious as to what they are asking as that two tone Sub is my Grail watch. Still out of my budget at this point in life.

Brad, I don't exactly remember, but I want to say it was around 6500. I think it was a late '90s model.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:
Submariner. Unless you want to grab one of the automatic Speedmasters. They're very hard to beat, but I'm not a manual watch fan no matter the history. I also find plexiglass on a multi-thousand dollar watch a bit insulting.

You know, the automatic with the coaxial escapement and date is a really nice watch. It's caught my eye, too.

The hunting is most of the fun...right?

I have a no date 2 line sub 14060M and I just picked up a 40Mm explorer 2 polar 16570 with my annual bonus. I almost bought a 3570 speedy that was clean as a whistle(no box or papers though) for 2,650 but the guy had no additional links and i didn't want to spend yet more cash on links. you can find a good 3570 or 3590 speedster for ~3k. the 861 that the astronauts used go for way more. the current ones are too much $$ in my opinion. You definitely want the plexiglass 3570 or 3590 or the current model (too many #s to remember) not a speed date or clear back one. again my opinion. the smaller speedos can be had for way less maybe 1k or so used depending on the model. but long term the value may not hold like the moon watch

The sub will retain its value better if thats a concern to you.

A used Explorer 2 is a tremendous value right now. a date & GMT function and same movement as the GMT II watch but can be had for 2-4k or more less than the GMT

quote:

Originally posted by showpro:
You know, the automatic with the coaxial escapement and date is a really nice watch. It's caught my eye, too.

The hunting is most of the fun...right?

Oh yeah. For a little bit, I had a Schumacher Legend Speedmaster that was a generation before the first co-axial. It was an amazing watch that I was too stupid not to sell. It was super thin, had a 52 hour power reserve, and the "Speedmaster" crystal was sapphire. I do miss it and the strap I put it on.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:
Submariner. Unless you want to grab one of the automatic Speedmasters. They're very hard to beat, but I'm not a manual watch fan no matter the history. I also find plexiglass on a multi-thousand dollar watch a bit insulting.

I much prefer sapphire crystal but the plexi is there for a reason, and it's period correct for the reason the watch is fameous.

I have worn a Rolex sub since 1983, bought the new transition model right out of college for $900.00. I love the watch still, wear it every day, but.....I would never replace it with a new Sub. I don't like the look of the new Sub dial and the price is crazy. I actually used mine for diving for years until computers came on the scene.

I have an Omega Ploprof and several highend Seiko divers watch for more than 5 years now. I looked hard at Rolex Submariner for quite a long time. It doesn't have that appeal to me i.e. too much money for Seiko looks alike with poki dot face. I am sure Rolex made very reliable time piece but I don't like it price and appealing.

I have had 3 Submariner's in the past and I have had a couple of Omega's (Planet Ocean XO and Seamaster)

The Speedmaster is a great iconic watch, but for me; it would be the Submariner.

Just another passing thought:

If you want the submariner because that's what you want, then go for it and enjoy!

But, if you're open to exploring other options, but still want to be within the Rolex family, check out the GMT Master II. Submariner looks (a little more dressed up with the polished center links on the bracelet, but rides a little lower on the wrist so it won't catch on shirt and jacket cuffs as easily), and it has an additional and useful complication. If you travel much across time zones, you'll love the way the time sets.

quote:

Originally posted by showpro:

I've always wanted the steel/black Submariner,

...then that to me says it all. Why wouldn't you want to get the one you've always wanted, if the opportunity has now arisen that allows you to do so? Don't get distracted by alternatives; keep your eye on the prize.

That said, I also think the Sub is a better looking watch than the Speedmaster, but then again I'm not really a fan of chronographs in general.

Both are the typical first luxury watch purchases. As you said, you will eventually have both. So the first choice isn't really that important.

If you really want a vintage Speedmaster, Watchuseek is the place to look without getting ripped off. A lot for sale over there.

RMD