Nav Ad Widget - Mobile

Collapse

Nav Ad Widget - Desktop

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Submersible VS Submariner

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Submersible VS Submariner

    Dilemma.... trickled down to these 2 choices as my next addition to the family; the Pam 25 and Sub ND non-COSC.

    Already own a 112 and not a Rolex yet.

    Which one makes more horological sense and value?

    What do u guys think?

    Thanks in advance.

  • #2
    You may want to consider the Submariner.

    Just me you see ?
    I own a Rolex !

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by terrenceterrence View Post
      Dilemma.... trickled down to these 2 choices as my next addition to the family; the Pam 25 and Sub ND non-COSC.
      Already own a 112 and not a Rolex yet.
      Which one makes more horological sense and value?
      What do u guys think?
      Thanks in advance.
      if it is just between the submariner and the 25, i say get the 25.

      but since you already have a 112 and you acknowledge that you do not have a Rolex yet...get the submariner.

      say what you want, the 25 and 112 share the same shape. yes, there are of course differences, but if you get the submariner, you are getting something disctinctly different.
      also, the submariner will be more versatile... you can pull off a formal attire with the submariner but not with the 25...
      "Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence,
      three times is enemy action and
      over 600 is clearly the work of an ancient Sumerian demon or some sh*t
      ."

      Comment


      • #4
        Clearly, the S U B M _ _ _ _ _ _

        The Crown Of Achievement

        Comment


        • #5
          so do you guys think is a Rolex a "must" to have in everyone's collection?

          i like to ask fellow paneristis better than in the Rolex forums because i get more honest and unbias opinions than majority "Rolex-only" owners

          Comment


          • #6
            A Rolex sub is a must have!
            1 3 5
            ├┼┼╕
            2 4 6 R

            Comment


            • #7
              I would love to have one in my collection. GMT2c looks good and so is daytona. But you know what ? after having a pam or two, everything else looks small on your wrist. I wish they make GMT2c/daytona as big as deep sea cos i am not really fond of that chapter ring thingy on that monster .


              Originally posted by terrenceterrence View Post
              so do you guys think is a Rolex a "must" to have in everyone's collection?

              i like to ask fellow paneristis better than in the Rolex forums because i get more honest and unbias opinions than majority "Rolex-only" owners

              Comment


              • #8
                Although one thing to consider is "knowing" versus "feeling". As in you "know" you should get the Rollie to have a more complete collection, but you may not "feel" like wearing it ever because the Pammy call out to you more each time...

                Comment


                • #9
                  yeah that's exactly why i am still with holding from pulling the trigger on the Sub ND.

                  it;s great to have a diverse collection but i am afraid i might not wear it as much as my Pam.

                  from the specs and pics the Sub ND looks great; a bullet proof in-house movement, better steel and etc.... it makes a more horological sense but...

                  the pull of a Pam is unexplainable.

                  that is why i am still in this dilemma

                  Comment

                  Footer Ad Widget - Desktop

                  Collapse

                  Footer Ad Widget - Mobile

                  Collapse
                  Working...
                  X