STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
There is a reason for that.Rolex Sub. nice watch but the only problem is that every schmo and their brother has one.
Of course, still a beautiful watch, but a bit less "pop". But perhaps contrast and "pop" are not what one wants?
Rolex Sub. nice watch but the only problem is that every schmo and their brother has one.
There is a reason for that.
Rolex Sub. nice watch but the only problem is that every schmo and their brother has one.
The name is Frills. No Frills.
Quite like.
Proportions seem okay.
I'm no doubt going over old ground here, but as somebody presently at that juncture I'd be very much obliged if somebody could explain what considerations go into the choice of date Sub or Sub - and why the latter is frequently preferred by the purists. I prefer no date on purely aesthetic grounds, but I'm wondering if there's some reason other than less things to go wrong. Thanks in advance if you have any thoughts.
I would choose my old 16610 date Submariner. For looks and for function. If I had to choose a cercamic Sub, not sure. I really, really like the one frills got on. Very handsome, and now with a fantastic bracelet. Like with every other watch: try them on. One of them will smile to you