Author Topic: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?  (Read 8131 times)

Offline chfoong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« on: September 13, 2016, 12:01:45 PM »
Hi all, first timer alert here.

I am trying to get my head around the idea to get my first Rolex.

A few points
1. Which is the main point, my first baby is just around the corner, something for myself for that memorable moment.
2. Reason above, so I am not flipping the watch, ever.
3. Never a Rolex guy before, first I cannot justify the price for my usage, second I always think it's got kinda old appearance. As a number guy myself, I would still buy one as long as it keeps its value along the time, and it must be a design that I like.
4. That comes to this submariner 116113, I like the look, two tones with gold and blue. Problem is, I don't know much about it. The more research I do, the more confused I am. There are different series(or whatever it is) within the same 116113, and prices vary a lot too.

Any Rolex masters out there care to enlighten/shower me with lots of information, and even better hook me up with good deals? This is my first Rolex and for its sentimental value, I want this to be a safe and pleasant experience. Thanks!  :)


Offline Cocas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2924
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #1 on: September 13, 2016, 12:16:56 PM »
If your budget allows, please get a brand new sea dweller. If not, a preowned Explorer II 16570 is a good choice too.

Offline dualcarb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 800
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #2 on: September 13, 2016, 12:41:17 PM »
Congrats on the expected arrival of your firstborn.

-Since you are not ever going to flip the watch, whichever you choose will be fine as long as you like it.

-Rolexes looks "old" to you because Rolex believes in tradition and maintaining its design philosophy is one of them. You can almost guarantee that what you buy today will still be very similar in the 50 years to come. Which is also one of the reasons why it retains it's value so well...once a classic, always a classic. My grandfather has a 50 year old Rolex which finally stopped working after all these years. A quick trip to the Rolex service centre in KL took care of that. They still had spare parts and after a quick service, polish and replacements of gaskets and lube, it came back looking like a million bucks. I don't believe any other brands are able to have inventory of spares the way Rolex has.

-The submariner that you had in mind, the 116613 is a two tone sub. The basic sub is the 114060 which only comes in stainless steel. The 116610 is your SS sub date. Then your 116613 and the gold 116618 and the white gold 116619.
Bezels available for the two tone are the LN, which is all black or LB which is blue. So with different case and bracelet materials come the different prices.

-I would humbly suggest that you spend a little more and go to any authorised Rolex dealer and purchase the watch as soon as your child is born so that your name is on the warranty card and the date stamped. This will signify it as a "birth year" watch for your child. But this is only me...I hope I was of help here.

Good luck and please let us know what you do get when you do get it...congrats again in advance...



Offline dualcarb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 800
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #3 on: September 13, 2016, 12:46:06 PM »
If your budget allows, please get a brand new sea dweller. If not, a preowned Explorer II 16570 is a good choice too.
Dude...read his post. If the OP can afford a 116613, an SD4K is easily within his reach. The sub is lighter, sits lower and of a classic design. The SD is not for everyone. And for celebrating the birth of a child, a pre owned watch is hardly advisable. No offence bro...just that your comment was rather unnecessary

Offline Cocas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2924
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2016, 12:56:08 PM »
If your budget allows, please get a brand new sea dweller. If not, a preowned Explorer II 16570 is a good choice too.
Dude...read his post. If the OP can afford a 116613, an SD4K is easily within his reach. The sub is lighter, sits lower and of a classic design. The SD is not for everyone. And for celebrating the birth of a child, a pre owned watch is hardly advisable. No offence bro...just that your comment was rather unnecessary

Oops, sorry about that. True, OP is aiming for a special and distinguishable watch for his new born.

My personal opinion from the view of cost saving is rather inappropriate.

Offline swleong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 594
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #5 on: September 13, 2016, 01:08:41 PM »
Hi all, first timer alert here.

I am trying to get my head around the idea to get my first Rolex.

A few points
1. Which is the main point, my first baby is just around the corner, something for myself for that memorable moment.
2. Reason above, so I am not flipping the watch, ever.
3. Never a Rolex guy before, first I cannot justify the price for my usage, second I always think it's got kinda old appearance. As a number guy myself, I would still buy one as long as it keeps its value along the time, and it must be a design that I like.
4. That comes to this submariner 116113, I like the look, two tones with gold and blue. Problem is, I don't know much about it. The more research I do, the more confused I am. There are different series(or whatever it is) within the same 116113, and prices vary a lot too.

Any Rolex masters out there care to enlighten/shower me with lots of information, and even better hook me up with good deals? This is my first Rolex and for its sentimental value, I want this to be a safe and pleasant experience. Thanks!  :)

1) Congratulations on you and your family!! Yes, get a watch for the memorable moment, that's how many of us started with and ended with many more "memorable watches" for the memorable moments  ;D
2) You might not flip, but sure will get many more.
3) Buy and use it daily and the paid price will be fully justified. Old and classic is paper thin in difference. As a number guy, yes, ROLEX is the obvious choice!
4) with all the above, I personally don't think 2-tone Sub will be a good choice for you. 1st it actually doesn't hold values as good as the stainless steel models, more difficult to flip (just in case you really want to), harder to match most occasions outfits, and it looks "old".

Get a stainless steel 116610, period.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2016, 01:39:32 PM by swleong »

Offline chfoong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #6 on: September 14, 2016, 11:11:32 AM »
Many thanks guys! Overwhelmed by the responses and helps! Any good places around KL or Selangor that I can go to? I know a few obvious places like watatime everywhere and the watch and watch in publika.

Offline D'Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1245
  • Success. It's a mind game.
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #7 on: September 14, 2016, 08:21:59 PM »
The 116613 is a beautiful piece, and will be a worthy piece to commensurate a memorable occasion. I've always have a soft spot for this handsome piece, although the OCD in me would not tolerate the scratches that the gold bit would attract like magnet. Seen quite a few examples from some associates. If you are an OCD like me, then getting an all stainless steel piece would be a viable solution. You could go for the 116610 (LN is common as heck, so go straight to the LV if green is your colour) or 116600. The 116600 would of course have more bragging rights being a rarer piece in the wild and with higher technical specs. Either way, you would be bagging a handsome piece that could be passed on to your child in future. All the best...
Watch hobbyist @ andywristwatches.blogspot.com. Current faves in my collection :

Rolex | Omega | Bell & Ross | Panerai | Seiko | G-Shock |

Offline Jedirat

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2016, 08:34:24 AM »
Many thanks guys! Overwhelmed by the responses and helps! Any good places around KL or Selangor that I can go to? I know a few obvious places like watatime everywhere and the watch and watch in publika.

You may try your luck at Amcorp Mall and Times Square too, bro.

Offline chfoong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #9 on: October 04, 2016, 03:17:22 PM »
Update: Went to a 2 Rolex ADs, one with much friendlier service than the other, ended up spent a good 45 minutes there. The sales guy was honest enough to tell me the submariner and GMT master don't suit me, instead he recommended me the datejust II with blue face, wife who tagged along second to that. Datejust got this classic look that won't go wrong in next 40 years, not to say the Subdate and GMT don't look classic, for some reason they look funny on my wrist. Still deciding which one to get... Worse part is, wifey got her eyes on one of the Rolex too, there gone my money.

Offline gunsnroses

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #10 on: October 04, 2016, 03:45:55 PM »
But Sub and GMT Master will hold much better value than a Datejust

Offline meoramri

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3899
    • My Eastern Watch Collection
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #11 on: October 04, 2016, 05:01:48 PM »
Get the Datejust since it does look good on your wrist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Main watch blog visit: http://easternwatch.blogspot.com

Offline Cocas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2924
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #12 on: October 04, 2016, 07:31:06 PM »
@chfoong bro. Just go get the watch that you like most! :thumbsup:


Offline adamjohari

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Wristy
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #13 on: October 18, 2016, 07:11:27 AM »
Bro, the 116113 is hideous. I know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, my opinion is just an opinion in a sea of opinions and what not, but the 116113 is still hideous.

Many other options from Rolex that are ok - The Batman, the Hulk, 114060, 116500LN, SD4K, Explorer2. But do not go down the two tone route. You'll regret it.
Adam J
Currently own: Rolex GMT Pepsi 126710BLRO mark 1

Offline theseira

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 536
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #14 on: October 20, 2016, 08:08:20 AM »
My recommendation:

Get the SS ceramic Daytona. Can't go wrong.

Offline CKL1213

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 776
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2016, 08:36:26 AM »
OP stated that he will not flip the watch ever, the word ever is strong.

since he like two tone and as a none flipper then two tone is justifiable for him

as for flippers, we all know two tone depreciated faster than steel models

two tone for keepers not flippers

Offline lovefoe

  • Freshie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2016, 07:47:09 AM »
never go wrong with Sub

Offline yippie123

  • Freshie
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2016, 08:19:50 AM »
How about a 116713 ??

Offline Timeless

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1165
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2016, 07:06:13 AM »
most sport models are well carry the value

Offline Watched

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
  • New trained daddy
Re: First Rolex - submariner 116113 or not?
« Reply #19 on: December 12, 2016, 06:32:40 PM »
I owns a Rolex 16570 but I don't think it's hold the value