Sunday Morning Showdown: Rolex Submariner Ref. 5512 Vs. Explorer Ref. 1016
It’s Sunday morning, and that means we have another Sunday Morning Showdown for you. We often get requests to put two classic watches against each other to find out what you think is better. This week, we opted for two great Rolex classics. One is the legendary Explorer ref. 1016. It will go up against the Submariner ref. 5512, which is just as — if not more — iconic. Which of these two is the Fratelli favorite? Get yourself a cup of coffee, and let’s find out!
Is there such a thing as a right or wrong choice between these two watches? There isn’t one in our book. Both have become absolute Rolex classics that are much sought after by both experienced collectors and people looking for their first and maybe only vintage Rolex watch. Either way, these two watches represent the great history of the Genevan brand while remaining very much connected to the present Explorer and Submariner. Which of these two will be more popular among the Fratelli? Let’s find out. Jorg picked the Rolex Submariner ref. 5512, while Mike will make his case for the Rolex Explorer ref. 1016. In the end, you will get the final vote in this Sunday Morning Showdown.
Last week, on Sunday Morning Showdown…
Before we hand it over to Mike and Jorg, let’s check the results of last week’s matchup. Last Sunday’s battle was quite monumental. An Omega Speedmaster rarely loses one of our Sunday Morning Showdowns, but Thomas’s Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Control Chronograph Calendar demolished Daan’s Omega Speedmaster Moonphase Meteorite. The former ended up with 81% of the votes, leaving the Speedy with a measly 19%. It must be one of the biggest losses in our series overall; honestly, we didn’t see this one coming. Sure, the JLC had a good shot at winning this battle, but the result was clear and even surprised us. This week’s showdown will undoubtedly be a lot closer. Now it’s time to find out. Over to Mike and Jorg!
Image: Bulang & Sons
Jorg: Rolex Submariner ref. 5512
Today’s battle is interesting. I expect the votes to be fairly balanced, but it’s an easy choice for me. While the Explorer ref. 1016 is one of those great Rolex classics that I appreciate, the Submariner ref. 5512 is a personal grail. Before I get into why I think it is the better pick, let’s quickly look at the history of the 5512.
Image: Bulang & Sons
The Submariner ref. 5512 debuted in 1959 and presented the typical Submariner aesthetic as we know it today. The watch introduced the larger 40mm case with crown guards, beveled lugs, and the distinct bezel that plays a big part in its recognition. It was a modern step forward compared to the 38mm cases that Rolex used before. The 5512 stayed in production until 1980.
Image: Bulang & Sons
Throughout the watch’s production run, Rolex produced several versions of the watch. Most notably, the shape of the crown guards changed multiple times. The first iteration featured square ones before the brand changed to the pointed “Eagle Beak” style and eventually settled for rounded crown guards.
Image: Bulang & Sons
The many dial variations of the Submariner ref. 5512
As most of you know, there are also several dial variations. The first dials featured two lines of text on the lower half as the initial caliber 1530 was often not chronometer certified. These two-line Subs are very rare, and their prices reflect that. Once Rolex switched to the chronometer-certified caliber 1560, soon after succeeded by the caliber 1570, the brand added the “Superlative Chronometer” and “Officially Certified” text to the lower half of the dial, thus creating the four-line Submariner. That was also right around the time that the first non-chronometer Submariner ref. 5513 models started running off the production line.
Image: Bulang & Sons
But that’s not where it ends. The first Submariner 5512 models featured the popular glossy black dials with gilt text and markings, whereas later models had matte black dials with white text and markings. Additionally, collectors have defined dial variations based on font serif, text alignment, chapter ring, and markings for depth rating. Well-known differences are the “feet first” versus “meters first” dials and whether the first of the four lines was the depth rating or the Submariner name. And we haven’t even mentioned the “Maxi dials” that I adore due to their larger lume plots. It will take some proper studying to understand all the differences, but that’s not what this battle is about.
Image: Bulang & Sons
Most Rolex fans have a favorite model
As mentioned, Rolex kept the Submariner ref. 5512 in production from 1959 until 1980. It shared most of its production period with Mike’s Explorer ref. 1016. So for customers back then, buying either of the two was a simple choice. They either preferred the Explorer over the Submariner or vice versa. And I like to think that the choice is still that simple. Even with all the historical context added to these two iconic models over time, I believe you are either a Submariner or an Explorer person. For me, that choice is always simple. It has always been and will always be the Submariner.
Image: Bulang & Sons
I have absolutely nothing against the Explorer ref. 1016, and I understand why it has become such a widely recognized classic. However, in terms of aesthetics, I much prefer the Submariner. Sure, the watch also has greater functionality, but I won’t pretend I am anything more than a desk diver, as most of us are. On top of that, the 40mm Submariner is also a much better fit for my 18.5cm wrist. The only way I can wear an Explorer ref. 1016 is on a bracelet because, on a leather or NATO strap, it’s simply too small for me. A bracelet solves that problem, but it doesn’t diminish my strong preference for the Submariner.
Image: Bulang & Sons
A preference for looks backed up by prices
Some of you will know that the Rolex model at the top of my wishlist is the Sea-Dweller ref. 16600. It has been my favorite for some time as it was the first Rolex that I wore, and the prices have not risen to astronomical levels. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same about the 5513 and especially the 5512. Expect to see prices starting just over €10K but quickly rising to €20K–30K and beyond for the rarer models.
Image: Bulang & Sons
To my surprise, the prices for an Explorer ref. 1016 might start at similar levels but also go up rapidly to €20K–30K. While my preference is primarily based on my love for the Sub’s aesthetic, seeing the comparable prices solidifies the thought that the Submariner ref. 5512 is the only way to go for me in this battle.
Image: Bulang & Sons
Even if I had the cash to drop on an Explorer ref. 1016, I would still hesitate when seeing today’s prices. That’s not to say it’s not “worth it” to some people, but it does reassure me that my love for the Sub runs deeper. But please explain why you would pick the Explorer ref. 1016, Mike. I know that you own both of today’s contenders, so you will be able to shine a proper light on them.
Image: Bulang & Sons
Mike: Rolex Explorer ref. 1016
Today’s challenge is a lot like visiting a fine steakhouse. There are so many fantastic options, but a stomach — or wrist, in this case — can only handle one. Indeed, the Submariner 5512 is an amazing watch. It and the similar-era 5513 are hard to beat and stand out as the best classic dive watches ever created. However, the 1016 might rank as the best all-around watch ever constructed.
Rolex Explorer 1016
The 1016 is sublime
Other iconic Rolex steel sports watches, including the 5512, have a specific and intentional use case, while the 1016 is simply a more robust watch. There’s no special bezel, stopwatch function, or even a date. A legible dial with luminous numerals and indexes is paired with a handset similar to that of the Submariner. The result is transformative to the otherwise bog-standard 36mm Rolex Oyster case. The 1016 is simplicity boiled down to the core ingredients of what can make a watch so madly irresistible.
A long production period
The 1016 debuted in 1960 and went through subtle changes until it was replaced by the more modern 14270 in 1989. Gilt dials with matching chapter rings gave way to matte dials with white printing along the way. Solid-link Oyster bracelets also replaced their earlier folded-link counterparts. However, the look remained remarkably consistent over nearly 30 years.
A lust-worthy object
I’ve collected many watches over the past 15 years, but few acquisitions stand out like the Explorer 1016. Taking a step back, my first vintage Rolex was the Submariner 5512 owned by my father. I wrote about that watch last October, and it remains one of my favorite references. Still, for a slim wrist like mine, a smaller 36mm case is better as a daily watch. I also find Rolex models with this case size more versatile and less noticeable.
In 2012, fueled by a decade of wearing the Explorer 14270 non-stop, I embarked on a mission to find a suitable 1016. After all, if the more modern model was so good, why not add its predecessor? The search was challenging, and I captured the buying experience in a 2016 article. In short, it was a back-and-forth discussion with an Italian seller, but I finally agreed to buy a late L-series model from 1989 in beautiful condition.
Tough to find
While great Submariner 5512 models aren’t easy to find, tracking down an excellent 1016 is a lofty challenge. No official numbers exist, but it’s fair to say that Rolex likely produced fewer of these models than the corresponding Submariners. Plus, with its more delicate lug design, many 1016s are heavily polished. All of this adds up to an even greater allure regarding the Explorer because having the funds for one doesn’t guarantee success. It takes work to find a nice one.
A difficult choice
I can’t fault anyone for choosing the 5512 over the 1016. There’s a reason why Rolex made more Subs than Explorers. It’s a commanding watch and looks great. The 1016, however, is the quiet and confident choice. It’s most definitely a Rolex, but it’s also so different from the rest of the lineup. The curvy numerals under the warm acrylic crystal make it so charming and attractive. Yes, it’s a tough choice!
Unfortunately, you, dear readers, must choose between the classic 5512 and the 1016. In this showdown, perhaps more than any other, we’d love to hear why you’ve chosen your pick. Let the voting begin!
