Not really, here they are side by side:


(Both are sales posts but I believe they are genuine, original examples. Heuer from Reddit and Sub from HQ Milton, who are a premier and extremely well-respected Rolex dealer in San Francisco)

The first Heuer diver showed up in 1979 which was a popular year for getting into divers - the Timex Red Ball arrived that year as well, for instance - while the contemporary Submariner would have been the reference 5513. (The one shown here is an earlier example from the 1960s but it remained much the same throughout the '70s and even into the 80s). I wouldn't say it closely resembles the Sub at all, any more than the Submariner itself resembled the very first dive watches* from Zodiac and Lip-Blancpain released a year earlier.

*yes the Turn-O-Graph debuted that same year, but it was not a dive watch.

 

I’m not here to dispute anything I’ll just use this article written by sir DC @Calibre11. The design language of the Diver watches were taken from what’s popular at that time.

https://www.calibre11.com/heuer-1000m-spirotechnique/

 

Sure...I don't particularly like it on the vintage watches either, but at least they generally have patina to add some charm. The difference is how bright the bezel is, the AR matches the gaudy gmt master bezel (at least in photos, I haven't compared the two in the metal).

I'm glad it's not just me that doesn't like that case...I remember reading up on the sub and there's a older no-date sub that I did like, but forget the era. I am clearly buying a bb gmt the first time I touch one, I keep wondering how I haven't bought one already. The real risk is I'll probably walk out with both the gmt and 58.

 

I don't like the Rolex maxi case either. Also, I know ceramic bezels are way more durable, but I still prefer the charm of a nice steel bezel. The Black Bay GMT is super nice and I prefer the color of its Pepsi over the Rolex color, but the size of the BB58 just fits my wrist so much better. If they make a BB58 GMT, I'd be all in!

 

You're probably thinking of the 14060. That was the model between the classic 5513 and the maxi case. Decent watch IMO and that's coming from someone who doesn't like Rolexes.

Aluminum on the older Subs and the Black Bay GMT, not steel, my guy (Steel bezels are not colored and appear as such as on the Speedmaster 2915, some Aquaracer models, the Black Bay Steel etc)

I have some good news for you though, regarding the rumored update to the Seamaster 300 Master Co-Axial line coming soon!

 

This is the dream, but have you ever tried on the current BB GMT?

(If not you will receive the same warning as dtf - DO NOT try one on unless you are ready to buy it, cause you're gonna want to!)

 

Thank you Orange man good to hear Im not the only one

 

Maybe they will present a Sporty Aquaracer in 44 and an Elegant in 42

 

I haven't, just the regular BB. It was OK size wise, but much prefer the 58 on my slimmer wrist.

LOL. Yes, I know. We can't all be as perfect as you when typing quick replies, my bad...

 

This made me smile.

 

And another one...

 

Wasn't sure if it was mistake or unknown - no big deal!

 

My little grey cells got signals crossed. I was thinking of the Rolex Sub, but then drifted over to the Daytona. Still kick myself for not buying the steel bezel Daytona when I had the chance. I got the call from my AD, but the ceramic had just been announced and I thought I should hold out for that instead. Since I was then supposed to be #1 on the wait list for the new ceramic Daytona. Little did I know that being "first in line" on a waiting list would mean absolutely nothing for that watch.

Hence, "steel" must of unconsciously flew from my fingers tips instead of aluminum. But I did mean aluminum, I like its more subdued finish over the glossy plastic looking ceramic.

 

For me it depends on the watch, I think aluminum is obviously the better choice for something a bit more classic. But a Seamaster 300M or PO looks great with Omega's "Liquidmetal" ceramic, in a modern way. I kinda like having the choice!