Monochrome Watches
An online magazine dedicated to fine watches
Video Review

The Brand New 2020 Rolex Submariner 41mm 124060

Our first encounter with the brand new version of the Rolex Submariner.

| By Brice Goulard | 2 min read |

Important news indeed, as today, September 1st, 2020, Rolex has launched its new collection of watches, which includes no fewer than five new Submariner references – four models with date, and the present steel, no-date version. You probably didn’t miss the launch but if so, you’d better check our early review article here, at MONOCHROME. But that’s not all, since we had the opportunity to see the watch in the metal right before the official presentation. And we thought it would be a great idea to film the watch too. So here it is, the video review of the brand new 2020 Rolex Submariner 41mm 124060.

So… A new Submariner? Yes, it is new but also feels totally familiar. Since its introduction, the whole concept behind the Sub has remained very consistent and this isn’t going to change soon. The new Rolex Submariner 41mm 124060 is more an evolution than a revolution. It is Rolex after all. At first, it will be hard to spot the differences with the older version, but the devil is in the details. And as you’ll see, most elements have been updated, changed or redesigned.

Basically, the updates concern the dimensions and proportions, not the design itself, which is very close to the previous 114060. The diameter is larger (1 extra millimetre) but the proportions have changed, with slimmer and more tapered lugs combined with a wider lug width and bracelet. Altogether, as you’ll see in the video review, the new Rolex Submariner 41mm is more balanced, slightly more elegant and the increased size is almost imperceptible. A positive point for many, the “super case” is gone and the look returns to that of the 5-digit references – something we anticipated in our yearly prediction article.

Ad – Scroll to continue with article

Rolex Submariner 41mm 124060 no-date Steel 2020 - wristshot

The dial and bezel remain almost identical with the exception of small details, such as the reworked hands. The bezel is still black Cerachom with a platinum PVD scale. To match the case’s increased size, the Oyster bracelet has also been reproportioned and is now 1mm wider, including the clasp. It keeps its sturdy and practical Oyterclasp with Glidelock extension system, allowing to fine adjust up to 20mm.

The major evolution to be found on the Sub 41mm is mechanical, as it is now fitted with the latest generation Rolex movement, the new calibre 3230, an automatic chronometer with hours, minutes and seconds. Equipped with the modern Chronergy escapement, it has a comfortable power reserve of 70 hours and anti-magnetic properties.

The new Rolex Submariner 41mm no-date will be priced at CHF 7,700 (CHF 200 extra compared to the 114060). More details and local prices at

8 responses

  1. Gorgeous and 41mm lovely!! But still making the vile two tone with blue dial!!

  2. Soon available on the gray market at a 300% premium, some things never change!

  3. Pro: Better proportions and more elegant case, more power reserve.

    Cons: Wildly overpriced on the gray market and otherwise unobtainable without under the table bribes to dealers due to the Rolex artificial shortage marketing con job, and most people will assume you’re wearing a fake and look down on you.

    Probably the least important watch of the year looking at it without rose coloured glasses.

  4. I own the previous generation ‘Hulkmariner’, which is a fine watch, but I have not worn in months. It sits in a safe gathering dust. Somehow, the Sub has run its course for me. I know it’s a fine watch and I am sure the new version is even better than the previous one. Having said that, the ‘Rolex-steel-watch’ hyperbole contributed to me losing all interest in these watches. I mean, these are just wrist watches. They are well made, have iconic design, but it’s simply a watch. Nothing more. I appreciate the fact that my watch, which I still could buy a list price back in 2010, has significantly increased in value. But to me, this is not a merit of the product, but an indicator that these watches reside inside a bubble …

  5. @Markus
    I agree,nothing to see here ,move along kind of thing,it is just a supply and demand issue ,false shortage that made the grey market a ton of money and Rolex a ton of press. The lemmings that are still buying these amaze me. The flippers, I hate but I get,they are opportunist and Rolex is just an algebraic item to buy for x and flip for y. What is also amazing is that it has gone on for a few years now and looks to be as they say “the new normal”. I would tell any young guy to look at almost any other brand to enjoy,Rolex will be like work to TRY and enjoy.

  6. @Ray – fortunately, there are many alternatives out there – Omega for those seeking extrovert design and cutting-edge technology, Tudor for the traditionalists, Sinn for the no-nonsense guys, etc.
    I made an interesting discovery once I actually started scuba diving – as long as you stay above the depths that require decompression you actually don’t need a dive watch. It’s not elapsed time, but remaining air pressure that will determine your time below the surface. Air consumption will vary widely depending on currents, distance covered, body size, etc, which means that timing a dive by elapsed time not only does not make sense, but would actually be dangerous. And in case your manometer fails, you’ll have to surface anyway.
    Once I get into depths where I have to make decompression stops for safe resurfacing, I would not want to rely on a wristwatch either. I mean, I learned to handle decompression tables to calculate the length of stops, which I would then time on my wristwatch. And I do believe one should train to use those tables, just in case. But using a dive computer is much safer. And in case my dive computer fails, I’ll hang on to my diving buddy who has his own device.
    Ultimately, a mechanical dive watch is a superfluous anachronism. Nice and charming for sure. But then, I’m just not willing to pay 10 grand or even more for that little gadget … 😉

Leave a Reply