Mark in Paris[Purist]
10488
Well this is an interesting project :)
I like both watches and totally understand your will to get a steel watch for some activities.
The 5960 and even I think the Daytona may not appreciate shocks like playing golf on the long run though.
The thing is that it is horologically 2 very different things. The 5960 is more elaborate in terms of complications and watchmaking interest as a nicely decorated and finished chrono Flyback (you can keep running) with Annual Calendar, especially on the long run. Much more interesting that the chronograph only for the Daytona. Furthermore, you can have a look at the decoration of the 5960, whereas the Daytona has a plain caseback, so it depends if these elements matter to you.
The Daytona has a complete different background and is a legend, thus it should be something important for you to get this watch precisely. I would personally really like to have one for what Rolex brings: I love its style, timeless design, reliability and accuracy.
As for the budget I think there is quite a significant difference, even if you can find a 5960 at good price today.
Finally, I think that it should be more about what they bring and what you like in them, more than will it match your activities style (as long as they are in steel). I think that the Rolex will be better for rougher hobbies while the 5960's case will be right for scratch "acceptance" compared to Pt or gold but not for shock resistance.
If you need more resistance in steel you have the Aquanaut and Nautilus but I imagine you already know that and put them out of your scope already.
Please keep us informed!
Cheers, Mark