Come on in and introduce yourself!
General watch talk.
-
JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Post
by JP Chestnut » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:20 pm
matt.wu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:13 pm
JP Chestnut wrote:I think the SS skydweller is pretty badass. The PM versions wears really big, but $14,000 for a Rolex AC is a super value for those who can deal with the size.
And it's a great deal when you look at it side by side with an $11k+ Sea-Dweller. I'm in for the blue.
I'm interested to hear your take on it. I tried it on super briefly when it was released and was shocked by the size. I expected a speedy pro sized daydate and it seemed much bigger and thicker. I think the SS versions are better looking. Baton markers and less obvious 24 hour rings. I'd be pissed if I bought the WG version.
I'm hoping that Rolex releases an AC enhanced daydate in the original size. I would buy it.
-
Zidane
- Stevie's Nick
- Posts: 3962
- Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 6:36 pm
- Name: Nick
- Location: Kennesaw, GA
Post
by Zidane » Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:28 pm
JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:36 pm
foodle wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:33 pm
Hmmm, bump up in size is a negative for me, since my sweet spot is around 40mm.
Red lettering is nice, but a cyclops on a SD?!?! WTF Rolex?
Sea Dweller = Sub XL now. I wish they would have just done this exact watch as a single red Submariner 2, and left the SD name as a throwback model. Bastardizing the history of your watch is a strange way to celebrate an anniversary.
Yeah...the cyclops bothers me, and for that very reason...why bastardize your history? No need whatsoever.
-
ncstate1201
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:20 pm
- Name: Geoff B
- Location: Apex, NC
Post
by ncstate1201 » Thu Mar 30, 2017 6:08 pm
Cyclops on a sea dweller is just blasphemous...that and I am still not a ceramic fan. I would not buy this just save my money for something more vintage...
-
YOHOHO
- Dirty Closet Hinderer Whore
- Posts: 2334
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:14 pm
- Name: Josh
- Location: SoCal
Post
by YOHOHO » Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:03 pm
Last Sunday I was at Traditional Jewelers in Newport Beach and they said they had received full payment for 3 SDs and 7 SS Skydwellers at that point. I would have thought a few more SDs. They also had a BLNR unclaimed in the case.
I was tempted to get the Skydweller, but I have trouble paying full in advance.
Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
-
marchone
- Capt. Obvious
- Posts: 14806
- Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:30 am
- Name: Wayne
- Location: NYC
Post
by marchone » Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:02 am
What I am fascinated by is everyone else is downsizing and Rolex goes in the opposite direction.
only accurate watches are interesting
-
Panerai7
- Posts: 16728
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:09 pm
- Name: Art
- Location: North Carolina
Post
by Panerai7 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:22 am
marchone wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:02 am
What I am fascinated by is everyone else is downsizing and Rolex goes in the opposite direction.
So does PateK Diver
-
marchone
- Capt. Obvious
- Posts: 14806
- Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:30 am
- Name: Wayne
- Location: NYC
Post
by marchone » Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:42 am
With a sticky date.
only accurate watches are interesting
-
Panerai7
- Posts: 16728
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:09 pm
- Name: Art
- Location: North Carolina
Post
by Panerai7 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 6:18 am
marchone wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:42 am
With a sticky date.
It takes haute horlogerie to make it stick on purpose. I don't know how they do it, my cheap watches could never do that
-
Ryeguy
- Posts: 5519
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:03 pm
- Name: Chris
- Location: Rye
Post
by Ryeguy » Fri Mar 31, 2017 7:26 am
marchone wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:02 am
What I am fascinated by is everyone else is downsizing and Rolex goes in the opposite direction.
It is not that Rolex is going in the opposite direction as much as it is that their design department moves at glacial speed with their sport watches. It seems they are on about a 10 year lag. Maybe this is a good thing - I don't know.
My personal perspective as an enthusiast but not owner is this is a miss for Rolex. It seems to crowd the space occupied by the DSSD. No cyclops and 41 or maybe 42mm would have been my suggestion, allowing for a "small" (Sub), "medium" (SDc), and "large" (DSSD) sports diver watch option.
Then again I'm just armchair quarterbacking this thing. Rolex has proven again and again they are successful for a reason.
-
marchone
- Capt. Obvious
- Posts: 14806
- Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:30 am
- Name: Wayne
- Location: NYC
Post
by marchone » Fri Mar 31, 2017 7:51 am
Ryeguy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 7:26 am
No cyclops and 41 or maybe 42mm would have been my suggestion, allowing for a "small" (Sub), "medium" (SDc), and "large" (DSSD) sports diver watch option.
Those are exactly my thoughts not that I'm their market. 41mm no cyclops date window making for a larger dial.
Ryeguy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 7:26 am
Then again I'm just armchair quarterbacking this thing. Rolex has proven again and again they are successful for a reason.
This comes up often yet they are reported to have have slow enough SDc sales to initiate this change.
only accurate watches are interesting
-
JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Post
by JP Chestnut » Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:02 am
If they slim the sub case, I can see this making sense.
-
jswing
- Founder, TDWC MM300 Fan Club
- Posts: 8342
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:54 am
- Name: Jeff
- Location: NJ
Post
by jswing » Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:06 am
matt.wu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:13 pm
JP Chestnut wrote:I think the SS skydweller is pretty badass. The PM versions wears really big, but $14,000 for a Rolex AC is a super value for those who can deal with the size.
And it's a great deal when you look at it side by side with an $11k+ Sea-Dweller. I'm in for the blue.
I always thought the skydwellers were hideous, and I still think the PM ones are, but the SS is pretty cool, especially the blue. I wouldn't buy one, but I'd wear it if I found one on the street.
-
matt.wu
- Wu
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:33 pm
- Name: m@
- Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA
Post
by matt.wu » Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:04 am
Surprisingly, the thing that I hate the most about the new Sea-Dweller may be a toss up between the addition of the cyclops and the widening of the bracelet. I HATE chunky bracelets and love the tapered look of the traditional oyster bracelet (even the more severe taper on the DSSD).
-
mtpenate
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:46 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Tacoma
-
Contact:
Post
by mtpenate » Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:21 am
Can't figure out the cyclops. Feels like they glued it on in the hotel room the night before the reveal. While I'm sure quite a bit of development went into the change, it just looks totally shoehorned. I can't understand why you'd take away one of the Sea-Dweller's most distinguishing features.
-Mike
-
Chocodove
- Posts: 8942
- Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:35 pm
- Name: Todd
- Location: NJ
Post
by Chocodove » Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:43 am
matt.wu wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:04 am
Surprisingly, the thing that I hate the most about the new Sea-Dweller may be a toss up between the addition of the cyclops and the widening of the bracelet. I HATE chunky bracelets and love the tapered look of the traditional oyster bracelet (even the more severe taper on the DSSD).
I'm also in the minority, but I actually like the look of a chunky watch with tapered bracelet.
That cyclops though...
- Todd
-
JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Post
by JP Chestnut » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:45 am
mtpenate wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:21 am
Can't figure out the cyclops. Feels like they glued it on in the hotel room the night before the reveal. While I'm sure quite a bit of development went into the change, it just looks totally shoehorned. I can't understand why you'd take away one of the Sea-Dweller's most distinguishing features.
Because to most dummies, Rolex = date bubble. The market gets what it demands.
-
Panerai7
- Posts: 16728
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:09 pm
- Name: Art
- Location: North Carolina
Post
by Panerai7 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:15 am
So what's the rumor Jacob was talking about that you can remove it? No AR underneath?
-
Panerai7
- Posts: 16728
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:09 pm
- Name: Art
- Location: North Carolina
Post
by Panerai7 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:16 am
MF, you guys reactivated that anachronistic Tapa didn't you, slow as shit again
-
CGSshorty
- Admin
- Posts: 33918
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Boynton Beach, FL
Post
by CGSshorty » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:13 pm
I really hope this watch is a complete failure for Rolex. You know, so I can afford one.
"It's such a fine line between stupid, and clever."
David St. Hubbins
-
outtatime
- Posts: 1708
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 7:42 pm
- Name: Jon
- Location: Ohio
Post
by outtatime » Thu Apr 06, 2017 4:59 am
I see the "trusted sellers" have wasted no time jacking the prices on the outgoing model up. Not sure why people over at TRF deify these guys so much. They bash private sellers for trying to buy and flip a DaytonaC but fall on their knees when a trusted lists one for $4k over MSRP.
Current
Alpina Extreme Diver 300 | Benarus Ti47 | Breitling Avenger Seawolf | Eterna KonTiki Super 1973 | Hamilton Jazzmaster Viewmatic | Hamilton Pan Europ | IWC Aquatimer 2000 | Korsbek Oceaneer | Linde Werdelin The One 2.6 | Omega Seamaster 300 Spectre | Omega Seamaster 300 Titanium | Omega Seamaster 2531.80 | Omega Speedmaster Broad Arrow | Panerai 005 | Rolex Deepsea | Steinhart Nav-B 6497 | Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military | Stowa Seatime | Zenith El Primero Stratos
Incoming
Considering
PAM 422 | AP Royal Oak 15400 Silver | Rolex Explorer II 42mm Polar | Omega PO 8500 XL
Sometimes it's easier just to watch
-
cdnwatchguy
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:56 am
- Name: Keith
- Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Post
by cdnwatchguy » Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:52 am
outtatime wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2017 4:59 am
I see the "trusted sellers" have wasted no time jacking the prices on the outgoing model up. Not sure why people over at TRF deify these guys so much. They bash private sellers for trying to buy and flip a DaytonaC but fall on their knees when a trusted lists one for $4k over MSRP.
I don't have a problem with that. They aren't selling watches out of the kindness of their heart, they are in business to make a profit. If the market price on the discontinued watch goes up (or it is forced up) more profit.
I was considering selling mine but not now, I will wait a bit and see if it does indeed become collectible. It might just be a price bubble, who knows.
cheers,
Keith
-
cdnwatchguy
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:56 am
- Name: Keith
- Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Post
by cdnwatchguy » Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:55 am
mtpenate wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:21 am
Can't figure out the cyclops. ........I can't understand why you'd take away one of the Sea-Dweller's most distinguishing features.
Because it didn't sell.....? Most buyers associate the cyclops with a Rolex. Why buy a $10,000 watch if people can't tell at a glance it is a Rolex?
cheers,
Keith
-
outtatime
- Posts: 1708
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 7:42 pm
- Name: Jon
- Location: Ohio
Post
by outtatime » Thu Apr 06, 2017 9:18 am
cdnwatchguy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:52 am
outtatime wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2017 4:59 am
I see the "trusted sellers" have wasted no time jacking the prices on the outgoing model up. Not sure why people over at TRF deify these guys so much. They bash private sellers for trying to buy and flip a DaytonaC but fall on their knees when a trusted lists one for $4k over MSRP.
I don't have a problem with that. They aren't selling watches out of the kindness of their heart, they are in business to make a profit. If the market price on the discontinued watch goes up (or it is forced up) more profit.
I was considering selling mine but not now, I will wait a bit and see if it does indeed become collectible. It might just be a price bubble, who knows.
I guess, my point was more that people seem to act like they're everyone's best friends, when in reality as you stated, they are in it to make a profit and are not anyone's friends.
Current
Alpina Extreme Diver 300 | Benarus Ti47 | Breitling Avenger Seawolf | Eterna KonTiki Super 1973 | Hamilton Jazzmaster Viewmatic | Hamilton Pan Europ | IWC Aquatimer 2000 | Korsbek Oceaneer | Linde Werdelin The One 2.6 | Omega Seamaster 300 Spectre | Omega Seamaster 300 Titanium | Omega Seamaster 2531.80 | Omega Speedmaster Broad Arrow | Panerai 005 | Rolex Deepsea | Steinhart Nav-B 6497 | Steinhart Ocean Vintage Military | Stowa Seatime | Zenith El Primero Stratos
Incoming
Considering
PAM 422 | AP Royal Oak 15400 Silver | Rolex Explorer II 42mm Polar | Omega PO 8500 XL
Sometimes it's easier just to watch
-
mtpenate
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:46 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Tacoma
-
Contact:
Post
by mtpenate » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:44 am
cdnwatchguy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:55 am
mtpenate wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:21 am
Can't figure out the cyclops. ........I can't understand why you'd take away one of the Sea-Dweller's most distinguishing features.
Because it didn't sell.....? Most buyers associate the cyclops with a Rolex. Why buy a $10,000 watch if people can't tell at a glance it is a Rolex?
Very true. I guess I really wasn't aware that so many non-watch enthusiasts would associate some bubble on a watch crystal with Rolex in the wild. I mean, a ton of other brands did it too. Aquastar, Bulova, Nivada, etc. But you're right - they're in the business of selling watches.
-Mike
-
Chocodove
- Posts: 8942
- Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:35 pm
- Name: Todd
- Location: NJ
Post
by Chocodove » Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:52 am
I was starting to warm up to this one slightly, but next to a 40mm GMT it looks frikkin huge even after taking the maxi-lugs into consideration.
Art, this one is for you.
- Todd