They will go up. It's the only ceramic model that I would own, possibly besides the Daytona. Those watches are unique in that they both have the updated features, yet lack all the hokey shit that goes with them.Chocodove wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:40 pmThe 116600 is the true 50th anniversary model in my eyes, it's just came a few years earlyJP Chestnut wrote: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.
It will be interesting to see what happens to these on the second hand market. It's an extremely low production run for Rolex. Could be nothing, but at least they won't go down. Regardless, it's meaningless to me since I see mine as a true keeper.
New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
- Jeep99dad
- Grand-père
- Posts: 32290
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:07 am
- Name: Brice
- Location: FlipVille, SC
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Isn't it pretty much the same size as the dssd or close anyway. Not sure about sweet spot in between. I think it'll wear pretty largehoppyjr wrote:I bet we'll see the Deepsea also goes away soon. This new one sits in the sweet spot between the two Sea-Dweller models.
I'd like this sans cyclops.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Merde Alors! Et Vive Les Francais!
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
It's 43mm per Rolex, which I think means it's really 42mm. The dssd wasn't that big, but it was THICK. This should be much more wearable - not for me of course.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Overall I see this release as an indication of things to come . For instance this is what lugs should look like on a SubC
- goaliechris
- Posts: 1785
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:24 pm
- Name: Chris
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
So, the new SD is $11k and is 43mm. The DSSD is 44mm and is $12k. Different watches in depth rating but hard to see these two coexisting for long. Makes me wonder if the DSSD will either go away or evolve in some way.
The more I look at them, it seems like the DSSD is the more classic SD now.
Edit: link to the ablogtowatch review with lots of pics: http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rolex-sea-d ... 600-watch/
The more I look at them, it seems like the DSSD is the more classic SD now.
Edit: link to the ablogtowatch review with lots of pics: http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rolex-sea-d ... 600-watch/
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
So well said, Art.Panerai7 wrote:I don't know why Rolex just doesn't make 2 size Subs and Daytonas. Omega does it just fine.
Instead of dividing community where one side is calling everyone fat who likes DSSD and this new RedSDC and the other side looks like they stole their kids watch when they wear a regular sub and has to have a 42mm+ watch just so it looks good to them (exactly what 40mm sub looks like on a small wrist). Just IMHO - buy what you like who TF cares.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
I really dig it, but maybe just too big for me and I have lots of subs... more into PM these days.
- Grahamcombat
- Posts: 4314
- Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 5:24 pm
- Name: Graham
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Ok, I get what you're saying, and it makes sense. I like watches but admit I have no idea how they're made: wouldn't Rolex scale all of the other features of the watch to meet the new size? Or do they/have they used "smaller" parts on different larger platforms? For example, is the date wheel in the DSSD the same as on a smaller framed series?Seppia wrote:hoppyjr wrote:Absolutely.Grahamcombat wrote:That would be so great as a no-date SubC.Panerai7 wrote:Ablogtowatch pic. F yeah
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Hell no.
When Ginault can come out with a mish mash of parts that looks better balanced than Rolex, SA, we have a problem.
I mean the new SD has DWARF HANDS. They look very undersized to me. Kinda like when the bumped the explorer 1 case size but kept the hands size.
I loathe Seiko going parts bin on us with a $200 watch, cannot accept it from Rolex at several thousand.
And if so: wtf? That makes no sense, especially from a design aesthetic. I know cost drives everything but seriously, couldn't they afford to make scalable parts??
I'm with you on this. Something I've never thought about.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Cyclops on a SeaDweller WTF!
Either ditch the cyclops or print SUBMARINER on the dial. For the love of God Rolex
This reminds me of Seiko levels of "so close to being good, but lets just FK it up with some jarringly bad detail"
Either ditch the cyclops or print SUBMARINER on the dial. For the love of God Rolex
This reminds me of Seiko levels of "so close to being good, but lets just FK it up with some jarringly bad detail"
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
It looks like they kept the dial size the same but upsized the bezel and case. Not a bad thing IMO. That cyclops though...
(pic stolen from TRF)
(pic stolen from TRF)
- Todd
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Now I don't like or can't wear every diver Rolex makes. Good thing so many old ones have lived in safes.
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Or the super duper maxi explorer 2. I can't fault Rolex selling watches that I think suck. Clearly the 40mm SD sold badly. Older for me.Seppia wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:20 amChocodove wrote:It looks like they kept the dial size the same but upsized the bezel and case. Not a bad thing IMO. That cyclops though...
(pic stolen from TRF)
So basically they started with an awesome watch.
Then they made the lugs fatter (not as fat as the horrible submariner ones but sill)
Now they make the case fatter, and add a cyclops that makes no sense.
This looks really like when they made the explorer I bigger without increasing the hands size.
It's all out of proportion.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Back when Rolex made the 16600 Seadweller, the 16610 Sub, and the 14060 ND Sub, even though they all looked very similar, shared almost no parts at all. There is precedent to suggest that Rolex is not using the parts bin to put together this new SD, so if the dial looks small it is almost certainly an affirmative choice rather than an accommodation. I also agree with the belief that the DSSD can't remain viable with this watch in the lineup. It's a damned shame they didn't use the marvelous domed crystal that's on the DSSD.
www.usmcscoutsniper.org - Life Member
“Qualified to deport with denizens of the deep, mermaids, and other inhabitants of the realm of Neptune.”
“Qualified to deport with denizens of the deep, mermaids, and other inhabitants of the realm of Neptune.”
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
The Rolex that made those watches is long gone. The Daytona used to have a unique clasp. Now it's a parts bin special.namor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:52 amBack when Rolex made the 16600 Seadweller, the 16610 Sub, and the 14060 ND Sub, even though they all looked very similar, shared almost no parts at all. There is precedent to suggest that Rolex is not using the parts bin to put together this new SD, so if the dial looks small it is almost certainly an affirmative choice rather than an accommodation. I also agree with the belief that the DSSD can't remain viable with this watch in the lineup. It's a damned shame they didn't use the marvelous domed crystal that's on the DSSD.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
But then there was the 214270 w/ the short hands. People tried to justify the hand length as intentional, and then Rolex went and fixed the issue.namor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:52 amBack when Rolex made the 16600 Seadweller, the 16610 Sub, and the 14060 ND Sub, even though they all looked very similar, shared almost no parts at all. There is precedent to suggest that Rolex is not using the parts bin to put together this new SD, so if the dial looks small it is almost certainly an affirmative choice rather than an accommodation. I also agree with the belief that the DSSD can't remain viable with this watch in the lineup. It's a damned shame they didn't use the marvelous domed crystal that's on the DSSD.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Domed crystal would make me really like it.
Domed Crystal and no date would make me own one.
Domed crystal, no date, and 22mm lug width would make me bust a nut.
Domed Crystal and no date would make me own one.
Domed crystal, no date, and 22mm lug width would make me bust a nut.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Can I interest you in a U1 Pro?hoppyjr wrote:Domed crystal would make me really like it.
Domed Crystal and no date would make me own one.
Domed crystal, no date, and 22mm lug width would make me bust a nut.
"It's such a fine line between stupid, and clever."
David St. Hubbins
David St. Hubbins
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
CGSshorty wrote:Can I interest you in a U1 Pro?hoppyjr wrote:Domed crystal would make me really like it.
Domed Crystal and no date would make me own one.
Domed crystal, no date, and 22mm lug width would make me bust a nut.
I'm already chubbed over that one. When mine arrives I'll pop.
Now, if Sinn created an adjustable clasp for their already nice bracelets, I'd send Ben and Terry over there to give handies to all the Sinn workers.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
Yeah, I don't like Sinn's clasp (but I'm still getting the bracelet). If they tapered the bracelet more and came up with a better clasp, I don't know I'd need to wear much else in the tool department.hoppyjr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:32 pmCGSshorty wrote:Can I interest you in a U1 Pro?hoppyjr wrote:Domed crystal would make me really like it.
Domed Crystal and no date would make me own one.
Domed crystal, no date, and 22mm lug width would make me bust a nut.
I'm already chubbed over that one. When mine arrives I'll pop.
Now, if Sinn created an adjustable clasp for their already nice bracelets, I'd send Ben and Terry over there to give handies to all the Sinn workers.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
meh. a slightly different size with a cyclops and red ink doesn't do much for me. Perhaps it's because I think the SDC and SubC are already perfectly sized, but was wanting something more interesting.
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17820
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
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.
Re: New 43mm Sea Dweller out...
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.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.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: DEMO and 211 guests