This was the end of my first week with my DSSD. And it's been a good one. But I had been talking with friends about the 14060m non-date and also the Sub-C. I began to doubt - was DSSD too big? I stopped by two ADs in my city (one had the 14060m and a two-tone sub, and the other had the sub-c). I did a lot of looking and evaluating.
Some (not entirely original) impressions were:
a) the sub-C is WAY smaller than the DSSD. Most of the felt difference is in the thickness. The bezel operation and crown operation is almost the same and very high quality on both, but slightly better on the DSSD, it seemed to me.
b) Some major differences in looks come from the matte dial on DSSD vs shinier dial on the sub-C.
c) The bezel on each is ceramic, but the color seems to shift more on the DSSD bezel - it can often seem grey or blue-ish, but on the sub-C it seems a more even shinier black.
d) the comments on the forum a about removing the diver's extension on the dssd bracelet and replacing it with two links, to make the overall bracelet feel much more comfortable (particularly on a somewhat smallish 6.5 inch wrist) are totally true. I did that and it made a noticeable and positive difference.
e) DSSD is not too big - you just have to decide that it's not too big. I have read a lot of comments that it is too big, and they seem to come from Rolex die-hards, rather than people new to the brand for whom DSSD is their first Rolex. People who have been wearing a PO XL 45.5mm, or a PO Chrono, or a Superocean 44, or an Avenger Seawolf etc. etc. are not going to think the DSSD is too big at all. It does stand out size-wise in the Rolex range, but amongst high(er) quality watches it really is not that big after all.
f) I wore a 38mm Longines Expeditions Polaires Francaises to church today (a perfectly fine watch that I do like) but after about 10 minutes I really strongly missed the reassuring solidity and power and "no worries -at all-" feeling of the DSSD. I was so glad to get home and switch back to DSSD.
g) I think that DSSD may be a continuation of the sub ethos, not a departure. When the sub first came out in the 50s, it was large(r) and robust(er) than all of its counterpart watches from Rolex or otherwise. It was as large as it needed to be to go as deep as the technology of the time allowed, but didn't depart from norms of quiet good taste more than the demands of function required. So too, today, the technological limits have shifted, so the watch is bulked up. It's as large as it needs to be to give the maximum technologically possible performance, but not larger, and is as restrained within those boundaries as it can be. The inputs are different, so the DSSD output differs, but the decision logic in the design and why the design choices were made as they were are consistent, I think.
The DSSD is becoming quite comfortable and I hope very much to end up turning it into a vintage piece slowly over time, over the next 35-40 years. It will collect stories, and probably then, as now, look a lot better than the guy wearing it.
cheers,
stimierky