Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher
Let's be honest, 2mm is nothing. The thickness and length of the lugs is a bigger factor in how the watch appears on the wrist. My SubC wears a lot larger than my Omega SMP, yet the SMP is a bigger watch (42mm vs 40mm). Some of you guys will find the absolute smallest thing to complain about.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rashid.bk
Spot on post. I am extremely please Rolex released this in 40mm and that it stayed true to the older design, and I guarantee this one will wear larger than it's 40mm size indicates, just like the SubC. 40mm is the perfect size, 42mm would have been overkill and made the watch heavy and maybe top heavy, just like the DSSD, this watch would have been ruined.
|
Not sure how you can agree w/ W Crusher as being "spot on" when his whole point was that many of us "find the absolutely smallest thing to complain about" in that the 40mm supercased divers essentially wear like 42mm watches and therefore it's not really a big deal. He didn't think it mattered, yet you believe it would have been overkill. You're not saying the same thing.
If someone is going to try and use the argument that 2mm isn't a big deal and doesn't really matter, I contend said argument is worthless when advocating not changing...because if it really isn't a "big deal", then why not embrace the 2mm increase?!?! If it's really doesn't make a difference, then it won't "ruin" the perfect 40mm design so many hold so near & dear to their hearts.
The fact that people say "Don't add 2mm to my beloved watch" only goes to prove that yes, 2mm really is a noticeable change...and for those like myself that want more options out of the classic Rolex divers, I'm all for it.
As I said before, the SubC & new SDc (like their past relationship) are very similar from a visual standpoint. I think it would have been cool to provide a slightly different size in that FINALLY Rolex would offer classic dive watch styling in the perfect range of sizes to meet ALL the customers of the world. 40mm, 42mm & 44mm is honestly the perfect 3 combos IMO when it comes to what the masses need/demand.
I think one of the mistakes Rolex made w/ the DSSD is that they went "Too big, too thick" without a happy medium. The company has been providing 40mm Subs for 50+ years and hadn't really updated that model prior to the DSSD. The simple fact is our society has literally grown in size compared to the average population when the Sub was unveiled. Beyond that, as with anything, fashion styles have evolved.
I agree that Rolex is cool in that they don't do wild design updates/changes, but when the DSSD was introduced, it was time for a bigger dive watch option. But again, I think they went too far w/ the 44mm (and more noticeable the extreme thickness) design WITHOUT offering another, slightly smaller alternative. A 42mm SD would have fit that bill perfectly and I was so hoping Rolex would finally provide the ultimate trifecta and close the loop by providing a 42mm SD. No doubt the 40mm SubC would still be the bread & butter seller as I believe 40mm is probably still the optimum size for the masses (if you HAD to offer ONLY one size)...and the cheaper price would no doubt help it to lead in the top seller dept.
But how cool would it have been to walk into an AD and be able to try on a 40mm SubC, 42mm SDc AND 44mm DSSD and ultimately decide which size is the PERFECT size for YOU!?!? That was my vision and I'm still a little bummed Rolex decided to not provide such an cool options size list for its customers.