Old SD vs New SD Pics? 116600 vs 16600

[sennheiserz]

Hey all,

I'm sure someone has posted a thread with pictures of the SD4000 next to the 16600, just having trouble finding it. If so, does anyone have a link? If not, can someone kindly put theirs together for a photo shoot? Its impossible to see them both in the same place at the moment unless you own a 16600.

Thanks!

[sennheiserz]

I was able to find these two, I'd love to see them from the side as well to check out the relative thickness:

[Touring]

Thanks for finding these photos! I'm really struggling with whether I want a 116600 or stick with a 16600, and these side-by-sides are helpful since my local ADs can't keep the SDc in stock to compare.

The "maxi-ceramicized" SDc looks great, but looking at it as a whole, the fully graduated bezel, enlarged/bolded 10/20/30/40/50 markers, and maxi dial/hands seem a tad too flashy for what I would want to be a tool/less conspicuous watch. May just stick with the SubC Date or BLNR for times when stainless steel blinginess is acceptable.

I'm kind of digging the more subtle 16600 but wish it had better lume and a better (read: more adjustable) bracelet.

I believe the thickness between the two is similar, but hopefully other owners who have both (e.g. token74...etc.) can whip out a pair of calipers and confirm.

[JohnFM]

Touring,

I agree that the SDc has a bit more bling than the 16600, but, having tried it on along with an SubC Date and BLNR, I'd say it's lower key than either the SubC Date or BLNR. It wears a little smaller for one thing and manages to stand out less, which is good or bad depending on your point of view. Personally, I like it a lot and would consider it if I didn't already own a 16600 ;-)

John

[Mick P]

Originally Posted by Touring

Thanks for finding these photos! I'm really struggling with whether I want a 116600 or stick with a 16600, and these side-by-sides are helpful since my local ADs can't keep the SDc in stock to compare.

The "maxi-ceramicized" SDc looks great, but looking at it as a whole, the fully graduated bezel, enlarged/bolded 10/20/30/40/50 markers, and maxi dial/hands seem a tad too flashy for what I would want to be a tool/less conspicuous watch. May just stick with the SubC Date or BLNR for times when stainless steel blinginess is acceptable.

I'm kind of digging the more subtle 16600 but wish it had better lume and a better (read: more adjustable) bracelet.

I believe the thickness between the two is similar, but hopefully other owners who have both (e.g. token74...etc.) can whip out a pair of calipers and confirm.

Hello Touring

I am in totally sympathy with your views. The 16600 just looks right and well proportioned and function follows form etc.

However the SDc looks a tad vulgar and is screaming LOOK AT ME.

I think I would opt for the 16600.

Regards

Mick

[Touring]

Thanks for the comments, John & Mick P.

I'm in the same boat. Recently picked up a safe-queen 16600 and am debating whether to peel off those stickers, or sell it and get the 116000 instead. Of course, I could just add the SDc but then I'd be in the doghouse at home for the foreseeable future.

Al.

[sennheiserz]

Originally Posted by Touring

Thanks for finding these photos! I'm really struggling with whether I want a 116600 or stick with a 16600, and these side-by-sides are helpful since my local ADs can't keep the SDc in stock to compare.

The "maxi-ceramicized" SDc looks great, but looking at it as a whole, the fully graduated bezel, enlarged/bolded 10/20/30/40/50 markers, and maxi dial/hands seem a tad too flashy for what I would want to be a tool/less conspicuous watch. May just stick with the SubC Date or BLNR for times when stainless steel blinginess is acceptable.

I'm kind of digging the more subtle 16600 but wish it had better lume and a better (read: more adjustable) bracelet.

I believe the thickness between the two is similar, but hopefully other owners who have both (e.g. token74...etc.) can whip out a pair of calipers and confirm.

The lume and bracelet of the new one are killing me too. Trying to decide on my first seadweller, and while I love the laid back look of the 16600, I recently had the BLNR and am well aware of how cool the blue lume and bracelet are...

[Touring]

Dave, have you thought about picking up a SubC Date and swapping out the crystal? Or are the ceramic Sub's case/lugs just not doing it for you? I've posted this photo in several other threads because I think it looks fantastic if you're not a fan of the cyclops but want the modern upgrades of the ceramic series. This is an option I'm seriously considering:
(not my photo)


The SubC/Date's lugs are definitely more pronounced than their predecessors and seem really square in photos. But on the wrist, it looks much better than you'd think. I just wish the date window was a bit closer to the edge of the dial, but that is also a problem with the new SDc compared to the non-ceramic model.

[strafer_kid]

I have been a Seadweller fan for some time and have both the 16600 and the new SDc. Yes, the new one does come over as a little 'shinier' and less toolwatch like than the 16600, which would always be a keeper for me in any event. The 16600 is a classic without doubt and I reckon that a lot of people will hold on to them as a really good all rounder watch. The new SDc however is definitely an advance with all the latest updates, and whilst I have no difficulty at all with the older bracelet on the 16600, the new Glidelock bracelet is definitely a significant improvement over all. Either way, you cannot go wrong with a Seadweller - good luck with whatever you go with!

[WAK4]

here are a couple quick and dirties I took Friday after bringing my SD-C home from the AD (and yes, the stickers are all peeled now...I think. It wouldn't surprise me if I come across another piece in a few months).

My impression after the weekend is it is a keeper, and I will most likely sell my 16600. I am not one for bling (I brushed the GMT-C bracelet for that reason) and I don't have a problem with the 116600 vs 16600. I also prefer the dial of the 116600 not being glossy.

I actually find it to be more comfortable and balanced (the 16600 tended to flop since I wore it loose to allow for swelling outside in humidity). Its good now, and I expect it to be even better once I get another link and remove the dive extension.

[Touring]

Great shots, Bill and congratulations on picking up the SDc!

I know both have been measured at 15mm thick, but I can't help but think the SDc appears noticeably thicker than the SD...

[fabio1965]

I prefer old Sea Dweller 16600!

[genta]

Originally Posted by fabio1965

I prefer old Sea Dweller 16600!

I prefer both

[Scotswierdo]

Ummm...I think I prefer the 16600 but its very close....

[WAK4]

Originally Posted by genta

I prefer both

That's my fear...and I won't end up selling the 16600. My bank account won't be happy.

[WAK4]

Originally Posted by Touring

Great shots, Bill and congratulations on picking up the SDc!

I know both have been measured at 15mm thick, but I can't help but think the SDc appears noticeably thicker than the SD...

Thanks!

It can be deceptive when we stack them on top of their bracelets for these shots. Last night I stuck a board between the two so I could see how they looked when resting on their case backs only. They looked spot on height wise.

Meant to take a pic but got sidetracked and forgot

[sennheiserz]

Originally Posted by WAK4

here are a couple quick and dirties I took Friday after bringing my SD-C home from the AD (and yes, the stickers are all peeled now...I think. It wouldn't surprise me if I come across another piece in a few months).

My impression after the weekend is it is a keeper, and I will most likely sell my 16600. I am not one for bling (I brushed the GMT-C bracelet for that reason) and I don't have a problem with the 116600 vs 16600. I also prefer the dial of the 116600 not being glossy.

I actually find it to be more comfortable and balanced (the 16600 tended to flop since I wore it loose to allow for swelling outside in humidity). Its good now, and I expect it to be even better once I get another link and remove the dive extension.

Thanks so much for putting these together! I think I'm still leaning towards the 16600, but I definitely want a Ceramic watch again soon.

[sennheiserz]

Originally Posted by Touring

Dave, have you thought about picking up a SubC Date and swapping out the crystal? Or are the ceramic Sub's case/lugs just not doing it for you? I've posted this photo in several other threads because I think it looks fantastic if you're not a fan of the cyclops but want the modern upgrades of the ceramic series. This is an option I'm seriously considering:
(not my photo)


The SubC/Date's lugs are definitely more pronounced than their predecessors and seem really square in photos. But on the wrist, it looks much better than you'd think. I just wish the date window was a bit closer to the edge of the dial, but that is also a problem with the new SDc compared to the non-ceramic model.

Wow, such an epic picture and a great idea. I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with modding, not sure why, I've updated my President with a new dial and hands from the next generation. This is definitely food for thought though. Where did you source a replacement crystal?

[Touring]

Originally Posted by sennheiserz

Wow, such an epic picture and a great idea. I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with modding, not sure why, I've updated my President with a new dial and hands from the next generation. This is definitely food for thought though. Where did you source a replacement crystal?

The photo of the Sub is not mine, but all you have to do is ask a watchmaker with a Rolex parts account. I did so at one of my ADs and swapped out my 16570 crystal:

There are independents on the board who could do it for you as well, if you don't have someone local.

You shouldn't worry too much about modding, especially if it's just a crystal swap. Just keep the original crystal safe and secure if you ever change your mind or decide to sell.

[sennheiserz]

Originally Posted by Touring

The photo of the Sub is not mine, but all you have to do is ask a watchmaker with a Rolex parts account. I did so at one of my ADs and swapped out my 16570 crystal:

There are independents on the board who could do it for you as well, if you don't have someone local.

You shouldn't worry too much about modding, especially if it's just a crystal swap. Just keep the original crystal safe and secure if you ever change your mind or decide to sell.

I was hell bent on a seadweller but I haven't fallen in love with the old ones or the new ones, this might be a perfect solution for a modern beater watch before I return to vintage collecting. You've given me a lot to think about...


Sent from a block of 904L steel

[CW3SF]

For an old guy who's losing his sight, the larger markers and hands are a blessing. :)

[accce]

Here are my 16600 and 116600

[116680]

Cool pics, can't better them myself. Having just picked up my NOS M-serial 16600 and compared it closely to my 116600, I thought I'd try and pick out some of the finer nuances as the obvious differences have already been covered. Adding to this older thread as a reference for future searches.

(1) The 116600 is about 0.5mm thicker.
(2) The shoulders of the 116600 are slightly thicker and the side of the case is significantly deeper. It is very slightly heavier that the 16600 as a consequence.
(3) The 16600 has curved lug ends whilst the 116600 is almost flat.
(4) The dial of the 116600 is a good 1mm larger, as is the font used for "Sea-Dweller".
(5) The knurling of the bezel of the 116600 is deeper (i.e. the "teeth" are larger).
(6) Surprisingly to me, the HEVs are EXACTLY the same. As are the crowns.
(7) That ceramic bezel really picks up fingermarks !
(8) The 116600 dial looks grey next to the gloss black of the 16600.

Which is the "better" watch ? The 116600 by a country mile. Even ignoring the bracelet, the incremental technical improvements are obvious.

Is the 16600 more elegant / have more charm ? Probably. The thinner mercedes hands, smaller typeface and cleaner typeface see to that.

Is there a place for both in a collection ? Logic says no, heart says yes.

Which would I keep if I had to sell one ? Financial considerations aside (I would lose more on the 16600, given the prices I bought at), I honestly don't know at this stage. It is that close. If the 116600 had a domed crystal like the DSSD, no contest - I would keep that. I likely won't come across another NOS 16600 though (this example was special to me as whilst manufactured 2008, the papers are dated 2011, which is the birth year of my daughter).

Most interesting to me is that Rolex have basically made the same watch again, with just minor cosmetic updates (maxi-dial, 60min markers on bezel, matt dial) and some major technological ones (bracelet, clasp, hairspring). There is a BIG visual difference between a 16610 sub and a 116610 one, but by comparison only tiny ones between a 16600 and a 116600. That tells me they feel they got it right the first time and wanted to rinse and repeat.

Anyway, hope that adds to the debate somewhat. Will post a couple of pics tomorrow.

[mps354]

Originally Posted by 116680

Cool pics, can't better them myself. Having just picked up my NOS M-serial 16600 and compared it closely to my 116600, I thought I'd try and pick out some of the finer nuances as the obvious differences have already been covered. Adding to this older thread as a reference for future searches.

(1) The 116600 is about 0.5mm thicker.
(2) The shoulders of the 116600 are slightly thicker and the side of the case is significantly deeper. It is very slightly heavier that the 16600 as a consequence.
(3) The 16600 has curved lug ends whilst the 116600 is almost flat.
(4) The dial of the 116600 is a good 1mm larger, as is the font used for "Sea-Dweller".
(5) The knurling of the bezel of the 116600 is deeper (i.e. the "teeth" are larger).
(6) Surprisingly to me, the HEVs are EXACTLY the same. As are the crowns.
(7) That ceramic bezel really picks up fingermarks !
(8) The 116600 dial looks grey next to the gloss black of the 16600.

Which is the "better" watch ? The 116600 by a country mile. Even ignoring the bracelet, the incremental technical improvements are obvious.

Is the 16600 more elegant / have more charm ? Probably. The thinner mercedes hands, smaller typeface and cleaner typeface see to that.

Is there a place for both in a collection ? Logic says no, heart says yes.

Which would I keep if I had to sell one ? Financial considerations aside (I would lose more on the 16600, given the prices I bought at), I honestly don't know at this stage. It is that close. If the 116600 had a domed crystal like the DSSD, no contest - I would keep that. I likely won't come across another NOS 16600 though (this example was special to me as whilst manufactured 2008, the papers are dated 2011, which is the birth year of my daughter).

Most interesting to me is that Rolex have basically made the same watch again, with just minor cosmetic updates (maxi-dial, 60min markers on bezel, matt dial) and some major technological ones (bracelet, clasp, hairspring). There is a BIG visual difference between a 16610 sub and a 116610 one, but by comparison only tiny ones between a 16600 and a 116600. That tells me they feel they got it right the first time and wanted to rinse and repeat.

Anyway, hope that adds to the debate somewhat. Will post a couple of pics tomorrow.

Thanks for writing this up, I'm considering both as well

[rollee1]

I was in the same boat before, and decided to go another route by adding a BLNR; only because my 16600 is a brand new untouched safe queen since 2001.

Otherwise I'll flip it and go straight to the deep end 116660 Deepsea.

[Joe.King]

Just picked a new 116600. I had no consideration for the older model. I am not that nostalgic. The SDc 4000 is just one awesome diver.

[JoseD]

Thanks for measuring the dials and confirming that the 116600 has a bigger dial!

[Mezz72]

only when u own it, will you know that the 116600 is a watch that will make it forget about 116610 or 116710.

[116680]

Quick comparison pic, which shows the dial size variance quite clearly. Sorry, haven't worked out how to rotate

CD old vs new.jpg

[dlack]

Originally Posted by 116680

Quick comparison pic, which shows the dial size variance quite clearly. Sorry, haven't worked out how to rotate

Attachment 600546

Looks like there's a 'cyclops' over the date aperture on the 16600! (Just a light reflection?)