SD 40 or 43 mm if price matters?

[Bond's First Watch]

Which would you choose? I can get a brand new 2016 SD right now for $1500 less than the new 43 mm.

[Mystro]

At that price point I don't think $1500 should matter either way. It's the right watch for you. I personally would go for what fits you best.

[RichM]

Originally Posted by Bond's First Watch

Which would you choose? I can get a brand new 2016 SD right now for $1500 less than the new 43 mm.

I'd pay the $1,500.

[Daytonaman799]

I think you should go with what you like best bec the 1500 will be much more eep if you aren't happy

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by Mystro

At that price point I don't think $1500 should matter either way. It's the right watch for you. I personally would go for what fits you best.

Couldn't agree more...which one do you want more? That's the one.

[JR16]

Originally Posted by Mystro

At that price point I don't think $1500 should matter either way. It's the right watch for you. I personally would go for what fits you best.

Bingo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[samson66]

Agree, $1,500 wouldn't sway me to buy one or the other. It's close enough that you should decide whether a 40 mm or a 43 mm works better for you. What's your wrist size?

[Bond's First Watch]

Originally Posted by samson66

Agree, $1,500 wouldn't sway me to buy one or the other. It's close enough that you should decide whether a 40 mm or a 43 mm works better for you. What's your wrist size?

6.5 inches

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by Bond's First Watch

6.5 inches

Same wrist size as mine.
I wear a 43mm Navitimer and a Chronomat 44mm as well as my Sub.
The Navitimer wears comparable to the Sub due to its shape, small stem lugs.
The new SD 43 will likely wear on you more like my 44 wears. Personally, I like having a larger watch in my collection. Looks modern, fresh. Clearly not for everyone.

Here is how my Chronomat looks on me, remembering the wrist photos always make the watch look bigger than it actually is on you.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=529191

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Bond's First Watch

6.5 inches

If my wrist was 6.5 I'd probably lean towards the 40mm model, but you are right on the line where you could do the 43 if you are someone who likes the look of a larger watch. But based solely on wrist size, I still would probably suggest the 40. I just think it would fit you a little better IMO.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge using Tapatalk

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by Bond's First Watch

6.5 inches

Do you want a moderately large watch, or a really large watch? My wrist size is similar, and I wouldn't even consider the new SD. It would be way too big - despite the chorus of "it wears small".

I've noticed a strong tendency on the forums for people to rationalize their choice of watch, no matter how large it is on their wrist.

[jonnyz1245]

As others have said I would go with the one you like most. Its your wrist and you have to live with the watch, not us.

[GB-man]

Which do you like better?

[Pmt2]

Remember that most people that say "it's too big" have only seen the watch in pictures. We have similar size wrists and my SD43 fits perfectly! You'll love it. You can't make a wrong decision. They're both great! BUT the SD43 just has an amazing presence. Don't get me wrong I love the SD40,but I'm IN LOVE with the SD43.

[Bond's First Watch]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Which do you like better?

I like Rolex's red-letter watches a lot; they are instant classics. I should state that I currently have a ceramic GMT Master II that is fairly large on my wrist. Also, I tried on a 44 mm Deep Sea and it was just massive on my wrist.

[WEST HAM ROLEX]

I would just choose the piece I want and wouldn't care about the 1500

If you wear the watch for many years it make no difference

In this case, I would go for the 43

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by Bond's First Watch

I like Rolex's red-letter watches a lot; they are instant classics. I should state that I currently have a ceramic GMT Master II that is fairly large on my wrist. Also, I tried on a 44 mm Deep Sea and it was just massive on my wrist.

The SD43 won't be much "shorter" lug to lug than the DSSD. It will be less massively thick. If you think the GMT2C is large, the even bigger SD43 is going to be gigantic.

I'd pick the future classic 40mm version.

[SnapperJohn]

You need to try them both on to decide. Sounds like the cyclops lens doesn't bother you and money wise the improved movement and bracelet more than justify the cost difference. SO it's all down to which one you prefer on your wrist.
FYI - I recently bought a DSSD and I'm loving it. That's despite many people saying it's 'too big' or 'too heavy' 'wrong proportions' etc.

[dave023]

Try them both, then choose the one you like the most. I have the SD4K and love it, but will also try the new one.

[ras47]

Perusing the classifieds, I've noticed the SD43 coming down in price. If you drag your feet for a bit you might get the 43 closer in price to the 40 in a few months.

[nvrp813]

IMO the 40 is a little more versatile. I also associate the cyclops with the Sub, and do not believe the SD should adorn to bubble.

[nvrp813]

Originally Posted by ras47

Perusing the classifieds, I've noticed the SD43 coming down in price. If you drag your feet for a bit you might get the 43 closer in price to the 40 in a few months.

The SD4K might be $1500 more than the SD43 in a few months

[locutus49]

This. When the huge watch craze dies down you will be thankful.

Originally Posted by JP Chestnut

The SD43 won't be much "shorter" lug to lug than the DSSD. It will be less massively thick. If you think the GMT2C is large, the even bigger SD43 is going to be gigantic.

I'd pick the future classic 40mm version.

[roger0770]

I like the SD4K better because I have a small wrist. It's just personal preference.

[ras47]

If the OP can settle for used but clean, $5800 gets you a nice SD40: http://forums.watchuseek.com/f29/fs-...a-4440418.html

Or this: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=490566

[Chewbacca]

if $1500 is a factor, why not save $6k - $8k and get a nice 16600 or a '666' and call it a day? these are so underpriced its ridiculous.

[sensui]

I'd listen to the wise gents above and decide for yourself with each on your wrist. It's more than just size of wrist for these watches....preference, shape of wrist, body built etc all comes into play. But it is no secret the SD43 is a large watch, hence why almost all the guys riding the hype train are DSSD fans/considered it @ 1 point to start with.

My personal preference is definitely the 116600.....the price difference of $1500 is too small to make a difference on a call like this. Whatever fits you best.

[Likestheshiny]

I would just choose the piece I want and wouldn't care about the 1500

This. That said, with my 6.75" wrists I personally would go for the 40. I think a 43 would look pretty huge on you.

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

if $1500 is a factor, why not save $6k - $8k and get a nice 16600 or a '666' and call it a day? these are so underpriced its ridiculous.

The 16600 is the most under priced five digit around. 14060Ms are more expensive today! The triple 6, at least in matte form, is riding the vintage wave though.

[swils8610]

I prefer the 40mm regardless of price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro