The new SD makes perfect sense...lets all be honest

[hitman23]

I'd like to know what the lug/clasp width is and if it has the glidelock of the Sub or DSSD version before making any judgement. My beef with the DSSD was that bracelet was too narrow for the heft.

[jrwilkes81]

Originally Posted by Mystro

In the kingdom of Rolex, there is no way you are getting a watch with the SD specs for under $10k. Look what the price is for the new SS Daytona. The only thing Rolex could do to make the new SD better is offer a OEM rubber dive strap as a after sale option to complete the hardcore diving image.

This. Why can't we get an OEM Rolex rubber strap for the DSSD?

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by seand442

I'm not a fan. My question is who are they marketing to? If Joe Everyman walks into an AD and sees the SubC and the new SD sitting next to each other with a $2800 price difference, how would you sell that difference for a watch, that unless you look up close, is virtually identical. The lack of the cyclops is what differentiated it, IMHO.

That is what differentiated it when it was essentially the same watch with a HE valve.
Now it is a different watch altogether. You can actually try them in and determine what suites your taste....not just because of an easily removable magnifying glass.

[mdgrwl]

It'll be a retail money maker for sure... a "sporty" Submariner.

To think... the Submariner will now be positioned as the dressier alternative.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Mystro

How does the cyclops make the new SD less of a tool watch? The Sub is a tool watch and has a cyclops for decades. One "might" argue that the ceramic bezel was really the end of the old school tool watch from Rolex as well as its inflated price point. It's a mute point as Rolex is a luxury watch that can be used as a tool watch.

I'm not talking about the cyclops. I'm saying that it's less of a tool watch because it's pandering to fashion sizing. It used to be impressive and desirable to be able to make the more capable SD at nearly the same size as the relatively small Sub.

Still, I said I'd be glad for one member and his 9" wrist if this watch happened, so I'll stick to that feeling and try to remain positive.

[dgobin208]

So as many have discussed before Rolex sizes are sometimes a bit suspect. Any thoughts or knowledge as to how the new SD will actually size up. Closer to a 42mm perhaps. Either way without the bigger lugs the difference in size between this and the SubC should be les pronounced.

[AK797]

I agree it makes sense from a sales point of view. The larger size justifies the higher price which was always the AD's bane and it is no longer up against the subc. The red is a nice touch and the cyclops makes it readily identifiable for the masses, and it looks 2-3mm thinner than the DSSD so will be more wearable for most. From a WIS POV it's a shame to "sell out" and put a cyclops but sales must I suppose.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver

I like it, but let's be honest here; from ten metres away, how many folk are going to be able to tell the difference between this and a Sub date?

If you want a hardcore dive watch that's different, get a D-Blue

Probably most.....3mm in size is noticeable. I actually think it will be easier to tell the difference now than with the old model.

[Mystro]

Good question as I have been on many forums today and I thought I saw it was to have the DSSD clasp?? Perhaps this was assumed by another and was passed on. Let's find this out now before it gets legs. Does the new SD have the better DSSD clasp??

Originally Posted by 904VT

What do you think is better about the bracelet clasp vs the Sub Glidelock? It's not a DSSD clasp is it and I missed that??

[904VT]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

It's because they basically just turned it into a SubDate XL, giving consumers two Sub sizes, for better or worse.

It's just another step away from being a brand that makes tool watches. The original SD was great, because they managed to make a more water resistant watch in a size not much bigger than the Sub. Now it's all about size and color preferences.

I agree, it's disappointing to see Rolex go to such an extreme to please aesthetically to the crowd that wants larger for the sake of larger. I mean why would they increase the size while leaving the water resistance the same. That just doesn't make sense

It's a Sub XL like you said, but the only logical audience is the super XL wrist crowd because most average size wrist consumers aren't paying a $3k premium for red text or those lugs. Calibre 3235 is nice, but it alone doesn't necessarily demand a large price increase if you look at their pricing of the Datejust

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Good question as I have been on many forums today and I thought I saw it was to have the DSSD clasp?? Perhaps this was assumed by another and was passed on. Let's find this out now before it gets legs. Does the new SD have the better DSSD clasp??

All of the pics I've seen show it as the exact same as the SD4K. I'd change my tune completely if it came with a DSSD clasp which is about a $1k replacement value increase over the Sub and SD4K clasps, justifying pricing.

[Nycturbovr6]

I agree I like it a lot. just not the cyclops

[Mystro]

Most of the hardcore dive watches never see anything deeper than the deep end of the swimming pool. The cyclops is more functional and more important, Rolex identifiable as many owners demand. (This is why the new SD will poach Sub sales) The higher WR offers no real world advantage over the current Sub but is more of a industry pissing match of technical capability. I dive with my PO (WR600) and my TT Sub (WR300). At no time have I ever worried my Sub was not up to the task of any diving I was physically capable of surviving and had to get the PO that was WR 600M.

Originally Posted by AK797

I agree it makes sense from a sales point of view. The larger size justifies the higher price which was always the AD's bane and it is no longer up against the subc. The red is a nice touch and the cyclops makes it readily identifiable for the masses, and it looks 2-3mm thinner than the DSSD so will be more wearable for most. From a WIS POV it's a shame to "sell out" and put a cyclops but sales must I suppose.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by 904VT

I agree, it's disappointing to see Rolex go to such an extreme to please aesthetically to the crowd that wants larger for the sake of larger. I mean why would they increase the size while leaving the water resistance the same. That just doesn't make sense

It's a Sub XL like you said, but the only logical audience is the super XL wrist crowd because most average size wrist consumers aren't paying a $3k premium for red text or those lugs. Calibre 3235 is nice, but it alone doesn't necessarily demand a large price increase if you look at their pricing of the Datejust

Pretty much agree, but don't underestimate the power of Veblen goods pricing. Even "normal" sized wrist people may see this watch as an upgrade to aspire to.

[MCOSUB]

Originally Posted by jrwilkes81

I don't hate it, I just like my D-blue DSSD better.

Agreed!!

[Brunik]

personally i dont like it... i have the 1665 double red and i was expecting something different...

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Even "normal" sized wrist people may see this watch as an upgrade to aspire to.

You can bet your money they will.

[rayraythemack]

I'm a bit disappointed. I agree with the OP and others that it may be a brilliant move, adding something new to the line and an in-between for new buyers. In fact, this is probably gonna be hot with new buyers. As a fanboy, however, I'm not interested. They could've kept the same SD4k specs and just added red lettering and I would be on the wait list now. Instead, it boxes me out. I originally had a d-Blue which I LOVED. Unfortunately, it became obvious how cumbersome it was to my 6.5" wrist and I switched to the SD4k. It's the perfect fit with size, heft, and lack of cyclops. It's the perfect tool watch for my wrist. This new SD lands in an awkward space for me, which is unfortunate. I just want red lettering! time to start saving for that vintage I suppose...All that said, I think buyers new to the collection will be satisfied and have a solid piece of tech on their wrist.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[seand442]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

That is what differentiated it when it was essentially the same watch with a HE valve.
Now it is a different watch altogether. You can actually try them in and determine what suites your taste....not just because of an easily removable magnifying glass.

Is it different? Yes. Slightly bigger, red writing, greater WR, HEV, and a new movement. Does that translate into $2800 more for the average guy who wants to buy a Rolex?

I guess I'd compare it to the difference between an Chevy Tahoe and a Suburban. Technically different and both have a place in the lineup, but to most folks, it's virtually the same thing, just a little bigger.

[vladamir15]

I don't like it personally. Would just get a sub instead. It was a good call on making it larger tho

[RRGHOST1]

I absolutely love it, the size is great and the Cyclops would make me buy it.

[brandrea]

Fits nicely between the Sub and the DSSD. I'm liking and sense an incoming for my 50th😊👍

Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk

[SeamasterGMT]

Originally Posted by 904VT

I agree, it's disappointing to see Rolex go to such an extreme to please aesthetically to the crowd that wants larger for the sake of larger. I mean why would they increase the size while leaving the water resistance the same. That just doesn't make sense

It's a Sub XL like you said, but the only logical audience is the super XL wrist crowd because most average size wrist consumers aren't paying a $3k premium for red text or those lugs. Calibre 3235 is nice, but it alone doesn't necessarily demand a large price increase if you look at their pricing of the Datejust

I think it's because, if they had left the size the same, What would be the point of the Submariner? You can have the same watch but better so who would the market be? Can you imagine a Rolex line-up without the sub?

[denmanproject]

I like it, not perfect though. Perfect would be 41.5mm with no cyclops

[904VT]

Originally Posted by SeamasterGMT

I think it's because, if they had left the size the same, What would be the point of the Submariner? You can have the same watch but better so who would the market be? Can you imagine a Rolex line-up without the sub?

Good point a 3235 powered 40mm red line SD4K would've have crushed it, especially if it came with a version of the DSSD Glidelock and if it came out before the Sub received 3235. Then again what's the point of purposely making a watch less attractive for the sake of it

Oh well it is what it is now. Just wished they would've at least kept the matte dial and lack of cyclops so it doesn't look as much like a Sub "knock off"

[Boaters]

I do like it 43mm .. 70 hr power reserve anybody know what the height is? Hope it won't be top heavy.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Pretty much agree, but don't underestimate the power of Veblen goods pricing. Even "normal" sized wrist people may see this watch as an upgrade to aspire to.

Funny we were talking about the Omega and the Planet Ocean last night, and today we have Rolex doing essentially the same thing

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Funny we were talking about the Omega and the Planet Ocean last night, and today we have Rolex doing essentially the same thing

Exactly. No difference from now on I'm sorry.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Funny we were talking about the Omega and the Planet Ocean last night, and today we have Rolex doing essentially the same thing

Yeah, to be fair, I think this is the most proportional and best looking Rolex sport model in the 6-digit era. As I said in the other thread, they should hit it with a shrink ray to 40mm and call it a Sub.

[GreenLantern]

No one mentioned the new movement. This is the latest and dearest that they launched last year, right?