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

[subx]

Originally Posted by nafkha

I understand that some people prefer watches without cyclope. However, it is one of the main symbols of Rolex genius. If they didn't have cyclope on Sea-Dweller, it it wouldn't resist the high pressure. Now they put the cyclope, I assume they invented a system that would allow the cyclope to resist high pressure, which would be a great achievement for Rolex.
If that is the case, I think Rolex is not getting enough credit for this achievement...

Im on the list, and my AD explained that the cyclops is ADDED to the crystal on this one, ergo : the crystal is flat and therefore there is no high pressure risk, Rolex only 'glued' a cyclops onto it. <- don't know if true, but that's what I was explained this morning by my AD.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by towernick

Why add the Cyclops now to a watch that's never had one?

They need the sales. Enough is enough, I expect is the refrain rebounding through Geneva.

[Limestonedan]

From afar, I love what they did.

I can't wait to go into an AD and try one on comparing it to my D-Blue. If I'll be able to find one..

[Goin2drt]

Originally Posted by lawrenceb

New SD will be smoking hot and very hard to get. For the first time Rolex has paid proper homage to a vintage model.
Cyclops is easily removed and can be reinstalled just as easily.
Watches evolve and for once Rolex hit a homerun..

I hope you are right and it relieves the pressure on C Daytona All these folks can go pay over MSRP for a SubXL.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Basel releases always crack me up...so much pure passion and reaction.
I remember the calls of "blasphemy" over the platinum Daytona, and the BLNR...

This Sea Dweller makes perfect sense for Rolex. Let's be honest...the old SD was too similar to the sub. The DSSD was too thick and chunky to be an everyday watch, not to mention the disproportionately thin bracelet.
This is a great play by Rolex.
It gives everyone a hardcore dive watch that is unique. It stands out from the basic 40mm crowd, but isn't too big. It is an actual "new watch", not just a colored bezel or different dial. This is a new watch that has never been produced before and there is a real reason to add it to the collection. Too many companies make a living off of minor variations of the same watch (Omega).
If you long for a 40mm black dial dive watch, buy a Sub...they still have one.
Oh, and by the way, they added a bit of red for nostalgia!

Well Done!

Agreed.
IMO, they missed the boat in not bringing it out as a bigger version when they had the chance with the SDC.
I absolutely love the watch but will probably never own it due to the extent of the protruding Case-back so the fit on my wrist is not good.
At least my bank account is safe for now but god help me if they ever decide to do a red DSSD version.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by RobearH

I waited to pull the trigger on a Deep Blue till after Basel in the hopes of this watch or something like it. The big negative and reason for waiting for me was the height of the DSSD case, not the overall width.

At the same dimensional width but not as top heavy as the DSSD the new SD 43 should be perfect for daily wear. My favorite aspect of the D-Blue over the standard DSSD is obliviously the dial. I was hoping Rolex would incorporate 50th anniversary green in the new SD somewhere (dial, bezel, text) and left the cyclops off.

IMO these additions or subtractions would have been the perfect version of new SD but or now close is perfect enough. Glad I got with my local AD in January to insure I was the first in line for one if and when they are released.

From experience the new SD will be more top heavy in real terms than the DSSD just like it always has.

[Psmith]

Good work Rolex - this pretty much ticks all the boxes

[moby33]

Originally Posted by RobearH

Glidelock with fliplock clasp ala Sub C and SD4K.

Originally Posted by bsprtsgrp

"The new Rolex Sea-Dweller's 904L Oyster bracelet is fitted with an Oysterlock safety clasp, Fliplock extension system for an added 26mm of reach along with the Rolex Glidelock system for 2mm-increment fine adjustments over a distance of 20mm"

I know it's a Glidelock, but DSSD is also a Glidelock (w/ same 2mm increment adj's). My question is how do we have confirmation it's SubC vs DSSD glidelock? Anyone seen a pic of the new SD GL in operation? Just reading Glidelock doesn't tell the whole story (hell, 1/2 the people I talk to don't even realize there's a difference between the Sub & DSSD Glidelock).

[Askewww]

Originally Posted by SeamasterGMT

Was this post just an excuse to slag off the DeepSea? 10 years on and people are "stating" the bracelet is too thin and the watch too thick. Well not for me it isn't. I had the pick of all the sports models when I bought my Deepsea and it was the one I liked the most. It fits my wrist very well and it just as comfortable as any other watch I own.
So, let's be honest, these are YOUR opinions, not fact. If some don't like the new watch, fair play. You probably love your 16610 but, let's be honest, every kid with a bonus has one.

edit: the last remark was purely to show how easy it is to be offensive.

Where was he being offensive?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anthon]

I am a bit sad to see the SD4K discontinued. I loved that watch, should have bought it. Oh well, maybe second hand..

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern

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

Yes.
But did they fix the date change issue?

[nikesupremedunk]

It does make a lot of sense. I have a feeling they are testing waters for the next gen sub/gmt. I hope not but I would be surprised if it remained 40mm.

[crowncollection]

Looks great imho no complaints here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[moby33]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

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.

Ha, ha. Thanks. And it's a shade under 9"...I've been hitting the treadmill since I was called obese on TRF a few days ago. And to think I actually passed my SpecWar PFT back in my active duty Navy days...but now I'm apparently obese. Oh well, at least I have a new Rolex diver to look forward to!

[00Seven]

I'll be getting one. Not a huge fan of the cyclops but it's not a deal killer for me...just would have preferred it without.

[winston]

The only thing I don't like is the cyclops its a departure from the classic non cyclops history of this watch so for me not one I'll be buying... glad I've got a short production run 116600 though..

[904VT]

Originally Posted by moby33

Ha, ha. Thanks. And it's a shade under 9"...I've been hitting the treadmill since I was called obese on TRF a few days ago. And to think I actually passed my SpecWar PFT back in my active duty Navy days...but now I'm apparently obese. Oh well, at least I have a new Rolex diver to look forward to!

Can't wait to see some wrist shots of the new SD when you get it

[mementomori1983]

I understand what Rolex is doing. They want to capture what I'm assuming is a significant market segment of buyers who want a larger Sub Date. The SD4K appealed to a small niche of buyers. It is too similar size-wise to the Sub Date, yet too different in that it didn't have the cyclops, a feature that the average (non-WIS type) buyer associates with a Rolex watch. So they fixed both of those things in one swoop. And I'm betting that these will sell very well.

Let's face it, we WIS are a tiny drop compared to the rest of the pool of Rolex buyers. Rolex won't release a product that pleases us to the detriment of their overall sales. That's just how most business are run.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoustonRoo]

Glad to see my SD4K just up in value as it was only produced for 2 years. : )

[RobearH]

Originally Posted by moby33

Ha, ha. Thanks. And it's a shade under 9"...I've been hitting the treadmill since I was called obese on TRF a few days ago. And to think I actually passed my SpecWar PFT back in my active duty Navy days...but now I'm apparently obese. Oh well, at least I have a new Rolex diver to look forward to!

I bet I read less then three posts by that guy (" my chilli dick" or some such) that wasn't rude or abrasive in some manner to a TRF'er he quoted. I would also bet he is headed for a turnaround or a timeout from TRF.

Enjoy your new watch on whatever sized wrist you wear it on.

[Gerry62]

I prefer the deep sea

but the new 126600 is more beautiful than the previous (116600)
despite the cyclops

[WhyMe]

43mm with date cyclops? Everyone will be able to see date from mile away. Thumbs down for me

[Askewww]

Is it just me or do the lugs actually look proportional now unlike say a subC? more like a 5 digit model?

[Springfield]

I will be honest, I was completely apathetic about the presumed upcoming new Sea Dweller or the past versions. I was interested in other lines.

However, after seeing the photos within the A Blog To Watch article, I must say this has gotten my attention. Such a tank! Even a little mean looking.

[Atleo]

Lol @ all the butthurt over a mm. "42 would have been clutch but now I don't like it."




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RobearH]

Originally Posted by RobearH

Glidelock with fliplock clasp ala Sub C and SD4K.

Originally Posted by bsprtsgrp

"The new Rolex Sea-Dweller's 904L Oyster bracelet is fitted with an Oysterlock safety clasp, Fliplock extension system for an added 26mm of reach along with the Rolex Glidelock system for 2mm-increment fine adjustments over a distance of 20mm"

Originally Posted by moby33

I know it's a Glidelock, but DSSD is also a Glidelock (w/ same 2mm increment adj's). My question is how do we have confirmation it's SubC vs DSSD glidelock? Anyone seen a pic of the new SD GL in operation? Just reading Glidelock doesn't tell the whole story (hell, 1/2 the people I talk to don't even realize there's a difference between the Sub & DSSD Glidelock).

I thought both of us were clear in the type of Glidelock (Not DSSD) it is but here is a review of the SD43 that should make it crystal for you.

http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rolex-se...-126600-watch/

[watchwatcher]

It's definitely worth a look-see, IMO.

I like that the bezel looks to be a little wider (at least from the pics I've seen). This makes the bezel markings blend in a little better, one of the characteristics I love on the DSSD.

Just wondering if perhaps 41-42mm and no cyclops would have given them their best bang for the buck...who knows. They didn't ask me.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by WhyMe

43mm with date cyclops? Everyone will be able to see date from mile away. Thumbs down for me

What? The date isn't 43mm...

[MattCH]

I'm going to wait to see it in flesh. I can't judge just by the pictures.

[HL65]

Would have been better in 40mm with no cyclops and that is being honest.


With that said I still like it just not as much.