ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Clay · 31 March 2014, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

You aren't going to dive in that red sweater, are you?!!

Don't be ridiculous…I always dive naked...

kymwatchlog · 31 March 2014, 02:57 PM

must see it in the flesh to justify the USD11200 price tag

QueueCumber · 31 March 2014, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay

Don't be ridiculous…I always dive naked...

Lol!

Token74 · 31 March 2014, 09:21 PM

I currently have the 16600 and a GMT2 so I certainly don't need another Sports watch, but I do need the 116600!!

I've ordered it, and if I need to flip my Limited Edition Bremont and my GMT to fund it then so be it.

Racerdj · 31 March 2014, 09:53 PM

Just tell yourself that having the additional minute markers on the bezel makes the watch much easier to read as your eyes need more help. Pretty weak....

Der Meister · 31 March 2014, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Invictus Maneo

I love your 14060! I'm sure others will disagree but to me having that and the SD-C is a bit redundant . JMO!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, they are (must be) very different ( date on the sd and a thicker case and lugs) on wrist! For sure, the design is not terribly different..They are both divers.

yld2rob · 31 March 2014, 11:44 PM

X2!

Quote:

Originally Posted by invictus maneo

i love your 14060! I'm sure others will disagree but to me having that and the sd-c is a bit redundant . Jmo!

Sent from my iphone using tapatalk

slm9555 · 31 March 2014, 11:50 PM

If I was in the market today for a diver I honestly think I would still get the sub c, I can't justify the price difference up to the sea dweller.

Token74 · 1 April 2014, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yld2rob

X2!

But the 14060 and the 116600 are far more different than the 116610 LN and the 116610 LV that you have in your collection??

DCheeta · 1 April 2014, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slm9555

If I was in the market today for a diver I honestly think I would still get the sub c, I can't justify the price difference up to the sea dweller.

If I had a SubC I probably would be less tempted to get the SDC, as many of the same upgrades exist in the SubC. But there are many more differences between the 14060 and the 116600.

DCheeta · 1 April 2014, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Token74

But the 14060 and the 116600 are far more different than the 116610 LN and the 116610 LV that you have in your collection??

Hahaha...good point!

Starbucksboss · 1 April 2014, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

The previous generation of subs are lighter in weight & more comfortable for me.

I agree and timeless design too....

Starbucksboss · 1 April 2014, 01:30 PM

The first "newly designed" Rolex I like...

T01 · 1 April 2014, 01:55 PM

Great 14060 two liner!

KZZN · 1 April 2014, 04:59 PM

Hi,

For what it's worth, I think your existing 14060 looks REALLY nice. I'm not generally a fan of the Professional line (I'm more of a Cellini and Datejust man), and the existing Sub doesn't do anything for me at all personally, whilst I can absolutely appreciate the merits of the piece. But I'd forgotten how 'right', for want of a better word, the old 14060 looked. I'd say it's the quintessential Oyster Professional, and definitely a piece to be very proud of!

Cc1966 · 1 April 2014, 10:45 PM

Dave, don't resist the SD4C too much or you may injure yourself!!!

polarinda · 9 April 2014, 02:39 PM

the sdc is kindda busy looking, now i look at it again...

Karbo · 9 April 2014, 04:05 PM

Your sub is a beauty ! Keep it and try to save for a 16600 that is also a keeper...
No need of the SDC, too much weight, height, ceramic and graduated

RRGHOST1 · 9 April 2014, 08:44 PM

Bracelet,maxi dial and blue lume would swing it for me !

gr33n · 10 April 2014, 02:06 AM

The matte dial saved me from a substancial loss. I'll keep my 16610LV.

Survivor · 10 April 2014, 03:22 AM

Always choose an SD over a Sub. At $11,000 however (insane, BTW), go out and get a classic SD 4000 for half the money.....now that's a watch you'll really enjoy!!!!

submariner123 · 10 April 2014, 03:25 AM

The new SD is just a Sub C without the cyclops.

tkerrmd · 10 April 2014, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCheeta

When I first saw the new Sea Dweller, I almost cried with happiness. I think Rolex has created the perfect dive watch. I mean, the 16600 was already a great diver, but now that it has been brought it up to date it is absolutely perfect.

I was sad to see the price, and started thinking about selling off some other watches and making the 116600 my "one and only".

But then I realized that many of the things I love about the new SD - no cyclops, thinner lugs than the current Subs, 40mm size - I already have in my old trusty 14060. Now I'm trying really really hard to convince myself that I don't need the new SD, and that my 14060 is good enough for me.

Do I need the Sea Dweller? No, probably not...but dammit, I LOVE IT.

it would be all about the date for you

DamageInc.77 · 10 April 2014, 04:30 AM

In my eyes, the 16600 is a better looking watch than the new Sea-Dweller.

Thinner Lugs, no gaudy maxi-dial, no full-gradation, and no super shiny bezel. I will say that the new clasp is great, but not a deal-maker or breaker.

strafer_kid · 10 April 2014, 04:36 AM

The new SD will be different things to different people. Some will like it..........others won't! Reckon it will sell good in any event. As for me, it will be an additional 16600 or the new SD!

Vincent65 · 10 April 2014, 04:56 AM

I much prefer my older one (1990), but do like the satin dial and the bezel marks on the new one (but it should also be matte or satin, not shiny)...

And · 10 April 2014, 06:32 AM

I think the new SD looks fantastic with the ever so subtle changes to the lugs but it begs the question, why did Rolex give us those oversized, squared off, designed by Volvo lugs on the subc in the first place? I own a subc and I still stare at the lugs wondering how they got past the design team.

An extra $4k for a less boxy watch is a steep hike though.

AK797 · 10 April 2014, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by And

I think the new SD looks fantastic with the ever so subtle changes to the lugs but it begs the question, why did Rolex give us those oversized, squared off, designed by Volvo lugs on the subc in the first place? I own a subc and I still stare at the lugs wondering how they got past the design team.

An extra $4k for a less boxy watch is a steep hike though.

To make the watch wear like a 42mm. I would have been interested in a 42mm with the old lugs, but the old 40mm is too small for me and is not the more modern direction Rolex is going in.

DCheeta · 11 April 2014, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamageInc.77

In my eyes, the 16600 is a better looking watch than the new Sea-Dweller.

Thinner Lugs, no gaudy maxi-dial, no full-gradation, and no super shiny bezel. I will say that the new clasp is great, but not a deal-maker or breaker.

I have always loved the 16600, but to be honest I really want a modern diver. I have a four-digit and a five-digit (1680 & 14060), but I don't have an example of a modern ceramic diver from Rolex.

I love the maxi dial, the new bracelets, the ceramic bezel...I think the 116600 will make its way into my collection rather than a 16600. Although I do foresee having both at some point down the road.

(great pic, by the way!)

zama · 11 April 2014, 04:59 PM

I think the SD is a nice watch and if I had no diver (not that I dive) then it might be the one to go for since it is new and shiny, but in my opinion many are kidding themselves, the no date Sub defines the brand, and in the words if if you had just one watch this would be all you need. I accept some like to have multiple Rolex divers personally I will only ever need one, and see no reason to upgrade. I support the comment that the gap is 1/2 way to a used DD.

I say stay with your current Sub, I can hear the popcorn being readied to be thrown at me.

31 March 2014, 09:21 PM	#34
Token74 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Real Name: Vince Location: England Watch: Too many! Posts: 5,707	I currently have the 16600 and a GMT2 so I certainly don't need another Sports watch, but I do need the 116600!! I've ordered it, and if I need to flip my Limited Edition Bremont and my GMT to fund it then so be it. __________________ Time is limited, make every second count. Patek Philippe Nautilus 5990 - AP Royal Oak 15300 - AP Royal Oak 15450 Blue - AP Royal Oak 15450 Silver - AP Royal Oak Offshore 26480 - Royal Oak Offshore 15710 - Rolex Sea Dweller 116600 - Rolex Daytona 116519 - Rolex GMT 126710 BLRO - Omega Speedmaster Reduced - JLC Reverso GMT Moonphase - TAG Microtimer - Dent Pocket Watch - JLC Atmos Phases de lune

31 March 2014, 09:53 PM	#35
Racerdj 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Indianapolis Watch: Patek-Philippe Posts: 16,832	Just tell yourself that having the additional minute markers on the bezel makes the watch much easier to read as your eyes need more help. Pretty weak.... __________________ Rolex and Patek Philippe

1 April 2014, 10:45 PM	#46
Cc1966 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Christopher Location: Georgia, USA Watch: ing the Sea... Posts: 6,713	Dave, don't resist the SD4C too much or you may injure yourself!!! __________________ "I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way." Captain John Paul Jones, 16 November 1778 "*Curmudgeons* " Favorites: 1665 SD, Sub Date, DSSD, Exp II, Sub LV, GMTIIc

9 April 2014, 04:05 PM	#48
Karbo "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Paris, France Watch: Dayto/5164 Posts: 1,631	Your sub is a beauty ! Keep it and try to save for a 16600 that is also a keeper... No need of the SDC, too much weight, height, ceramic and graduated __________________ IG : @aka_karbo

9 April 2014, 08:44 PM	#49
RRGHOST1 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: luke standing Location: england Watch: Rolex TT SubC Blue Posts: 3,898	Bracelet,maxi dial and blue lume would swing it for me ! __________________ RRGHOST1

31 March 2014, 02:57 PM	#32
kymwatchlog Banned Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: US Posts: 853	must see it in the flesh to justify the USD11200 price tag

31 March 2014, 11:50 PM	#38
slm9555 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: SoCal Posts: 614	If I was in the market today for a diver I honestly think I would still get the sub c, I can't justify the price difference up to the sea dweller.

1 April 2014, 01:30 PM	#43
Starbucksboss Banned Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Reno Posts: 1,028	The first "newly designed" Rolex I like...

1 April 2014, 01:55 PM	#44
T01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Real Name: T Location: AZ, NV, CA Posts: 6,481	Great 14060 two liner!

1 April 2014, 04:59 PM	#45
KZZN "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: UK Watch: Rolex Cellini 5115 Posts: 512	Hi, For what it's worth, I think your existing 14060 looks REALLY nice. I'm not generally a fan of the Professional line (I'm more of a Cellini and Datejust man), and the existing Sub doesn't do anything for me at all personally, whilst I can absolutely appreciate the merits of the piece. But I'd forgotten how 'right', for want of a better word, the old 14060 looked. I'd say it's the quintessential Oyster Professional, and definitely a piece to be very proud of!

9 April 2014, 02:39 PM	#47
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,312	the sdc is kindda busy looking, now i look at it again...

10 April 2014, 02:06 AM	#50
gr33n "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Real Name: Xavier Location: Switzerland Posts: 439	The matte dial saved me from a substancial loss. I'll keep my 16610LV. __________________ Liberty

10 April 2014, 03:22 AM	#51
Survivor Banned Join Date: Feb 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Thousand Oaks Watch: DSSD Posts: 1,017	Always choose an SD over a Sub. At $11,000 however (insane, BTW), go out and get a classic SD 4000 for half the money.....now that's a watch you'll really enjoy!!!!

10 April 2014, 03:25 AM	#52
submariner123 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Real Name: Thomas Location: England Watch: 116610LN Posts: 643	The new SD is just a Sub C without the cyclops.

10 April 2014, 04:30 AM	#54
DamageInc.77 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Denmark Watch: UJ Alfred 40 Posts: 216	In my eyes, the 16600 is a better looking watch than the new Sea-Dweller. Thinner Lugs, no gaudy maxi-dial, no full-gradation, and no super shiny bezel. I will say that the new clasp is great, but not a deal-maker or breaker. __________________ Don't drink out of ornamental ponds in Tiergarten. You will get sick.

10 April 2014, 04:36 AM	#55
strafer_kid "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Kenny Location: northern ireland Watch: SDs, Subs & GMTs Posts: 5,127	The new SD will be different things to different people. Some will like it..........others won't! Reckon it will sell good in any event. As for me, it will be an additional 16600 or the new SD!

10 April 2014, 06:32 AM	#57
And "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Real Name: Andy Location: Beds Watch: Speedmaster Posts: 198	I think the new SD looks fantastic with the ever so subtle changes to the lugs but it begs the question, why did Rolex give us those oversized, squared off, designed by Volvo lugs on the subc in the first place? I own a subc and I still stare at the lugs wondering how they got past the design team. An extra $4k for a less boxy watch is a steep hike though. __________________ Truth is singular. Its "versions" are mistruths. - Sonmi 451

11 April 2014, 04:59 PM	#60
zama "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Real Name: Craig Location: Sydney Watch: 4 Broken glass Posts: 5,806	I think the SD is a nice watch and if I had no diver (not that I dive) then it might be the one to go for since it is new and shiny, but in my opinion many are kidding themselves, the no date Sub defines the brand, and in the words if if you had just one watch this would be all you need. I accept some like to have multiple Rolex divers personally I will only ever need one, and see no reason to upgrade. I support the comment that the gap is 1/2 way to a used DD. I say stay with your current Sub, I can hear the popcorn being readied to be thrown at me. __________________ Day Date 118206, Daytona 116509 & 116505, AP 25859ST Gone but not forgotten and genuinely missed..... Root Beer GMT, Sub, TT Daytona, YG DD Bark, Datejust(2 his & hers), AP RO, PP Aquanaut, Lange 1, Heuer Monza, Piaget Altiplano, GP Chrono, Seamaster, Tudor Sub, Tudor Chrono, Tudor Black Bay Bronze

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)