Brand New Sea Dweller 43 and very weak Lume...

[chris_1001]

Hey all, just bought a new Sea Dweller 43 from an AD this past Tuesday. I've noticed and been very disappointed that the Lume is so very weak.

This is not my first Rolex, and when I bought my Sub in 1998, it glowed great for a long time (both in hours and for many years).

I was pretty excited to get a new one and get a watch with new Lume to experience. I figure in all that time, Rolex would have a much better formula.

Is this normal for current models of Rolex to have weak Lume, Did I get a lemon?

Yes I can charge it with a flashlight, it glows strong for a bit (and my Old Sub does as well) then dies pretty fast. And most ambient light does nothing to charge it at all.

I'm trying to feel better here... But I'm pretty bummed

[ertihan]

Is this something that would be covered under warranty? Also, by flashlight, do you mean a UV flashlight? I find that non-UV flashlights don't necessarily light up lume nearly as well. You can get them for about $20 off of Amazon (the UV flashlights I mean).

I imagine if this is a brand new watch, then something like this might be covered under the warranty. You might lose access to your watch for a month or so but at least Rolex will fix it for you and you'll get the lume experience you were hoping for! As long as there's time left on the warranty I'd say just try - worst case scenario the service center says no (or charges for it). At that point it's up to you to decide if it's worth it for you.

[herts9]

Seiko, categorically, does a better job of having bright and longstanding lume more than Rolex. My SD43 is okay, but is trumped by a lot of other watch brands that happen to do lume better.

It just depends on what you're comparing it to. Superluminova, Luminova and Chromalight are different animals.

[Lewi777]

that's odd - mine is a strong glow for hours with no flashlight charging required (sub date)

[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by ertihan

Is this something that would be covered under warranty? Also, by flashlight, do you mean a UV flashlight? I find that non-UV flashlights don't necessarily light up lume nearly as well. You can get them for about $20 off of Amazon (the UV flashlights I mean).

I imagine if this is a brand new watch, then something like this might be covered under the warranty. You might lose access to your watch for a month or so but at least Rolex will fix it for you and you'll get the lume experience you were hoping for! As long as there's time left on the warranty I'd say just try - worst case scenario the service center says no (or charges for it). At that point it's up to you to decide if it's worth it for you.

I'm more curious if this is normal and to try and get some input from some owners before I decide to leave it be or send it in. I'd hate to have to send it in right off the bat.

I have a few high end flashlights that will charge even my old Sub. so that part is not an issue. And I do know most household LED's wont do much.

[Luisrm02]

I have a 41mm sub and also a Pelagos, Omega PO, Marine Master 300 and a Tudor 925. The sub by far has the weakest lume, 925 second worst Omega in the middle and the Pelagos and Seiko at the top. Seiko lume is absolutely ridiculous. Pelagos is a very close second.

I think what you are experiencing is normal.

[Luisrm02]

It’s pretty when it’s charged but not super bright for long compared to the other watches listed.

[2loaded]

tough one..
It might come back with the same results from RSC. Heck, my Citizen Aqualand outshines my DSSD...

[chris_1001]

Originally Posted by 2loaded

tough one..
It might come back with the same results from RSC. Heck, my Citizen Aqualand outshines my DSSD...

I so miss my old Aqualand!!!! 1990's one

Good point it might come back the same way.

[apinault]

I got an SD43 last January and also notice the lume isn’t that strong nor last that long. The sun charges it really well, but it does fade faster than I thought it would. Lume isn’t that big of a deal for me so I’d not send it in.

For what it’s worth, I got a new OP41 this January and that lume is stronger and last longer, oddly.

[ROLEX*]

Send it to RSC to check and appreciate to report back.
SD43 lume should outshine the sub40/41 due to bigger lume areas and diving down to deeper depth

[al503]

The lume on my 2018 SD43 is disappointing. It charges easily from sunlight but the nice, bright lume, only lasts a couple of minutes and it's usually down to where it's very hard to see (even in a dark room/movie theater) ~20 min later.

[Harvie]

Buy a $6 uv light from A and shine it on dial overnight.

I put one in front of my watch winder and pointed it at the dial wala.....

[ROLEX*]

Originally Posted by Harvie

Buy a $6 uv light from A and shine it on dial overnight.

I put one in front of my watch winder and pointed it at the dial wala.....

So when you are in the dark you use a torch light to light up the lume in order to read the time?

[waterman1]

No need for special lights etc. A few seconds in outdoor sunshine is best but any light will work. I find my sd43 and DSSD have a subdued but effective glow that lasts throughout the night. No it is not Pelagos or Seiko level of brightness but I find the sd43 is more legible than older 5 digit sea dweller and even sd4k based on larger indices. Also make sure your eyes have adjusted to darkness.

[EndlessEight]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

Hey all, just bought a new Sea Dweller 43 from an AD this past Tuesday. I've noticed and been very disappointed that the Lume is so very weak.

This is not my first Rolex, and when I bought my Sub in 1998, it glowed great for a long time (both in hours and for many years).

I was pretty excited to get a new one and get a watch with new Lume to experience. I figure in all that time, Rolex would have a much better formula.

Is this normal for current models of Rolex to have weak Lume, Did I get a lemon?

Yes I can charge it with a flashlight, it glows strong for a bit (and my Old Sub does as well) then dies pretty fast. And most ambient light does nothing to charge it at all.

I'm trying to feel better here... But I'm pretty bummed

Normal behavior.

If you hit it with a UV flashlight, the lume is remarkable.

But it tapers off quickly and remains pretty consistent there for hours.

[Combine man]

My SD 43 is 18 months old and the lume is very good,,in fact better than previous references I have owned to be honest.
Take it back under warranty, mine has also kept perfect time from new,unlike some I read about on this forum,worn 24/7 /365. Must be lucky!
Hope you get it sorted,it's a great watch.

[Harvie]

Originally Posted by ROLEX*

So when you are in the dark you use a torch light to light up the lume in order to read the time?

No genius, I shined the uv light at the dial when my watch rotated on my watch winder to evenly get all evenly luminated. It then becomes readable in the dark.

[Harvie]

Uv light is also very good at showing a fake dial, they light up in a very different color.

Yea, I know wearing them for since the SD came out is not how to learn anything. It is much better to get "opinions" off the net. Hehehe

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by waterman1

… Also make sure your eyes have adjusted to darkness.

This ^^^

I’ve owned mine (on and off) since 2017. The lume last through the night

[alphadweller]

Same glow in my SD43 as in my YM40 and Sub41 Date. They're about average compared to other brands. My 2005 PO2500 for example has a stronger lume, even today.

I couldn't find a picture of my own, so I borrowed a few from TRF members. Sorry for not remembering their handles.

[asiparks]

Photos are grossly misleading- they set expectations for lume too high. There was another thread on this a month or two ago- 30 secs in sunlight or with any LED flashlight will make lume shine madly for a few minutes, before it fades back to it's normal level..
Bottom line, it's designed to make the time visible in darkness, not movie theatre darkness, but real 3am, just woken up darkness?
If so, then it's doing it's job, if not, then send it back.

[MRBolton]

The lume on my 2019 Pepsi is a little underwhelming, too. It’s not abysmal, but my Tudors definitely do better.

[Goupax]

I never was super impressed by the lume duration on my Explorer II and Submariner to be honest. That's why I went for a DateJust with roman numerals and no lume on the hands, I would rather have applied white gold indices any day than batons with subpar lume on them.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by Goupax

I never was super impressed by the lume duration on my Explorer II and Submariner to be honest. That's why I went for a DateJust with roman numerals and no lume on the hands, I would rather have applied white gold indices any day than batons with subpar lume on them.

Agreed, valid point.

[rolexpatek363]

Rolex lume isn't the best by a long way, my Seiko Monster is leagues better, FWIW.

[Frog7151]

What is the longevity of lume? Does it degrade with time? Would a 2008-2009 Sub lume still shine through the night? Thanks

[crazycarlitos]

Originally Posted by chris_1001

This is not my first Rolex, and when I bought my Sub in 1998, it glowed great for a long time (both in hours and for many years).

Afaik that’s around the time Rolex stopped using tritium and started using Luminova.
Ur sub most likely reads t<25 at bottom of dial.

Tritium and Luminova is apple/orange.

Tritium would glow regardless of uv exposure.. and glow all night, since it’s radiation energy. However, the brightness would reduce over the years.

Luminova is “charged” by UV so the initial brightness would wear off pretty fast.. and gradually dim throughout the night.

[Gab27]

Your older Rolex might have brighter lume than the current Chromalight lume in a color the eye picks up on better. Also, ambient light is not going to charge it very well.

Your older Rolex, assuming it is a Luminova model, would have a yellow-green color temp compared to Chromalight's more blue-white. At least with Superluminova, their green-yellow C3 is still by far the brightest they offer, and IMHO that type of lume in a yellow-greenish color looks notably brighter in a side-by-side comparison with one of a more white light during day/blue color temp, and is more visible over time as the output decreases. So the green Luminova/SL Rolex models may be brighter than the current Chromalight models.


(TLDR, with respect to the modern strontium aluminate–based lume, blue-white colors generally may not be as visible as green-yellow.)

[JadeRaven]

Originally Posted by ROLEX*

So when you are in the dark you use a torch light to light up the lume in order to read the time?

Yeah pretty much something like how a diver always has a light they can turn on and off, and it's typical to light up the watch for a quick read, not desirable to have a bright light constantly on your wrist, something something idk I read it somewhere or saw a youtube.