Sea Dweller vs. Sea Dweller?

[samson66]

At 40mm it was just a fat Sub that was top heavy. The wider proportions of the 43mm balanced out the thickness. The 126600 is damned near perfect to me.

If you want a 40mm dive watch, just get a Sub.

[Rori]

Originally Posted by Roli4life

IMO the SD43 is the sweet spot with proportions and aesthetics that are best in class of the sports line. Its symmetrical case, and red line make for the perfect combination of technology, and heritage.

Magnificent picture. It Shows the attractive aspect of the watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[j0hnny]

I have the 16600 and for me it’s perfect. I really don’t like the new one, too big and I don’t like date bubbles, I agree it’s a sub on steroids. I really can’t see how 40mm is too small for anyone, who are you? Goliath?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mdtddd2007]

Both to have in collection. But had to choose one...40mm better sized 116600. Shorter run and more collectible!

[Billfish]

SD43 is the one for me- fits and comfortable and easy on the eyes !

[samuel019]

By far the best 2 modern versions imho. For all the talk about the SDK being basically a 116610 is partly what makes it so much better then the SD43.

The slimmer lugs, 40 mm case and no cyclops outweigh the red writing and the bigger case.

[synrrgy]

A close friend of mine has both and I personally like the feel of the 116600. Only because of how it sits on my wrists at 40mm despite the thickness, the SD43 seems so much bigger when I tried it on.

[abozz]

The SeaDweller was ALWAYS a vitaminazed Submariner (is the SAME watch, with the SAME porpouse, but with bigger screwback case, crystal, and now size), Hev and more deep rating. Then is the same seadweller of always and all are wondeRful for me, the most handsome the SD43!
Indeed, the first seadweller percieved like something DIFFERENT from the Submariner is the SD43 reference, that is the reason is the first time a SD is a hot model and is not percieved like a more expensive sub with almost exact aesthetics.
Enviado desde mi SM-G975F mediante Tapatalk

[Robf52]

Originally Posted by swiss mad!

its made by rolex & it says sea dweller on the dial.

Therefore it is a rolex sea dweller.

Its like saying the latest daydate is vitaminized because its now 40mm & traditionally daydates were always 36mm so therefore the latest dd isn't really a dd in the traditional sense.

It is what it is, its progress, evolution or however else you want to call it.

You don't like the new style sea dweller, fine, don't buy it keep your 116600 if that's what you feel is the last watch worthy of the sea dweller name.

You could argue the 116600 was just a vitaminized sub date, just minus the cyclops but with a thicker case & hev .

+1.

[pbubsy]

All SD's matter.... but I'm a big dude with bad eyes so I went with the SD43. Bigger and more legible with date magnification.

[CaptT]

I like all variations of the Sea-Dweller line, the history, their subtle and not so subtle differences, and capabilities. While I’ve often contemplated which is a keeper (16600, 116600, 126600, 126660), I’m back on the 116600 train as the one and only (if I ever had to make that decision!).

[JohnnyBer]

I vote for the 116600; great 2 dimensional proportions, but too thick for daily comfort. The caseback is what sealed its fate for me.

[Boaters]

43mm for me size updated movement.

[chloebear]

Originally Posted by Swiss Mad!

Its made by Rolex & it says Sea Dweller on the dial.

Therefore it is a Rolex Sea Dweller.

Its like saying the latest Daydate is vitaminized because its now 40mm & traditionally Daydates were always 36mm so therefore the latest DD isn't really a DD in the traditional sense.

It is what it is, its progress, evolution or however else you want to call it.

You don't like the new style Sea Dweller, fine, don't buy it keep your 116600 if that's what you feel is the last watch worthy of the Sea Dweller name.

You could argue the 116600 was just a vitaminized Sub date, just minus the cyclops but with a thicker case & HEV .

Great points. You could take it further and say the original Sub was just an Explorer with a rotating bezel....and the Explorer was just an OP with a new name.

[sirC]

Originally Posted by chloebear

Great points. You could take it further and say the original Sub was just an Explorer with a rotating bezel....and the Explorer was just an OP with a new name.

Kevin Bacon................

[teabags001]

Originally Posted by samson66

At 40mm it was just a fat Sub that was top heavy. The wider proportions of the 43mm balanced out the thickness. The 126600 is damned near perfect to me.



If you want a 40mm dive watch, just get a Sub.

Well said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FQ01]

Originally Posted by chloebear

Great points. You could take it further and say the original Sub was just an Explorer with a rotating bezel....and the Explorer was just an OP with a new name.

touché

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[Swiss Mad!]

Originally Posted by chloebear

Great points. You could take it further and say the original Sub was just an Explorer with a rotating bezel....and the Explorer was just an OP with a new name.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CanPam]

Both are cool watches but I prefer the SD4K on my 7.28" wrist. It's more confortable than the heavier SD43 which is also much “louder“ than the SD4K.

I think the SD4K will probably be a future collectors piece due to its short production time.

[Rori]

Just one more picture to prove that the SD43 is indeed a seadweller ;-)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kog]

The Sea Dweller has to be Rolex's most innovative watch ever, since its launch in 1967. It has undergone much R&D to get where it is today 126600. For me each of the models dating from the very first are equally relevant and give a chronological record of Rolex's commitment to creating the best diver sports watch. The 116600 is an excellent well designed diver, it has historical value now since it is no longer in production. Where as the 126600 is also an excellent well designed watch with some controversial additions

Like all watches out there, these two will appeal to certain people. Someone said the 116600 is just a more expensive Sub, well the Sea Dweller is a more capable watch by design, Rolex made it that way - those numbers on the dial signifying depth rating do not come cheap. It cost money to research, design, develop and build dive watches that can withstand such high water pressure.

I appreciate what Rolex has done with the Sea Dweller, the innovation, how they have pushed the boundaries where ever possible, used new materials and design to plumb ever deeper into the ocean.


Sea Dweller = innovation = Rolex

[subx]

sd43 has everything you would want and is ultra well proportioned and sexy with red

116600 is boring , like a forgetable submariner

[abozz]

Originally Posted by Roli4life

IMO the SD43 is the sweet spot with proportions and aesthetics that are best in class of the sports line. Its symmetrical case, and red line make for the perfect combination of technology, and heritage.

Agreed! Wonderful pic. I LOVE mine! The Seadweller 50th anniversary

Enviado desde mi SM-G975F mediante Tapatalk

[Strummer25]

116600 is perfect

[Robf52]

Originally Posted by kog

The Sea Dweller has to be Rolex's most innovative watch ever, since its launch in 1967. It has undergone much R&D to get where it is today 126600. For me each of the models dating from the very first are equally relevant and give a chronological record of Rolex's commitment to creating the best diver sports watch. The 116600 is an excellent well designed diver, it has historical value now since it is no longer in production. Where as the 126600 is also an excellent well designed watch with some controversial additions

Like all watches out there, these two will appeal to certain people. Someone said the 116600 is just a more expensive Sub, well the Sea Dweller is a more capable watch by design, Rolex made it that way - those numbers on the dial signifying depth rating do not come cheap. It cost money to research, design, develop and build dive watches that can withstand such high water pressure.

I appreciate what Rolex has done with the Sea Dweller, the innovation, how they have pushed the boundaries where ever possible, used new materials and design to plumb ever deeper into the ocean.


Sea Dweller = innovation = Rolex

Well said.

[JonOnTime]

For me id go for the SD43 but old and new are great.

[JonOnTime]

Originally Posted by CanPam

Both are cool watches but I prefer the SD4K on my 7.28" wrist. It's more confortable than the heavier SD43 which is also much “louder“ than the SD4K.

I think the SD4K will probably be a future collectors piece due to its short production time.

gorgeous lume shot! Really doing these watches justice

[WhiteRhino]

I’m really surprised the voting is this close. SD43 all day for me. The 40mm wears too small for my liking. The 40mm SD wears even smaller then a Sub. No dice for me

[BNA/LION]

Sea Dweller 116600 40mm

[alphadweller]

The Sea-Dweller has always been a Super Submariner. I don't get the whole "Sub on steroids" short-sighted criticism.

Why is the Cyclops such a big deal on the SD and was never a problem on other pieces, including the Sub itself?

What's with the size, why can't some people accept that larger watches look better on larger wrists, within reason?

Since the SD4K 116600 got discontinued, I keep seeing posts from people claiming it's the last true SD, praising its wonderful merits and how great it is. I disagree but I respect the fact that some people love it and I don't start threads bashing its proportions, misaligned end links and protruding crystal. I let people enjoy what they like.