Sea Dweller vs. Sea Dweller?

[101031-28]

Owned both. Sold the 116600. The SD43 is perfection.

[synrrgy]

I personally like the dimensions and feel of the 40mm SD on my wrist. 116600 ftw!

[Efferalgan]

The lens makes the date window look somewhat symmetrical while the traditional SD always looked ugly to me because of the date window crawling to the center of the dial. Tudor GMT for example on the contrary: demonstrates the perfect date window positioning.

[Homo Sapien X]

Originally Posted by Efferalgan

The lens makes the date window look somewhat symmetrical while the traditional SD always looked ugly to me because of the date window crawling to the center of the dial. Tudor GMT for example on the contrary: demonstrates the perfect date window positioning.

Get a Cellini instead. These SDs are for professional not for the masses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willywatch]

I think threads like this are started by people just trying to justify why they bought
the wrong watch.It is really comical.

[Daytonaman799]

The new Sea Dweller is a Sea Dweller to me. It is a logical evolution of the original watch and is set apart from the traditional sub. It is a rugged tool watch that was purpose built to be tougher and stronger and is an over engineered dive watch that only a very few will ever really utilize its real potential. It has shifted as a piece of jewelry as it seems it’s being used to fill the void between the 41mm world and the 44. I say that bec it is now offered in two tone which I found to be disappointing. Two tone watches are for jewelry and not a tool of trade and that reality may prove the OP’s original point, that being said in my mind it’s just so solid and that’s what a SD is supposed to be as opposed to the daintiness of a Nautilus or Royal Oak in t(e sport watch category.

[Tensai]

I owned a triple 6. Value skyrocketed but an amazingly uncomfortable watch. Too high and no balance.

[joejoe1225]

Had all 3 the SD4K is the winner.

Best overall size 40mm / has all the modern technology / and most like the original design no cyclops date window.

All great choices - All SDs are great.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Efferalgan

The lens makes the date window look somewhat symmetrical while the traditional SD always looked ugly to me because of the date window crawling to the center of the dial. Tudor GMT for example on the contrary: demonstrates the perfect date window positioning.

Agree completely. The inset date window sans cyclops never looked right to me. If no cyclops, t
he window should be positioned all the way to the right, just like the Tudor you point out

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

[jets]

I guess this isn’t a 911 on the right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spartan1]

It is a Sea-Dweller...a new Sea-Dweller. Like all else, change is certain.

[kuuttingg]

Originally Posted by jets

I guess this isn’t a 911 on the right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ouch!

[Mr. Drunmond]

I have owned 3 different SDs. I only have the SD43 now. If it fits your wrist, it is the perfect modern sports rolex.

[Scanspeakman]

“To me the Sea Dweler 43 is not an SD. It's a vitaminized Submariner Date. It doesn't have the classic, historical design of an SD.”

“Both are great but to me the 40mm one is simply an expensive sub!”

A vitamized and expensive Sub; isn’t this exactly what the SD has always been? A beefed up Sub to withstand greater pressure. A bit more difficult to manufacture and therefore a bit more expensive.

I think this whole discussion captures the main paradox Rolex is facing; enthusiasts are looking forward every year to Baselworld (or whatever it will be in the future) for the new models to be released, but are always disappointed they don’t look exactly the same as the previous models. And lets be happy about that new models look different; this is probably driver why older models are wanted and keep their value.

I was able to buy a SD43 a couple of months ago and I think the SD43 is a fantastic watch. And its great you can now choose a model that fits your wrist. All those comments about 40mm being perfection is nonsense; wrist sizes differ and therefore what looks like perfection on a wrist differs. For me, 40mm is a bit small on my wrists and 42-43mm is perfect. Where for others 40mm indeed looks great. So I am glad there is more to choose instead of 1001 models in just one size. And therefore, I am hoping a 42mm Daytona will be released in the future. Call it the Daytona II for all I care. I love the design of the current watch but looks tiny on wrist.

Scanspeakman

[bmb15]

Originally Posted by jets

I guess this isn’t a 911 on the right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OMG....you are right
Left is a 1665 DRSD, Right is a 126600 'SRSD', bothmade. To the owner, congratulations for the two beautifuldream cars! Smart comparison and excellent question, best post so far here.

[Steph-paul]

I prefer the 40 mm case and no cyclops look, but to each their own.

[BrazenC5]

I also prefer the 40MM versions.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[jamesbondOO7]

16600 or nothing

[juve]

40mm for me

[bmb15]

Originally Posted by BrazenC5

I also prefer the 40MM versions.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

Nice pair with 1665, congratulations!

[Rolex.c6]

It says Sea-Dweller on the dial, so that is what it is. Suprised at how close the votes are, for some reason I would have expected it would be further apart. Had the chance to try on both models, but allready owned the 116600 when I tried on the 126600. 40mm is the better size for my wrist. Bought mine feb 2017, weeks before the 43mm was presented at Baselworld 2017. Having spend all my watch money on the 116600 I was kind of nervous what Rolex would bring for the 50 anniversary model. Loved the red text, was in doubt of the size increase and personally would have prefered it without the cyclops. But hey, it is what it is.
Still happy with SD 4K and wouldn't change it for any other modern ss model. If I could change anything on my watch, it would be a glossy dial instead of the matte one it has. Although it is a minor 'issue'.

[Atone]

The cyclops and balance of the SD43 caused me to pass twice on offers from AD. 116600 is a killer reference

[Atone]

Originally Posted by BrazenC5

I also prefer the 40MM versions.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[sheldonsmith]

It’s tough. I own both and own a 7” wrist. I prefer both. The 126600 fits better, but the 116600 looks proportional on the wrist. (How’s that?).

All the technical improvements on the 126600 are appreciated, but I know the 116600 will always keep tractoring on.

Fwiw, I have a comparison posted at https://www.minus4plus6.com/SD43.php




~ Sheldon

[Wcdhtwn]

Not if there’s a cyclops on it...

(According to many here)

Originally Posted by jets

I guess this isn’t a 911 on the right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jets]

It’s turbo, even though it’s not the ‘Turbo’ model. That count?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fania123]

16600, hands down

[brucethemanlee]

116600 for me

[jamesbondOO7]

Originally Posted by jets

I guess this isn’t a 911 on the right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would consider only the one on the left (without those additional bumpers, obviously).
Very representative comparison. Perfect functional design vs body built bling bling.

[Combine man]

Both good watches,I happen to favour the SD43 for me,but don't pretend to be a SD specialist,I doubt very few wear them for their intended role,so if you don't like the 43 for whatever reason,simple,don't buy one!!