Why hasn't the 116600 SD4K price skyrocketed?

[Bladeshot]

Originally Posted by Tampashooter

You could buy SD4k's in the $7500 range a year and a half ago, all day long. If thats not skyrocketing, I don't know what is.

Exactly! I bought a used SD4K full set for $7400 in fall 2016 and now look at the asking prices, $9.5-11k. They are up. I loved mine but another caught my eye; and I certainly won’t be replacing it at current prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeToWatch]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

I think doubling in price or close to is “sky rocketing”. I think going from 7500 (which is a little bit lower than it was IMO) to $10-11k is just rising with a boost in the first year.

Let's use numbers rather than words to describe its price jump: 7.5k - 10k is 33%. That's a better return than the US stock market last year. Hardly "rising with a boost".

The 116600 is hands-down the shortest production run ceramic Rolex. I can't predict the future, but I can learn from the past: short production + poor popularity during a watch's heyday is the Rolex formula for a future classic. Both the original Milguass and 4-digit Daytonas met these same criteria.

And for those saying "this is just an overpriced Submariner look-a-like". Oh please...
This is the ONLY 6 digit sports Rolex with slender lugs reminiscent of the 5-digit era and potentially the last 40 mm, cyclops free Sea Dweller. Also, the matte dial is simply mesmerizing. Time will tell, but I see connoisseurs chasing this for years to come as the price goes nowhere but up.

[JCC296]

Originally Posted by aschneid

And for those saying "this is just an overpriced Submariner look-a-like". Oh please...

agreed completely

[superstarmar]

Originally Posted by lhawli

PS. Not directed at OP but I’m really perplexed by the fascination people have with the thought of investments in watches.
I can think of a few better ways to invest your $10k.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Right , then don’t buy Rolex anymore...
Simple cut and dry ....
Why not another brand you can take a bath on ?
Plenty of those ... Right ?
So then why are you here on this site ?
Simply because you appreciate Rolex and it’s
History, Quality, Prestige and so on and so on...
In conclusion save the investment BS for yourself
cause no one wants to take a bath on a $10K watch ...

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by aschneid

Let's use numbers rather than words to describe its price jump: 7.5k - 10k is 33%. That's a better return than the US stock market last year. Hardly "rising with a boost".

The 116600 is hands-down the shortest production run ceramic Rolex. I can't predict the future, but I can learn from the past: short production + poor popularity during a watch's heyday is the Rolex formula for a future classic. Both the original Milguass and 4-digit Daytonas met these same criteria.

And for those saying "this is just an overpriced Submariner look-a-like". Oh please...
This is the ONLY 6 digit sports Rolex with slender lugs reminiscent of the 5-digit era and potentially the last 40 mm, cyclops free Sea Dweller. Also, the matte dial is simply mesmerizing. Time will tell, but I see connoisseurs chasing this for years to come as the price goes nowhere but up.

Whilst I agree with most of the above, it is not the only 6 digit sports Rolex with slender lugs (and in fact its lugs are not that slender, just short)

And in terms of looking at price increase, we should be looking at MRSP at discontinuation compared to market price now. Not the discounted price.

It retailed at what, $10,400? What are they selling for now?

Having said that, its a fantastic piece and well deserving of future collectable status. And those who say any of the Sea Dwellers are just overpriced submariners really have no idea just how different the SD's are

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

How can a 50th anniversary be 43mm when at no point in SD history did Rolex have a 43mm case?

SD4K is the true last of the seadweller model and shortest run in modern rolex history.

By your reasoning, how can a 50th anniversary Sub have a green bezel when at no time in its history did it have a green bezel.

And how can a 50th anniversary GMT have a green dial when at no time in its history did a GMT have a green dial?

You're conclusions are ridiculous. And right up there with claiming that a 116500 is available with a brown ceramic bezel. Or that yellow gold Daytonas on a leather strap have a brown ceramic bezel

Your knowledge of Rolex current and past is laughable at best. Maybe you shoudl learn something about the brand before you start typing

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by landroverking

Because the 16600 is a better watch.

BTW, the Sea Dweller has never been a "popular" model. It's always been kind of niche.

The SD43 stands a better chance of become relatively more popular being that in most people's eyes it is just a bigger Sub !

[lhawli]

Originally Posted by superstarmar

Right , then don’t buy Rolex anymore...

Simple cut and dry ....

Why not another brand you can take a bath on ?

Plenty of those ... Right ?

So then why are you here on this site ?

Simply because you appreciate Rolex and it’s

History, Quality, Prestige and so on and so on...

In conclusion save the investment BS for yourself

cause no one wants to take a bath on a $10K watch ...

Ok wow! Are you ok buddy? Do you need to talk in private about what’s really bothering you?

I buy rolex and other brands because I love and appreciate the brand and because I wear the watches I own the way they are supposed to be worn.

I don’t intend to ever sell my LVc or BLNR but if I do, it’s simply due to the fact that I grew out of them and want something different. I’m not In It to make a couple of grand on a watch and come here on a watch forum and boast about the ridiculous amounts of threads on here that keep asking is this or that a good investment!

PS. I take baths with all my watches lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[kog]

Well, fist off the price has shot up. I paid £6000 for mine two year ago, now I can't get one less than £8500 with box and papers. At the time of purchase they were going for about £7500 new.

Second, I here people saying it isn't sky rocketing in value because it wasn't a popular watch. That doesn't make sense in the world of collecting. Look at the SD Comex, not very popular but bloody rare and expensive now. The Daytona when it was first released was unloved, people were buying the much more popular, at the time, Omega Man on the moon.

The 116600 was a short production run, thats a big plus, they say it was unpopular thats a plus.

[superstarmar]

Originally Posted by lhawli

Ok wow! Are you ok buddy? Do you need to talk in private about what’s really bothering you?

I buy rolex and other brands because I love and appreciate the brand and because I wear the watches I own the way they are supposed to be worn.

I don’t intend to ever sell my LVc or BLNR but if I do, it’s simply due to the fact that I grew out of them and want something different. I’m not In It to make a couple of grand on a watch and come here on a watch forum and boast about the ridiculous amounts of threads on here that keep asking is this or that a good investment!

PS. I take baths with all my watches lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I may have gone a little overboard...

[tgoddu]

Some really good conversation here..

For those concerned- No, my 401K isn't filled with a watch portfolio. However, I like the idea of an appreciating TANGIBLE asset as I believe anyone would be. Who wants a watch they bought to be worth nothing?

I bought this watch from an AD with a good discount and fell in love ever since. Probably my favorite watch to look at on the wrist.

I guess what I originally had in mind when starting this thread was a feeling of under appreciation for the watch. Upon the SD43 release, I it was quite controversial to many and figured it would cause many to refocus on the SD4k and like many of you pointed out, it has. Also, I feel like although this watch wasn't widely loved, those who own and love it are cult-like.

Thanks for input

[Tampashooter]

Rolex couldn't give away Daytonas in the 70's. I had an uncle that ran the counter at Tiffanys in Manhattan for 25 years. Subs weren't all that popular either. Datejusts were the rage.

So much for that trend...

[crazycarlitos]

Sd4k was discontinued in 2017

Great watch, but it wasn’t a great seller...
The fact that there are not too many in the wild and the short production run pretty much guarantees the scarcity in the distant future.

But IMO, the value “skyrocketing” will not happen for many decades.
Perhaps check back in 2050

Off topic:
Some insisting that SD43 is not true seadweller because it has cyclops is just laughable.
If u think that cyclops (or lack of) is what seaDweller is all about, than u need to read more and write less.
SD has always been about deeper depth than the Submariner. Period.
Why did they not put a cyclops in the original? Because they could not put one on the domed acrylic based on Rolex standard.
Why did they put it on the SD43? Because they can now.

The og SD had the red letters.
Does that mean all the SD since without the red letters are not true SeadDwellers ??
That’s about silly as claiming the cyclop makes the SD

So let’s stop this non-sense about what is true SeaDweller and what is not.
If The dial has “Sea-Dweller” on it, it’s a seadweller.

[crazycarlitos]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

How can a 50th anniversary be 43mm when at no point in SD history did Rolex have a 43mm case?

SD4K is the true last of the seadweller model and shortest run in modern rolex history.

Dude, ur non-sense opinion is really useless.

U make it sound like subs were always 40mm (they were not)

Even the Daytona’s grew in size over the years.

Do u even know what size the original “true” sea dweller was ? U think 40mm ?

Do some research

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by crazycarlitos

Sd4k was discontinued in 2017

Great watch, but it wasn’t a great seller...


So let’s stop this non-sense about what is true SeaDweller and what is not.
If The dial has “Sea-Dweller” on it, it’s a seadweller.

Originally Posted by crazycarlitos

Dude, ur non-sense opinion is really useless.

And you could stand to be a bit more polite in your posts.

FWIW, I really think the lack of cyclops has been a significant separator for the SD from the Sub Date. I think most would agree. For me the 43mm is a deal breaker for my smaller wrist. Maybe if it were really being used over a wet suit but as a daily watch there is no way I could wear it except on rare occasions. I can't possibly understand why you'd chose to attack those who recognize the long tradition of the SDs. Clearly none are claiming that the new one isn't an SD only that it is divergent.

Now the SD4K for me is just about perfect as a daily regardless of how it performed in sales before its discontinuance.

[aquatimerfla]

Originally Posted by crazycarlitos

Dude, ur non-sense opinion is really useless.

U make it sound like subs were always 40mm (they were not)

Even the Daytona’s grew in size over the years.

Do u even know what size the original “true” sea dweller was ? U think 40mm ?

Do some research

My research indicates 40mm. The original true seadweller implies production. 1967. Rolex would agree.

You crazy carlito!!!

[crazycarlitos]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

My research indicates 40mm. The original true seadweller implies production. 1967. Rolex would agree.

I stand corrected re: original sea-dweller size. It was 40mm

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

My research indicates 40mm. The original true seadweller implies production. 1967. Rolex would agree.

You crazy carlito!!!

https://watchengines.files.wordpress...ea-dweller.jpg

[aquatimerfla]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

https://watchengines.files.wordpress...ea-dweller.jpg

Yes. 40mm. 1967.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

Yes. 40mm. 1967.

In SD43 terms, anything thought of as a SD prior to '67 would invalidate the SD43 as a 50th anniversary model leaving that honor to the SD4K.

[aquatimerfla]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

In SD43 terms, anything thought of as a SD prior to '67 would invalidate the SD43 as a 50th anniversary model leaving that honor to the SD4K.

Yes. I firmly believe that the SD4k is the last of the seadwellers from history past. I cannot comprehend how a 43mm model w cyclops gives recognition to that history. Rolex created a brand new model whick for all intents is a 43mm submariner.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

Yes. I firmly believe that the SD4k is the last of the seadwellers from history past. I cannot comprehend how a 43mm model w cyclops gives recognition to that history. Rolex created a brand new model whick for all intents is a 43mm submariner.

I don't really go along with that as it's got the GEV which no Sub has had and has been a staple of the SDs. It's an SD for certain just too large for me. Cyclops does make it look like a Sub Date for certain.

[mistermann]

My 6th and only Rolex currently, can't see myself getting rid of this one.

[Canefan1]

IMHO all the divers are the same to me(SS). SDDS looks the same but way to thick and all the other SD’s are the same as Subs with the exception of the Sumariner. Looking to get rid of my 116613lb for something more clean and simple. Not meant to dis you Diver lovers but I’m over mine. A nice DJ 36/41 904 with smooth bezel is all I want.

[Tframo]

I picked up my SD4k used about a year ago and it has def increased in value. Not skyrocket though.
Great watch but getting itch to flip for something else

[ras47]

Going from 40mm all the way up to 43mm was an odd choice for a watch that’s supposed to celebrate the line. And adding the cyclops kinda “Submariner-ed” it up. There’s a whole lot of hoopla over the red writing too. Color me a hopeless traditionalist.

[Pacha]

I'm very pleased with my 16660, it someday it will belong to my Son.

[christo4]

Thanks for sharing that link to the History of the Rolex Sea Dweller. I've not seen this before. FWIW, I own both a 16600 and the 116600 and feel I know the differences between these two and their shallower Sub-cousins (pun intended). Love these two Dwellers for all the reasons they are a little different from each other and everybody else. Kills me that I can't wear both all the time. Ha ha ha.

[DoctorA]

The SD43 is steaming the thunder and there are a lot of compitetion from similar rolexes

[Steerpike999]

Originally Posted by landroverking

Because the 16600 is a better watch.

What He ^ Said