The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 14 August 2022, 09:30 AM   #121
JonTheKingJames
"TRF" Member
 
JonTheKingJames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Real Name: Jon
Location: Long Island, NY
Watch: 126600 SD 43
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by askdanny View Post
On the secondary market, the SD 43 is the same price (or less) than the Sub Date 41.

A better built watch for less money? Shows the controversial nature of the design...
I think this has more to do with “Hype” than design. Mainstream Rolex is purely hype driven. 99.9% of people that know what a submariner is, doesn’t even know what a Sea Dweller is. We are a different breed here, don’t forget that.
__________________
CURRENT: 2021 Sea Dweller 126600
FORMER: 1988 Day-Date 18238, 2019 Submariner 114060. Tag Heuer Monaco Titan.
JonTheKingJames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 09:37 AM   #122
2loaded
"TRF" Member
 
2loaded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Watch: es watches
Posts: 1,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
The burson of proof is on you to provide data that more than literally a few people dive with a luxury watch. Not me.
SD43 a "luxury watch"? It's a tool watch designed and made to take on extreme conditions.

2loaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 09:39 AM   #123
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonTheKingJames View Post
I think this has more to do with “Hype” than design. Mainstream Rolex is purely hype driven. 99.9% of people that know what a submariner is, doesn’t even know what a Sea Dweller is. We are a different breed here, don’t forget that.
True enough, however it's an inescapable fact that a Sub is more wearable and appealing in terms of size and comfort across the general population.
A Sea-dweller is almost certainly a curiosity, generally speaking
Dirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 10:00 AM   #124
wb55
"TRF" Member
 
wb55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: -
Posts: 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonTheKingJames View Post
I think this has more to do with “Hype” than design. Mainstream Rolex is purely hype driven. 99.9% of people that know what a submariner is, doesn’t even know what a Sea Dweller is. We are a different breed here, don’t forget that.

The Sub 41 is a better watch in my view. For the same price I'd take the Sub 41 no question. I almost never wear my SD43.
wb55 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:08 AM   #125
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Play View Post
To me at least an SD with decreased depth rating is a bit like a blunt pencil - pointless.
This is just wrong from a practical perspective.

The point: Having a 43mm diameter watch with a decent thickness. Does not look like a hockey puck.

What's pointless is making a ridiculous caseback stick out for a depth rating you'd never remotely utilize. THAT's pointless.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:09 AM   #126
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2loaded View Post
SD43 a "luxury watch"? It's a tool watch designed and made to take on extreme conditions.

My friend, no one uses the SD43 for extreme conditions. The Rolex costs over 10 thousand dollars. That is by definition a luxury watch.

Calling any Rolex not a luxury watch is out of touch.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:10 AM   #127
kaiserphoenix
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London/Tokyo
Watch: FPJ CO BL
Posts: 1,592
Yeah I had a SD43 briefly for a while but I just felt it was too bulky even though I loved the aesthetics. In addition I wish it didnt have a cyclopes or even a date for that matter.
__________________
F.P.Journe Chronometre Optimum Black Label, Patek 5811G-001, A. Lange & Söhne Lange 1 191.039, Patek 5167A-001, Rolex Yacht-Master 40 Everrose, (Wh) Rolex Daytona 116500, (Blue) Rolex Skydweller 326934, Rolex Submariner 126610LV

IG: tokyo_watch_guy
kaiserphoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:48 AM   #128
gwozhog
"TRF" Member
 
gwozhog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Point Blank, TX
Posts: 2,893
Tried on a TT Seadweller and also the bluesy you see in the pic today and like a tractor pull the TT Seadweller just made me put bluesy down and slide it back on my wrist. By far the nicest dive watch I have ever seen. If they ever make one with the blue dial it would probably be the end of the Submariner.
Attached Images
File Type: png sea.PNG (284.2 KB, 151 views)
gwozhog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 05:09 PM   #129
GGGMT
2024 Pledge Member
 
GGGMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Itinerant
Watch: 79010sg
Posts: 7,961
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
Much like 99.9% of people who own the SD43, no I am not.

And of the .1% who are divers, no one goes that deep and if they are, they’re not wearing a rolex. This watch has little to do with diving.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GGGMT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 05:29 PM   #130
Paka
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Europe
Watch: IWC Big Pilot 5002
Posts: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by wb55 View Post
I almost never wear my SD43.
Sell it to me, if you're from EU.
Paka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 06:31 PM   #131
rambo99
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Tokyo
Watch: SD43,PAM1616,Hulk
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
This is just wrong from a practical perspective.

The point: Having a 43mm diameter watch with a decent thickness. Does not look like a hockey puck.

What's pointless is making a ridiculous caseback stick out for a depth rating you'd never remotely utilize. THAT's pointless.
if this is pointless, how about wearing a several thousand dollar rolex on your wrist just to tell time? is it also pointless to you?
rambo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 07:19 PM   #132
Manamana
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Here and There
Posts: 639
The best diver ever produced by Rolex. Why get a Sub when you can wear an SD43 comfortably. If you can't wear it go for a Sub.
Manamana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 07:28 PM   #133
TswaneNguni
"TRF" Member
 
TswaneNguni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: .
Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs
Posts: 12,606
What we have here is the small wristed discussing a watch, with with great enthusiasm,which they can never wear anyway ..

If you have the wrist,you wear anything ..Subs,Sub 50th ,DSSD
If you dont, stick to Subs/Daytonas/DJs.

Wearing a PAM 422 47mm on OEM Green camo rubber now .

Wear what suits you .
TswaneNguni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 08:00 PM   #134
Driver8
"TRF" Member
 
Driver8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 2,731
Rather than saying the SD needs to be thinner and therefore lose its WR (and thus its entire USP and reason for being), I think it’d just be easier for the OP to say, “I wish we had a slightly larger diameter Sub”. That seems to be what he really wants.
__________________
Rolex - 116710BLNR : 116610LN : 116622 : 116334 : 14060M
(Plus - Glashutte Original, Breitling, Omega, IWC, Tag Heuer, Doxa, Sinn, Seiko, G-Shock + micros)
Driver8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 08:02 PM   #135
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by rambo99 View Post
if this is pointless, how about wearing a several thousand dollar rolex on your wrist just to tell time? is it also pointless to you?
Yes, to tell time of course it is pointless. Good thing nobody does that, cause luxury watches are about style and jewelry, not to tell time. And jewelry this weirdly proportioned is a shame.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 08:04 PM   #136
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by TswaneNguni View Post
What we have here is the small wristed discussing a watch, with with great enthusiasm,which they can never wear anyway ..

If you have the wrist,you wear anything ..Subs,Sub 50th ,DSSD
If you dont, stick to Subs/Daytonas/DJs.

Wearing a PAM 422 47mm on OEM Green camo rubber now .

Wear what suits you .
Well, no. I have the wrist for it. I can wear 44mm PAMs no problem which wear bigger than the SD43. The PAMs don't have weird thickness proportions though which makes them wear better even though they're larger.

The thickness on the sd43 destroys it.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 09:15 PM   #137
TswaneNguni
"TRF" Member
 
TswaneNguni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: .
Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs
Posts: 12,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
Well, no. I have the wrist for it. I can wear 44mm PAMs no problem which wear bigger than the SD43. The PAMs don't have weird thickness proportions though which makes them wear better even though they're larger.

The thickness on the sd43 destroys it.
..and how about a DSSD ? Wears better than a SD50th ?
TswaneNguni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 09:17 PM   #138
rambo99
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Tokyo
Watch: SD43,PAM1616,Hulk
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
Yes, to tell time of course it is pointless. Good thing nobody does that, cause luxury watches are about style and jewelry, not to tell time. And jewelry this weirdly proportioned is a shame.
so do you wear a rolex?
rambo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 09:44 PM   #139
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by rambo99 View Post
so do you wear a rolex?
I have a few, yes. This point states I have the SD43 at the very least does it not?
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 09:45 PM   #140
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by TswaneNguni View Post
..and how about a DSSD ? Wears better than a SD50th ?
I have not tried the DSSD yet but the inner ring does not work for me
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 10:15 PM   #141
rambo99
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Tokyo
Watch: SD43,PAM1616,Hulk
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
I have a few, yes. This point states I have the SD43 at the very least does it not?
so you are pointless wearing a rolex! by your own logic you should never buy a rolex, instead you should buy jewelry to wear and a 10 dollar watch to tell time.
rambo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 10:17 PM   #142
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by rambo99 View Post
so you are pointless! by your own logic you should never buy a rolex, you should buy jewelry to wear and a 10 dollar watch to tell time.
You have horrible reading comprehension. Nowhere have I contradicted myself nor does my logic state that we should not buy Rolex. This is the weirdest strawman I have seen yet.

I said buying a luxury watch is all about jewelry and style. That is literally their entire point whether you want to admit it or not. Rolex works great for that. How you somehow misinterpreted that, I have no idea.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 10:36 PM   #143
Daytonaman799
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/South Fl
Watch: Rolex, Patek
Posts: 3,452
I love my SD 43 but get why it’s not for everyone. It is heavy and def think it’s big but I think it’s manageable and it’s like wearing a bank vault on yours wrist in a good way. It just feels like it can go anywhere and do anything. I also think the proportions are far more manageable than something like an AP offshore, etc. it’s big without being ridiculous.
Daytonaman799 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 10:36 PM   #144
rambo99
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Tokyo
Watch: SD43,PAM1616,Hulk
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
You have horrible reading comprehension. Nowhere have I contradicted myself nor does my logic state that we should not buy Rolex. This is the weirdest strawman I have seen yet.

I said buying a luxury watch is all about jewelry and style. That is literally their entire point whether you want to admit it or not. Rolex works great for that. How you somehow misinterpreted that, I have no idea.
didnt you say making a ridiculous caseback stick out for a depth rating you'd never remotely utilize is pointless? luxury watches are all about excessive engineering and the finest display of craftmanship, if you think this is ridiculous you should buy a 10 dollars watch just to tell time.
rambo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 10:41 PM   #145
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by rambo99 View Post
didnt you say making a ridiculous caseback stick out for a depth rating you'd never remotely utilize is pointless? luxury watches are all about excessive engineering and the finest display of craftmanship, if you think this is ridiculous you should buy a 10 dollars watch just to tell time.
Yes I did say that. Now how does that contradict my overall argument? I agree, it is all about finest display of craftsmanship indeed -- hence jewlery. I do not consider a protruding caseback that doesn't let the overall case hug the wrist and just plop on top that looks like it's floating, because of that caseback, a case of "the finest display of craftsmanship" -- kind of the opposite actually.

Now you keep repeating this 10 dollar watch to tell time thing, when I repeatedly said it's not about telling time, it's about craftsmanship that we enjoy, and both agree on -- so I'd rather wear my Hulk or Sub41, which don't have a ridiculous caseback. You need to stop strawmaning my argument that I have never made.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:04 PM   #146
rambo99
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Tokyo
Watch: SD43,PAM1616,Hulk
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
Yes I did say that. Now how does that contradict my overall argument? I agree, it is all about finest display of craftsmanship indeed -- hence jewlery. I do not consider a protruding caseback that doesn't let the overall case hug the wrist and just plop on top that looks like it's floating, because of that caseback, a case of "the finest display of craftsmanship" -- kind of the opposite actually.

Now you keep repeating this 10 dollar watch to tell time thing, when I repeatedly said it's not about telling time, it's about craftsmanship that we enjoy, and both agree on -- so I'd rather wear my Hulk or Sub41, which don't have a ridiculous caseback. You need to stop strawmaning my argument that I have never made.
the fact that you claim the sd43 caseback design is ridiculous just for the sake of deep diving capability has zero ground, which proves that you have no idea what luxury watches are.
rambo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:07 PM   #147
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by rambo99 View Post
the fact that you claim the sd43 caseback design is ridiculous just for the sake of deep diving capability has zero ground, which proves that you have no idea what luxury watches are.
Lol you're just spewing word salad now. The ground is based on how it wears on the wrist. That's plenty ground and very logical. The fact that you say this shows you have no idea what common sense and what logical fallacies are.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:09 PM   #148
rambo99
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Tokyo
Watch: SD43,PAM1616,Hulk
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
Lol you're just spewing word salad now. The ground is based on how it wears on the wrist. That's plenty ground and very logical. The fact that you say this shows you have no idea what common sense and what logical fallacies are.
lol.
rambo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:13 PM   #149
brandrea
2024 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 73,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by interestedinwatches View Post
Yes I did say that. Now how does that contradict my overall argument? I agree, it is all about finest display of craftsmanship indeed -- hence jewlery. I do not consider a protruding caseback that doesn't let the overall case hug the wrist and just plop on top that looks like it's floating, because of that caseback, a case of "the finest display of craftsmanship" -- kind of the opposite actually.

Now you keep repeating this 10 dollar watch to tell time thing, when I repeatedly said it's not about telling time, it's about craftsmanship that we enjoy, and both agree on -- so I'd rather wear my Hulk or Sub41, which don't have a ridiculous caseback.

Makes sense?
I think it’s important not to make sweeping generalizations.

For you and me and others, the caseback is a point of contention. That’s well documented here on TRF.

For others the protruding caseback serves a purpose, which is to raise the mid case ever so slightly off the wrist ensuring the crown doesn’t dig into the hand.

Others, site the protruding caseback as a point of comfort. That’s right, comfort in that it helps to seat the watch on the wrist between the ulnar bone and the meat of the wrist. It almost sinks in.

Obviously the wearer needs to decide and no two wrists are the same.

I owned one of the first SD43’s on the forum and finally sold it a couple of years ago because I struggled with the caseback comfort. I recently bought the exact same watch back from the person I sold it to, and started to wear it looser on my wrist with more success.

Will it ever be as comfortable as a flat, cushion style caseback? Of course not. It is what it is and I accept that.

Also, most of us will never use our watches for any of the intended purposes or capabilities, but that doesn’t mean Rolex should dial back on the specs. That’s like suggesting you can’t drive a Ferrari to its limits so they should make the car more comfortable.

I like that the SD is a 1220m rated watch. Of course I’ll never use it, most will never use the depth rating on a GMT, but that really isn’t the point. The point is Rolex builds these little machines to over perform and that’s the entire point.

If I were you I’d just move on. No need to keep hating on the reference.
brandrea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 August 2022, 11:16 PM   #150
interestedinwatches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: nyc
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandrea View Post
I think it’s important not to make sweeping generalizations.

For you and me and others, the caseback is a point of contention. That’s well documented here on TRF.

For others the protruding caseback serves a purpose, which is to raise the mid case ever so slightly off the wrist ensuring the crown doesn’t dig into the hand.

Others, site the protruding caseback as a point of comfort. That’s right, comfort in that it helps to seat the watch on the wrist between the ulnar bone and the meat of the wrist. It almost sinks in.

Obviously the wearer needs to decide and no two wrists are the same.

I owned one of the first SD43’s on the forum and finally sold it a couple of years ago because I struggled with the caseback comfort. I recently bought the exact same watch back from the person I sold it to, and started to wear it looser on my wrist with more success.

Will it ever be as comfortable as a flat, cushion style caseback? Of course not. It is what it is and I accept that.

Also, most of us will never use our watches for any of the intended purposes or capabilities, but that doesn’t mean Rolex should dial back on the specs. That’s like suggesting you can’t drive a Ferrari to its limits so they should make the car more comfortable.

I like that the SD is a 1220m rated watch. Of course I’ll never use it, most will never use the depth rating on a GMT, but that really isn’t the point. The point is Rolex builds these little machines to over perform and that’s the entire point.

If I were you I’d just move on. No need to keep hating on the reference.
I get where you're coming from to a degree. I am not stating that everyone should dislike it because I dislike it. Feel free to like what you like, no opinion is invalid in what they prefer from Rolex. Rolex makes a multitude of different watches and there is something for everyone.

I was simply arguing with someone who lacked common sense and kept making strawman arguments against points I did not create.

If someone likes the overly huge caseback, good for them.


But yes, it would be very nice if Rolex made the Submariner in 43mm and did not have a grotesquely huge caseback. That would be the perfect Rolex for me.
interestedinwatches is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.