I for one am hoping for a sub redesign...

[49ers101hitters]

Originally Posted by 007_Omega

I don't think they are easier to adjust than glidelock or the easy link extension. As far as the lighter feeling, I guess but that just gives a cheap, rattly feeling for me. I completely understanding wanting a lighter watch though. I've noticed that some people who are a bit older, those used to the lighter watches back in the day, just aren't fans of the hefty chunks of steel modern watches have become.

I’m a young guy and I prefer lighter and smaller watches (40mm max). I guess I’m just old school.

If you want to know my intuition for why the easy link is harder to adjust, I explained my reasoning in my previous comment.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeaDweller50]

The biggest 2 hints that the maxi case was a mistake is that the references since have been slimmed down, and the price of the 5 digits are crazy high.

[Seibei]

I am now in the don't care camp, since I already have my sub. If I did not I would be worried that they will change it for the worse. I think the current incarnation is close to perfect and it looks great on my wrist.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by 49ers101hitters

I agree with you on the glidelock, but the thing is, only the submariner has the glidelock clasp. The rest of the Rolex line up has the easy link clasp. Yes, you get the half link but that only changes the fit slightly. The fine adjustments on the easy link clasp are really annoying to use since the holes are on the inside of the clasp.

On the other hand, every five digit bracelet has holes on the outside of the clasp. It takes just a few seconds to adjust the clasp with a ballpoint pen.

Yeah, I can see that. When Breitling went from pin-and-hole to friction fit, which required a tool (beyond a simple toothpick) just to do the micro-adjustment, it was a real PITA, despite the fact the newer clasps looked better.

[jnkay]

I like the supercase. A lot.

If Rolex ever does go back to slimmer lugs, I would hope that there is a corresponding 1mm increase in case diameter. The maxi case was a bold and brilliant move to make the 40mm models more visually competitive with watches/brands that have larger cases, without actually increasing the case diameter. I get that it's not for everyone, but I believe that sports models should be a tad larger than 41mm DJ and 40mm DD models, or at least have the appearance of same via thicker lugs.

[Rolex.c6]

The modern Sub should have the SD4K case.

[danlar]

When changes are made, they will most likely be minuscule. A newer movement, yes, but minor changes to everything else. Maybe slimmer everything, but measuring just a few millimeters. I wouldn't worry.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by danlar

When changes are made, they will most likely be minuscule. A newer movement, yes, but minor changes to everything else. Maybe slimmer everything, but measuring just a few millimeters. I wouldn't worry.

A few millimeters would be dramatic. The SD43 is "just a few millimeters" larger than the Sub. On the lugs, even a single millimeter off each one would make a pretty big impact on the look. I'd be amazed if the new GMT has been modified more than a few fractions of a millimeter per lug, if that.

[FTX I]

I love both 5 and 6 digit, and if they change the current Sub I'll have a good reason to buy another ND and Date LN.

[danlar]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

A few millimeters would be dramatic. The SD43 is "just a few millimeters" larger than the Sub. On the lugs, even a single millimeter off each one would make a pretty big impact on the look. I'd be amazed if the new GMT has been modified more than a few fractions of a millimeter per lug, if that.

I agree a few millimeters (more or less) can make or break it for some. IMO, if you already own a Sub, I don't see a reason to sell it. I don't believe the brand would make major cosmetic changes to one of their best selling watches. In the end, the watch you own is still going to be a Sub.

[DonBateman]

I think the size of sub is perfect.

[Xerxes77]

I like maxi case and I think they don’t change it!
What I like to see on Sub is a TT and rose gold Sub!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by toolr

Why would they redesign it, is it not popular? Are they having trouble selling new Subs?

They're not having trouble selling Subs because it's simply all one can get in that size range in the Rolex diver line up. And at the entry level Rolex diver price point.

Also, I think the increasing popularity of The Tudor equivalent divers is partly because of the current Rolex Sub style.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by DonBateman

I think the size of sub is perfect.

Agreed.
It's certainly a sweet spot in terms of being a universal size.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by mdubya

I also agree with some posters in here that the maxi case is a huge mistake in design and looks terrible on 90% of wrists... there is no flow between the watch and the bracelet and it looks like it was put together as an afterthought. If rolex produced watches designed as they did for the first 70 years of their existence that I could actually but from an AD, they would probably have 30-50K of my money right now. A 40mm sub and GMT with case proportions like the SD43, please.

I tend to agree.

No offense intended to the 6 digit sub lovers out there.
I think the way Rolex went about the up-sizing of the appearance of the Sub was a cheap and nasty exercise with limited thought put into styling.

I also have often reflected on how the lug width of the old 5 digit models look when I used to own them and thought they could be just a little wider to reflect more modern tastes as it was probably due for an update of some description anyway.

Interestingly, I hear people make comment on the DSSD and how it looks like a fat lady with skinny legs or it's like somebody went to the gym and only worked on their upper body and forgot their legs, etc.
To get back on topic.
But the 6 digit Sub in some respects is worse it terms of proportions and no one ever makes those sorts of comments about it.

Rolex literally fattened up the width of the lugs and squared off the end at the tips because they couldn't do much else with it and used the same width bracelet whilst maintaining the same taper on the bracelet as they always have but added a cheap version of a Glidelock clasp.
And people were virtually running around in circles with their arms flailing about in the air going, oh f**king amazing, oh f**king amazing, check out the new Sub, isn't it fantastic. Go figure

It almost goes to show that Rolex can just about slap anything up and put it up for sale and people will find a way to love it, regardless of how awkward or ridiculous it may look.
In ways, it reflects on perceptions of the brand on a number of levels.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Ra_88

The biggest 2 hints that the maxi case was a mistake is that the references since have been slimmed down, and the price of the 5 digits are crazy high.

This is of course your opinion, not fact.
What you claim as having been slimmed down is not in fact correct. The SD4k wasn't a slimmed down version of anything. It was it's own new model watch. The previous five digit SD had this slim case you are all crazy about but won't buy any old watches for...
The SD43 is not a slimmed down version anything either as this also is a new watch.
The Deepsea isn't a slimmed down version as this also was a new watch.

There isn't an example to my knowledge of a ceramic model sports watch in the six digit reference range that has been slimmed down as you claim. The only two watches people are bitching about are the Submariner and GMT ll and both still have their same maxi cases since introduction.

Rolex may slim the cases of these models, but so far doesn't look promising since the Pepsi and Rosegold model new generation watches have the same cases from what it looks like. So highly unlikely Rolex with change the Submariner, a watch which can't even be kept on display for more than a day.

Rolex is doing surprising things so anything is possible but I'm in the not likely camp, and going 100% against any reduction in case shape. While some claim it's the worst in proportions I think it is the best it has ever been. I could see if the Sub was sitting on shelves with no buyers....but we all know that isn't the case. This supposed "mistake" watch is flying off the shelves with more demand than ever, people are speaking with their wallets, and they seem to like it. And guess what, if Rolex slims it down to look all skinny and feminine, I won't bitch, I'll just go buy an 11 series six digit reference, which I don't know why you five digit guys don't source a watch and upgrade the bracelet...too expensive for an "old" watch?? but...but, you love it right...

[Likestheshiny]

I really don't see Rolex making their dive watch slimmer and more elegant than their GMT.

[toolr]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I tend to agree.

No offense intended to the 6 digit sub lovers out there.
I think the way Rolex went about the up-sizing of the appearance of the Sub was a cheap and nasty exercise with limited thought put into styling.

I also have often reflected on how the lug width of the old 5 digit models look when I used to own them and thought they could be just a little wider to reflect more modern tastes as it was probably due for an update of some description anyway.

Interestingly, I hear people make comment on the DSSD and how it looks like a fat lady with skinny legs or it's like somebody went to the gym and only worked on their upper body and forgot their legs, etc.
To get back on topic.
But the 6 digit Sub in some respects is worse it terms of proportions and no one ever makes those sorts of comments about it.

Rolex literally fattened up the width of the lugs and squared off the end at the tips because they couldn't do much else with it and used the same width bracelet whilst maintaining the same taper on the bracelet as they always have but added a cheap version of a Glidelock clasp.
And people were virtually running around in circles with their arms flailing about in the air going, oh f**king amazing, oh f**king amazing, check out the new Sub, isn't it fantastic. Go figure

It almost goes to show that Rolex can just about slap anything up and put it up for sale and people will find a way to love it, regardless of how awkward or ridiculous it may look.
In ways, it reflects on perceptions of the brand on a number of levels.

And yet you bought a DSSD? Go figure

[AK797]

SD4K had the thin lugs and nobody bought them so Rolex got rid of it. This was there for all the thick sub haters but where were they? When sub sales fall dramatically then maybe a grand redesign will occur... so some time during our grandchildren's later years.

[toolr]

Originally Posted by AK797

SD4K had the thin lugs and nobody bought them so Rolex got rid of it.

Good point

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I tend to agree.

No offense intended to the 6 digit sub lovers out there.
I think the way Rolex went about the up-sizing of the appearance of the Sub was a cheap and nasty exercise with limited thought put into styling.

I also have often reflected on how the lug width of the old 5 digit models look when I used to own them and thought they could be just a little wider to reflect more modern tastes as it was probably due for an update of some description anyway.

Interestingly, I hear people make comment on the DSSD and how it looks like a fat lady with skinny legs or it's like somebody went to the gym and only worked on their upper body and forgot their legs, etc.
To get back on topic.
But the 6 digit Sub in some respects is worse it terms of proportions and no one ever makes those sorts of comments about it.

Rolex literally fattened up the width of the lugs and squared off the end at the tips because they couldn't do much else with it and used the same width bracelet whilst maintaining the same taper on the bracelet as they always have but added a cheap version of a Glidelock clasp.
And people were virtually running around in circles with their arms flailing about in the air going, oh f**king amazing, oh f**king amazing, check out the new Sub, isn't it fantastic. Go figure

It almost goes to show that Rolex can just about slap anything up and put it up for sale and people will find a way to love it, regardless of how awkward or ridiculous it may look.
In ways, it reflects on perceptions of the brand on a number of levels.

The DSSD and Subc are certainly not perfect but there have been more than enough fans to make it work, and recently phenomenally so, but half the SS models are/have not been selling well, Milgauss, Exp2, OP, SD4K so the customer is still discerning.

[Cru Jones]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Also, I think the increasing popularity of The Tudor equivalent divers is partly because of the current Rolex Sub style.

So, the Sub should be bigger and thicker?

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

This is of course your opinion, not fact.
What you claim as having been slimmed down is not in fact correct. The SD4k wasn't a slimmed down version of anything. It was it's own new model watch. The previous five digit SD had this slim case you are all crazy about but won't buy any old watches for...
The SD43 is not a slimmed down version anything either as this also is a new watch.
The Deepsea isn't a slimmed down version as this also was a new watch.

There isn't an example to my knowledge of a ceramic model sports watch in the six digit reference range that has been slimmed down as you claim. The only two watches people are bitching about are the Submariner and GMT ll and both still have their same maxi cases since introduction.

Rolex may slim the cases of these models, but so far doesn't look promising since the Pepsi and Rosegold model new generation watches have the same cases from what it looks like. So highly unlikely Rolex with change the Submariner, a watch which can't even be kept on display for more than a day.

Rolex is doing surprising things so anything is possible but I'm in the not likely camp, and going 100% against any reduction in case shape. While some claim it's the worst in proportions I think it is the best it has ever been. I could see if the Sub was sitting on shelves with no buyers....but we all know that isn't the case. This supposed "mistake" watch is flying off the shelves with more demand than ever, people are speaking with their wallets, and they seem to like it. And guess what, if Rolex slims it down to look all skinny and feminine, I won't bitch, I'll just go buy an 11 series six digit reference, which I don't know why you five digit guys don't source a watch and upgrade the bracelet...too expensive for an "old" watch?? but...but, you love it right...

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by toolr

And yet you bought a DSSD? Go figure

Precisely.
I actually have two of them. Go figure.

I suppose it has to be seen in context doesn't it?
To that, I will give some historical background.

I never had a problem with the DSSD except for issues around the font and layout of the mix of text of the MK I dial. Essentially everything else about the watch was quite acceptable.
It was a clean sheet design and a relatively good first attempt.
That was 2008.

later on, Rolex brought out the SubC which to my mind was a bridge way too far in terms of styling. And it had a cheap version of a Glidelock.
It made the DSSD look like a fairly respectable watch(for a first attempt).

Around late 2010 the Mk II DSSD came out and that was my entry into the DSSD line.
Over time, all my other 5 digit Rolex watches have been moved on simply due to lack of wrist time after a became accustomed to the size and weight of the DSSD.
My choice in the DSSD was never an emotional one.
It was always a product of a series of logical decisions around functionality on a number of levels and the DSSD was the answer to a lot of issues.

It still doesn't change what Rolex did to a great watch which they had in the Sub that didn't really need changing all that much.
In summary.
Had Rolex brought out a Sub that was more akin to the better qualities of the DSSD but without the size and weight of the DSSD I would more than likely be wearing that instead.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by AK797

The DSSD and Subc are certainly not perfect but there have been more than enough fans to make it work, and recently phenomenally so, but half the SS models are/have not been selling well, Milgauss, Exp2, OP, SD4K so the customer is still discerning.

I take your point.

However, no one has been able to gather data at the dealership level or personal level to ascertain whether the current Sub styling has detracted from a sale after people have tried them on in store or simply window shopping.

I have tried the Sub on and it doesn't look so bad on my wrist.
I couldn't live with it day to day though from a visual perspective and the DSSD fixed some issues I had with the Rolex offerings at the time so it became my go to watch by default.

[Unsubscriber]

Thought I'd see if I could cobble together a reasonably accurate picture comparing the lugs of the SubC, GMT-II Pepsi, and SD4K. It's not perfect but I used several reference points as guides.

I do see the difference between the Sub and the GMT, subtle though it is – I think this obsessional, comparative view makes the new, slight taper (more) evident. Seems reasonable to think a Sub update would inherit the new GMT case. Who knows? What's really clear is why the SD4K suits my small wrist so much better than the others. Very apparent difference.

Anyway, as a relative newbie, wanted to try to give back to the forum!

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Dirt

They're not having trouble selling Subs because it's simply all one can get in that size range in the Rolex diver line up. And at the entry level Rolex diver price point.

Also, I think the increasing popularity of The Tudor equivalent divers is partly because of the current Rolex Sub style.

Well there's Blancpain, Omega, AP, Panerai and a few others. You mean to tell me people are being forced by Rolex to buy a $9k watch they don't want. Sorry but those are really stupid people. I would never buy something I don't like or settle.

Tudors are popular not because of Rolex Submariners inability to quell a thirst, it is clearly apparent that if you look at Tudor's revival over the last 5-7 years, they have really stepped it up. While Rolex is more conservative, they have passed the baton to Tudor to benefit from all the heritage design and history as well as play with new ideas. Patina, gilt dials, domed crystals, rivet bracelets, titanium, black pvd divers, 42mm and smaller than 40mm, big crowns, no crown guards....basically every play form the vintage handbook, now with in-house movements, availability and extremely reasonable and more attainable prices.

Rolex focuses on strict quality and tolerances, timeless design and materials and now seemingly, exclusivity.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by AK797

SD4K had the thin lugs and nobody bought them so Rolex got rid of it. This was there for all the thick sub haters but where were they? When sub sales fall dramatically then maybe a grand redesign will occur... so some time during our grandchildren's later years.

I think the killer for the SDc was always the price point.
In store it looked like a Sub date, only without a Cyclops.

It was also a middle child.
Not fish nor fowl.
In ways it was overshadowed by the technical advancements of the DSSD and not perceived to be as good as the Sub in general terms.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Well there's Blancpain, Omega, AP, Panerai and a few others. You mean to tell me people are being forced by Rolex to buy a $9k watch they don't want. Sorry but those are really stupid people. I would never buy something I don't like or settle.

Tudors are popular not because of Rolex Submariners inability to quell a thirst, it is clearly apparent that if you look at Tudor's revival over the last 5-7 years, they have really stepped it up. While Rolex is more conservative, they have passed the baton to Tudor to benefit from all the heritage design and history as well as play with new ideas. Patina, gilt dials, domed crystals, rivet bracelets, titanium, black pvd divers, 42mm and smaller than 40mm, big crowns, no crown guards....basically every play form the vintage handbook, now with in-house movements, availability and extremely reasonable and more attainable prices.

Rolex focuses on strict quality and tolerances, timeless design and materials and now seemingly, exclusivity.

There are people who just want to have a Rolex diver.
The Sub is the iconic go to example with quite a lot of choice in the model line up to appeal to the masses.

Watches are for the most part, an emotional purchase.
I personally, would stop short of calling someone stupid over their choice in watch no matter what the brand.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I think the killer for the SDc was always the price point.
In store it looked like a Sub date, only without a Cyclops.

It was also a middle child.
Not fish nor fowl.
In ways it was overshadowed by the technical advancements of the DSSD and not perceived to be as good as the Sub in general terms.

Honestly I'm confused. Not trying to be argumentative, but this logic is flawed. This rational only makes sense when it comes to the non wis buyer walking in trying to get himself a Rollie.

The folks that are whining about a thin case are Rolex wis and watch aficionados that know exactly why the SD4K costs more, why it's a bit heavier and why it literally really is just a Sub without a cyclops.
That is all a Seadweller ever was, just a smidgen thicker and more expensive. So Rolex made the ultimate "Submariner" for all the wis...the skinny lug army...and where was it...on the shelves, being sold new on TRF for $9k, used $8k.
You had a few die hards who loved it and spoke with their wallet, but everyone else did nothing, bought a SubC. Rolex canceled it and the speculators were born, now people are buying it for a markup from msrp even though they don't like it for an "investment".
They complained about the price before but now they'll pay it...my point, it wasn't the price, they just didn't like it.