The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24 April 2017, 12:25 PM   #61
Bigsykedaddy
"TRF" Member
 
Bigsykedaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Florida
Watch: LVc | SubC
Posts: 2,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nav01L View Post
We saw the rhodium flat bezel jubilee combo, which clearly was not for me, it lacked the vibrance of the OP39 and was too gray in gray for my taste. Other than that, the white (milky white like the EX II polar) flat bezel oyster bracelet was a quite nice combo, if perhaps a bit boring. The blue one with fluted bezel was nowhere to be seen, but since we were the first ones to drop by just after breakfast, they were just getting started with unpacking the exhibits.
Awesome thank you for the response / info

I am waiting to see a blue dial with domed bezel in person (along with the fluted version to see which one I like most.)

Thanks again
Bigsykedaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 April 2017, 12:31 PM   #62
HogwldFLTR
2024 Pledge Member
 
HogwldFLTR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Lee
Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48
Watch: What's on my wrist
Posts: 33,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJMarcus View Post
Can't get into the skydweller. Just looks like an omega homage on steroids.:
I don't understand this at all. I'd love to see the reference you are comparing it too.
__________________
Troglodyte in residence!

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=808599
HogwldFLTR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 April 2017, 03:33 PM   #63
meganfox17
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Kuala Lumpur , Ma
Posts: 2,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nav01L View Post
It is when you hold them side by side, though it's more like 1/2 mm than 2/3.

The SD43 has a much slimmer main case side than the DSSD. However the new SD43's caseback sticks out more than the DSSD's which caused it to "hover" over my wrist much more than the Deep Sea and feel less compact than the latter. This sort of equalled out the difference in feel. I was really surprised how alike they wore overall.
I used my mm measuring Apps to guesstimate the height & my calculations suggests it's between 17.48 and 17.52 mm. Wait a minute ! That can't be right , right ? Anyway I have my doubts and think it's slimmer than the figures suggest...

In fact even Omega had to rework the 16.0 mm thickness of the open boxed sapphire caseback ( the Co Ax movement wasnt to be blamed ) of the old 44.25 mm Speedmaster Cal 9300 and announced that the new 2017 Speedy Racing dial Cal 9900 44.25 mm Co Ax MC is now slimmer at 14.9 mm




meganfox17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 April 2017, 05:29 PM   #64
Nav01L
"TRF" Member
 
Nav01L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Real Name: Fred
Location: Zurich
Posts: 2,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by meganfox17 View Post
I used my mm measuring Apps to guesstimate the height & my calculations suggests it's between 17.48 and 17.52 mm. Wait a minute ! That can't be right , right ? Anyway I have my doubts and think it's slimmer than the figures suggest...
I'd say your result is correct.

I did that same calculation, though old school, with a ruler and pencil, based on that same image and the assumption that the bezel would have a diameter of 43mm (which, having seen it live now, feels accurate).

My result was 16.52 mm top to bottom without cyclops, i. e. 17.something with cyclops. This is also pretty consistent with the wearing experience, given how similar it felt to the DSSD on the wrist.
__________________
Greetings from Switzerland

Remember, the dignity you surrender at your AD‘s doorstep will never be recovered by wearing the watch he may get you.
Nav01L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 April 2017, 06:47 PM   #65
xIZeitgeistIx
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Switzerland
Watch: DaytonaC & Sub
Posts: 116
Gruetzi!
Which dealer did you visit? Bucherer or Beyer in Zürich?
Great pictures and kind regards from Luzern
xIZeitgeistIx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 April 2017, 07:10 PM   #66
Nav01L
"TRF" Member
 
Nav01L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Real Name: Fred
Location: Zurich
Posts: 2,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by xIZeitgeistIx View Post
Gruetzi!
Which dealer did you visit? Bucherer or Beyer in Zürich?
Great pictures and kind regards from Luzern
They held the Basel showing at the now not so new anymore Rolex Monobrand Boutique (powered by Bucherer) just off Paradeplatz, down the road from Sprüngli. I'm told the exhibit will stay there until Friday, if you are interested in visiting. Best place to purchase is still Beyer though ;)

Greetings to Lucerne, I'll actually be there for a meeting tomorrow, but on too tight a schedule to have a stroll through your beautiful city I'm afraid.
__________________
Greetings from Switzerland

Remember, the dignity you surrender at your AD‘s doorstep will never be recovered by wearing the watch he may get you.
Nav01L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 April 2017, 09:20 PM   #67
meganfox17
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Kuala Lumpur , Ma
Posts: 2,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nav01L View Post
I did that same calculation, though old school, with a ruler and pencil, based on that same image and the assumption that the bezel would have a diameter of 43mm (which, having seen it live now, feels accurate).

My result was 16.52 mm top to bottom without cyclops, i. e. 17.something with cyclops. This is also pretty consistent with the wearing experience, given how similar it felt to the DSSD on the wrist.
It's really lots of fun refining the measurements +/- the cyclops


meganfox17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 April 2017, 12:15 AM   #68
j-watch
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Joe
Location: Wisconsin
Watch: HULK, BLRO, 16523
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by meganfox17 View Post
I used my mm measuring Apps to guesstimate the height & my calculations suggests it's between 17.48 and 17.52 mm. Wait a minute ! That can't be right , right ? Anyway I have my doubts and think it's slimmer than the figures suggest...

In fact even Omega had to rework the 16.0 mm thickness of the open boxed sapphire caseback ( the Co Ax movement wasnt to be blamed ) of the old 44.25 mm Speedmaster Cal 9300 and announced that the new 2017 Speedy Racing dial Cal 9900 44.25 mm Co Ax MC is now slimmer at 14.9 mm





Ya know what I just noticed on this piece (can't believe I didn't see it previously), is that there's a "half link" on the 12:00 side connected to the folding divers extension. This is interesting, as the 116600 didn't come with a half link, and to get "just the right fit" with the folding snap extension removed, I had to add a full link to the 12:00 side. This allowed me to have the glide lock positioned near the middle of it's adjustment mechanism.

I tried leaving the divers extension in, but to me the watch looks off when you do this. I prefer it out, only showing the normal links exposed. I also prefer to have the glide lock positioned in the middle of it's mechanism if not even closer to the "end near the folding clasp" if that makes any sense.

The curse of having 8" wrists, is that not all Rolex's are delivered with enough links to fit properly. My DaytonaC barely fit with all links in, and the clasp adjusted to it's furthest position.

This is good news for me!!! Especially seeing all the documentation states the bracelet and clasp have been resized. I'm just guessing that Rolex USA will not be overloaded on the proper link size in stock in case I need one.

Hoping to have the watch in early summer. My AD still hasn't been able to confirm when he'll see stock, and I'm not sure I'm 1st on his list like I was for the DaytonaC last year. Fingers crossed!

Cheers,

Joe
j-watch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 April 2017, 12:28 AM   #69
watchwatcher
"TRF" Member
 
watchwatcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 34,443
Good stuff...thanks for the info and pics.
watchwatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 April 2017, 02:41 AM   #70
Dyim
"TRF" Member
 
Dyim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nav01L View Post
Edit: Pictures below

Turns out the blue Sky Dweller is better in the pictures. The blue is far less vibrant than I had expected.

However, the white one is absolutely fabulous. It's not flat white, but rather a very light ivory/silver. An absolutely fantastic watch. Took pictures, but have to find out how to post them first.

Of, by the way, the Sea Dweller has a satin dial, not glossy. It sits really high on the wrist. Had it side by side with the James Cameron Deep Sea. Less of a difference than expected. Both feel about the same on the wrist. The new SD43 is better proportioned when seen from above, whereas the Deep Sea felt more special. Both too big for me.
That's interesting. Wonder why the promo pdf file from the web says it is glossy.
Dyim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 April 2017, 10:54 AM   #71
cuibono
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Watch: SS SkyD
Posts: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nav01L View Post
Edit: Pictures below

Turns out the blue Sky Dweller is better in the pictures. The blue is far less vibrant than I had expected.

However, the white one is absolutely fabulous. It's not flat white, but rather a very light ivory/silver. An absolutely fantastic watch. Took pictures, but have to find out how to post them first.

Of, by the way, the Sea Dweller has a satin dial, not glossy. It sits really high on the wrist. Had it side by side with the James Cameron Deep Sea. Less of a difference than expected. Both feel about the same on the wrist. The new SD43 is better proportioned when seen from above, whereas the Deep Sea felt more special. Both too big for me.
Any other pictures of the sky-dweller by any chance?

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
cuibono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 2017, 07:39 AM   #72
thewolfofmiddlesex
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Real Name: Neil
Location: London, UK
Posts: 224
Anybody else seen the SkyDs in the flesh? Any other opinions on the white face?
thewolfofmiddlesex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 04:16 AM   #73
moby33
"TRF" Member
 
moby33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Huntington Beach
Watch: Rolex/Omega/Seiko
Posts: 2,560
Hey Nav01L...any thoughts on post #59 of this thread? I'm dying for info on that topic...thanks.
moby33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 04:19 AM   #74
Etschell
"TRF" Member
 
Etschell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: FL
Watch: platinum sub
Posts: 15,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by moby33 View Post
Hey Nav01L...any thoughts on post #59 of this thread? I'm dying for info on that topic...thanks.
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=535147

5 pictures down on 1st post.
__________________
If you wind it, they will run.

25 or 6 to 4.
Etschell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 05:15 AM   #75
www777
"TRF" Member
 
www777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by meganfox17 View Post
I used my mm measuring Apps to guesstimate the height & my calculations suggests it's between 17.48 and 17.52 mm. Wait a minute ! That can't be right , right ? Anyway I have my doubts and think it's slimmer than the figures suggest...

In fact even Omega had to rework the 16.0 mm thickness of the open boxed sapphire caseback ( the Co Ax movement wasnt to be blamed ) of the old 44.25 mm Speedmaster Cal 9300 and announced that the new 2017 Speedy Racing dial Cal 9900 44.25 mm Co Ax MC is now slimmer at 14.9 mm




Wow, I'm surprised that it isn't much slimmer than the DSSD. If they are that close why not just get the DSSD instead? Which is more comfortable?
www777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 05:59 AM   #76
MCOSUB
"TRF" Member
 
MCOSUB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: FLA
Watch: A Few
Posts: 535
Quote:
Originally Posted by www777 View Post
Wow, I'm surprised that it isn't much slimmer than the DSSD. If they are that close why not just get the DSSD instead? Which is more comfortable?
This has been my point all along that everyone has been applauding the new size when it is in fact similar to the DSSD that so many on here feel is "way too big".

Going to be interesting to see how many change their mind on this watch once they try it on and see the size.
__________________
Rolex Sea Dweller 126600 MK1
Rolex GMT II 126710BLRO
Rolex Submariner 116610LV-C
Rolex Deep Blue Deep Sea Dweller 116660
Oris Great Barrier Reef #845/1000
MCOSUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 06:15 AM   #77
j-watch
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Joe
Location: Wisconsin
Watch: HULK, BLRO, 16523
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by www777 View Post
Wow, I'm surprised that it isn't much slimmer than the DSSD. If they are that close why not just get the DSSD instead? Which is more comfortable?
Because it looks better from a "proportional standpoint", IMHO. I owned the DSSD when it first came out. Sold it, and then tried it again a few years later. Both times, I struggled with the thickness in comparison to the relatively skinny bracelet. Always seemed like a miss to me. Never got used to the "ring lock" info on the dial either. I did like the domed crystal and the glide lock.

I think there's enough that's different between the two pieces to actually keep both in the line up. My 2 cents.

Not having seen the new piece in the flesh, I can't say for sure but I think from the photo's and comments from those that have handled the piece this week, it seems to be very positive. Time will tell.

Cheers,

Joe
j-watch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 06:23 AM   #78
SeaDweller50
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Real Name: Sandy
Location: England.
Watch: 14060M 2 liner
Posts: 3,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by meganfox17 View Post
I used my mm measuring Apps to guesstimate the height & my calculations suggests it's between 17.48 and 17.52 mm. Wait a minute ! That can't be right , right ? Anyway I have my doubts and think it's slimmer than the figures suggest...

In fact even Omega had to rework the 16.0 mm thickness of the open boxed sapphire caseback ( the Co Ax movement wasnt to be blamed ) of the old 44.25 mm Speedmaster Cal 9300 and announced that the new 2017 Speedy Racing dial Cal 9900 44.25 mm Co Ax MC is now slimmer at 14.9 mm




My head hurts.
SeaDweller50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 07:04 AM   #79
moby33
"TRF" Member
 
moby33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Huntington Beach
Watch: Rolex/Omega/Seiko
Posts: 2,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etschell View Post
moby33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 2017, 08:15 PM   #80
regnant
"TRF" Member
 
regnant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Close to Rolex AD
Posts: 3,474
Thank you for your posting the pictures and your inputs on the watches
I appreciate that
I think white dial Sky Dweller is looking better than I expected
__________________
http://s30.postimg.org/eykg4i271/A_Lange_Sohne_Movement.jpg
regnant 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.