ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
26 August 2015, 02:09 AM | #121 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London, England
Posts: 81
|
I love my SD4K and have no regrets trading my subC for it, but I wish they'd given it the same glidelock clasp as the DSSD. Being able to adjust it whilst still on the wrist would help justify the premium over the SubC.
|
26 August 2015, 12:28 PM | #122 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Jay
Location: New York
Watch: 118206
Posts: 910
|
Quote:
__________________
126719 BLRO meteorite 126660 D-blue 118206 Day Date |
|
28 August 2015, 11:09 PM | #123 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Charlotte, NC
Watch: Rolex 14060M
Posts: 681
|
dont know about the flop but I know used values as a % of new pricing are significantly worse then with other sport SS models like sub for example
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
31 March 2016, 12:27 AM | #124 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: DC
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 2,698
|
This trend is continuing, I'm baffled. All I see are positive threads about the SDC, I have handled it a few times, great piece. Not sure why it's getting torched on the value side.
|
31 March 2016, 01:53 AM | #125 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Real Name: Steve
Location: Maine
Watch: Explorer II 16570
Posts: 1,396
|
Quote:
1. Have previously owned Subs, and wanted something a little different. 2. Love the fully graduated bezel on SD4K. 3. Not a huge fan of the cyclops, and the SD4K face is 'cleaner'. 4. Not a fan of the new 'supercase' on the new Sub Ceramics. 5. My 6.5" wrist doesn't really support a 44mm DSSD. 6. Fewer SD4Ks in the wild, compared to the Sub Ceramic at least. |
|
31 March 2016, 02:22 AM | #126 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,843
|
|
31 March 2016, 02:27 AM | #127 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2008
Real Name: Dan
Location: CT, by a lake
Watch: shopping
Posts: 1,463
|
The pic "MasterGreenHands" posted is such a good comparison of the lugs. It also shows just how awfully proportioned the SubC Supercase lugs are compared to the more slender lines of the SD4k.
Here's to hoping one day Rolex fixes those bloated lugs.
__________________
A watch is about the entire package, not just its appearance. Any large watch company not making its own movement is not making a watch at all; they’re just playing dress-up. --The Watch Snob |
31 March 2016, 02:35 AM | #128 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: USA
Watch: me hit Huge Lotto
Posts: 6,502
|
Quote:
__________________
“Every man Dies... Not Every Man, Really Lives.” – William Wallace - To really lives means to live your life to the fullest. It means to chase your dreams, take risks, and to love life. Since everyone’s fate is the same, why not live the best life that you possibly can? In order to really live,you must seize the day. Live each day as if it's your last and overall just do it! Today is a gift, that’s why it’s called the present... |
|
31 March 2016, 03:30 AM | #129 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Gunter
Location: AL/NJ
Watch: DSSD; 116610LN
Posts: 5,509
|
New Seadweller 4000 a flop?
Quote:
I think B/C it's so similar to the Sub and the SD has always been priced close to the Sub and that is about where people see the value of it. Buy right and you will be fine. The SD I think has always been just a tad more than the Sub not $2000 more. I have one and love it. Traded my SubC for it. Just saw how old this thread is..... |
|
31 March 2016, 04:11 AM | #130 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Real Name: J
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Watch: 16610
Posts: 225
|
Wow revival of an old thread.
I recently picked up the SDc after owning 3 subs. I love everything about it, expect the small date window. I bought mine preloved for the same price I would have bought a sub in this condition (mint, full kit, under warranty), which made this decision extremely easy for me. SD all day! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Current: ♛ Rolex 126200, ♛ Rolex 14060m equipped w/glidelock, Apple Watch, G-Shock Gone but not forgotten: Way too many to remember! |
31 March 2016, 04:33 AM | #131 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: northern CA USA
Watch: 114270 Explorer
Posts: 477
|
leicashot, your photos are wonderful. Time to pull out the M6 ;-)
Also nice to see the side-by-side shot from LuminousMaximus above. I love the new Sea Dweller but the older 16600 is flat out beautiful. While I might prefer the 116600 if it had fewer bezel markers, Rolex did a fine job with this update in my opinion. The proportions are superb, the quality obvious. My only hesitation is that it's a little heavier than I might want to wear everyday on my 6.75" wrist. If you're a relatively big guy and can handle the height and weight, I doubt there's a better looking or working watch out there. For some, no cyclops and less common is a good thing. I appreciate the OP's question, however. It's always interesting to know how a watch is doing in the market. Not that it should matter much to us since, as we know, watches that didn't sell especially well are often revered later. |
31 March 2016, 05:46 PM | #132 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: UK / Spain
Watch: 39mm Explorer
Posts: 1,990
|
Chaps
I think it is a tad harsh to describe the SD4000 as a flop but it is certainly a bit of a disappointment. The SD4000 is still true to being a deep sea watch but the ceramic dial is just plain fussy due to all the minute markings on the entire bezel. The old pre ceramic just looked more classy and mature with less markings confined to the first 15 minutes. Rolex has got to be careful if going down the ceramic route as it is all to easy to make it look cheap and blingy which unfortunately is what has happened to the SD4000. The new ceramic Daytona has successfully pulled it off where the bezel has actually enhanced the appearance of the watch and it shows that it can be done but it has to be done with taste. Regards Mick |
31 March 2016, 11:03 PM | #133 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Real Name: Simon
Location: Houston
Watch: Some
Posts: 1,109
|
I have had mine for a while now and I can say, I wear it 90% of the time, I have no complaints, I like everything about the watch, there is not a thing I would change about it, perfect to me.
|
31 March 2016, 11:19 PM | #134 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 3,247
|
I'd choose an SD4000 over a sub C, but not an older sub
|
31 March 2016, 11:27 PM | #135 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
|
The 16600 was a "flop" too - too expensive, too thick case, too similar to a Sub, etc. There's a reason it was discontinued.
The new SD was Rolex throwing a crumb to the purists. |
31 March 2016, 11:29 PM | #136 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
|
It's not complicated. The Sub has ridiculously fat lugs, and the DSSD is ridiculously huge. If you have been into Rolex for years, the new SD is about the only watch that captures what was good about the five digits.
|
31 March 2016, 11:41 PM | #137 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Wales
Watch: 16610, SD4K, Exp 1
Posts: 1,098
|
I'm glad it is a 'flop', fantastic value pre-owned or new now which is great for those who appreciate it. The less they sell the better, I will just keep enjoying mine and wait for people to catch on and the demand to rise 😃
It is a fantastic watch. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
31 March 2016, 11:43 PM | #138 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
|
|
1 April 2016, 01:38 AM | #139 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Real Name: Kenny
Location: northern ireland
Watch: SDs, Subs & GMTs
Posts: 5,127
|
Quote:
|
|
1 April 2016, 02:27 AM | #140 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: WA
Posts: 272
|
Msrp is not the greatest, however it usually carries a 20% discount online.
|
1 April 2016, 05:35 AM | #141 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Netflix
Posts: 3,977
|
The SD4K has its ups and downs, but I prefer it to the 116610LN.
It's the anti-Sub for someone who wants a Rolex black diver. The matte dial gives it a cool balance with the blingy bezel. Also the lugs are more easy on the eyes from a distance. My only drawback is that it's too chunky. Maybe one day I'll trade it towards a Double Red. |
1 April 2016, 01:08 PM | #142 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: SS
Posts: 137
|
How can that be! Owners of SD4K I know of are very low profile, doesn't do forums but there are definitely lots of them out there.
|
1 April 2016, 01:44 PM | #143 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Is Everything
Posts: 205
|
I handled this watch again today. To me, it has the aesthetics I associate with classic Rolex. The raised crystal, lack of cyclops, matte dial, and case shape combine to give it a clean and classic look. I am not thrilled about the thickness, but could never own the Sub due to the square shape. I am now in the market for this "flop"
|
2 April 2016, 03:43 AM | #144 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Billings, MT
Watch: 228238
Posts: 437
|
So what exactly accounts for the price differential? It's basically the same as a Sub minus the Cyclops plus the helium escape valve.
Is the valve that expensive to make? The lack of Cyclops shouldn't be an additional cost. I think the real question that the OP should have better articulated is why the price delta. Even AD's will admit it's overpriced (albeit, they won't discount it either). |
2 April 2016, 04:53 AM | #145 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Peter
Location: Massachusetts
Watch: Dad's 14060
Posts: 1,936
|
Disagree 120%.
__________________
1996 Submariner 14060* - 1972 Datejust 1601 1972 Oyster Perpetual 1002 - 1978 Oysterquartz 17000 Omega Seamaster 2265.80 - Omega Seamaster 300 166.0324 *RIP PAL 1942-2015 |
2 April 2016, 08:08 AM | #146 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Real Name: David Cote
Location: USA 603
Watch: Watches etc
Posts: 2,300
|
Lol, I love mine !! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
2 April 2016, 09:27 AM | #147 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
|
I can tell by your join date that you've been on the forums a while. Do you rember when TZ had a single "Rolex" forum? The SD, along with the explorer 2, was a total pariah back then. Only a really small portion of the Internet active collectors were into that reference.
I love mine, and always have. Nonetheless, it was absolutely not a popular choice circa 2000. |
2 April 2016, 09:46 AM | #148 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Texas
Watch: 114060
Posts: 435
|
It has finally made me content. I have it and a SS white dial Daytona. The SD gets 95% of the wrist time.
|
2 April 2016, 09:50 AM | #149 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Watch: ing the detectives
Posts: 3,745
|
SD4K is my preference over the SubC. Looks more elegant and frankly wears better on my wrist. Yes it's heavy, but that's what glide lock is for
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
2 April 2016, 10:15 AM | #150 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,214
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.