DSSD Being Discontinued: Prices & Demand

[00Seven]

It'll definitely be interesting to see if they discontinue - production has been about 10 years, correct?

[aquatimerfla]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I think you"ll find the clamping ring might be SS.
Of course, as you have mentioned the Caseback is Titanium.

correct




The Rolex Deepsea owes its exceptional strength, waterproofness
and pressure resistance to the exclusive Ringlock system. This innovative
case architecture patented by Rolex enables the watch to resist
the massive pressure exerted by water at the depth of 3,900 metres
(12,800 feet), equivalent to a weight of approximately 3 tonnes on the
watch. Its construction is based on three elements: a nitrogen-alloyed
steel central ring forms the backbone of the system, accompanied by a
5.5 mm‑thick, domed sapphire crystal and a case back in grade 5
titanium.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by herts9

quite distinctive. mine does not fit into the MK I or MK II category, but seems to be a hybrid of both (flat S, but with the thin coronet and font/thickness). aberrations always exist, but don't have the heart to bump an old thread

It's a MK I.
Notice the following.
Corronet style.
Font thickness is greater.
Pointed top of the letter "A".
Font bunched up with particular attention to the depth rating.
Font of the depth rating letters.
Flat "S" combined with curved "s" on the dial.

Make no mistake, it's a MK I through and through judging from the pic provided.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by 00Seven

It'll definitely be interesting to see if they discontinue - production has been about 10 years, correct?

That's right.
The model came out in 2008.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

correct




The Rolex Deepsea owes its exceptional strength, waterproofness
and pressure resistance to the exclusive Ringlock system. This innovative
case architecture patented by Rolex enables the watch to resist
the massive pressure exerted by water at the depth of 3,900 metres
(12,800 feet), equivalent to a weight of approximately 3 tonnes on the
watch. Its construction is based on three elements: a nitrogen-alloyed
steel central ring forms the backbone of the system, accompanied by a
5.5 mm‑thick, domed sapphire crystal and a case back in grade 5
titanium.

Whilst the description you provide says the Case-back is grade 5 Titanium.
It's limited in it's description because it's actually a two part assembly with the Case-back being of Titanium(as described) which is held in place by a separate retaining/clamping ring.

There's no need for the Clamping ring to be Titanium as it serves no purpose.
Only the Case-back itself needs to have the properties that Titanium provides in that it will return back to it's original shape after deformation at the rated depth(+ 25%).

[aquatimerfla]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Whilst the description you provide says the Case-back is grade 5 Titanium.
It's limited in it's description because it's actually a two part assembly with the Case-back being of Titanium(as described) which is held in place by a separate retaining/clamping ring.

There's no need for the Clamping ring to be Titanium as it serves no purpose.
Only the Case-back itself needs to have the properties that Titanium provides in that it will return back to it's original shape after deformation at the rated depth(+ 25%).

The description was direct from Rolex

The description indicates what you said. Steel ring. Read again.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by RedLs3

Just checked mine... got the mk1 dial, that unique rolex crown and font. The actual piece that went down with cameron on the dive should be the jc edition. Not the blue.. my 2cents

Blues growing on me though.. looks like my next one instead of the red sea dweller. That cyclops on the sd43 ruins the watch.

Well.
In that case it may very well have been a MK II
That is unless it's JC's personal watch which he picked up early on in the model's production.

Consider this.
The period when the movie was made was dead in the middle of the MK II production run.
The watch that JC is known to predominantly wear has always been the Sub, and a 5 digit model at that until recent times after he gave the 5 digit away.
Further to this, JC has never been known to wear the DSSD up until the movie was shot.

Based upon the above and given the balance of probability.
I would say that it was actually a MK II variant that went down to the very bottom of the ocean on his wrist

It's all food for thought

[BreezyMan]

I saw at a ad deep sea with mk1 s and depth fronts italics and no space but with the new thinner crown is there a mk4 maybe

[meganfox17]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

correct

Originally Posted by Dirt

I think you"ll find the clamping ring might be SS

All I said was a Titanium Clamping Ring ( a component ).It serves a purpose nothing is wasted on a DSSD
Have you guys ever studied the UPDATED DSSD structural diagram before ( source :Rolex) or just reading the boring text only?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by aquatimerfla

The description was direct from Rolex

The description indicates what you said. Steel ring. Read again.

I did read it again and again and again before I posted my response in the hope of being clear.

I think there is some confusion which needs further clarification.
I know your quoting from the source(Rolex) and that's part of the problem and where we can get caught out buy the expert marketing men under their employ and what they tell us and not what they tell us or how they tell us.

Their blurb never ever states that it's more or less, a two piece assembly that makes up the Case-back. Only a study of a breakdown diagram of the design behind the case architecture reveals the truth behind the design.
Rolex only ever make a big deal of the Titanium part which actually keeps the water out. Never the lowly old 904 L Stainless Steel retainer that holds the thing in place for the entire time.
Also the only mention of anything else that's related to a Steel component of any description is the Nitrogen Alloyed Ring-lock. Which is on the interior of the watch and only visible through the Crystal(obviously).

Perhaps we could look into it further

[aquatimerfla]

Originally Posted by meganfox17

All I said was a Titanium Clamping Ring ( a component ).It serves a purpose nothing is wasted on a DSSD
Have you guys ever studied the UPDATED DSSD structural diagram before ( source :Rolex) or just reading the boring text only?

You brought your A game as always.

The DSSD is by far bar none THE most advanced sports watch Rolex has ever made or any brand has made for that matter.

RIP DSSD

#legend

[herts9]

Originally Posted by meganfox17

All I said was a Titanium Clamping Ring ( a component ).It serves a purpose nothing is wasted on a DSSD
Have you guys ever studied the UPDATED DSSD structural diagram before ( source :Rolex) or just reading the boring text only?

Your love, knowledge and appreciation of all things Deepsea and Mr James Cameron is well documented...and admirable!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by meganfox17

All I said was a Titanium Clamping Ring ( a component ).It serves a purpose nothing is wasted on a DSSD
Have you guys ever studied the UPDATED DSSD structural diagram before ( source :Rolex) or just reading the boring text only?

I have studied it myself from time to time since the model came out.
As a Marine Engineer by trade, I have more than a bit of an interest in these matters.

Your picture of the breakdown of the case architecture shows the Case-back as a separate piece as you have indeed previously indicated.
And I fully concur that it is also made of Titanium(Grade 5 to be precise).
The nature of the Retaining ring is inconclusive leading people to come to their own conclusions in accordance with the narrative going on in their individual heads.

I put it to you.
At no time since it's inception have Rolex claimed the Retaining ring is Titanium. In fact the description on the diagram does not support the notion that it is Titanium.
Rolex only ever mentioned the sexy Grade 5 Titanium Case-back.

Three questions if I may?
Why would they not state it on the diagram if the Retaining ring was indeed Titanium?
Why wouldn't they be trumpeting it to the world that they have developed a totally unique "Two piece Titanium case-back"?
Why would the Retaining ring need to be Titanium? when It only holds the really important(and sexiest) bit in place.

Putting my Marine Engineer hat on.
Some things for you all to consider that has never been mentioned by the learned collective on the forum.
A simple Retaining ring made of Titanium would add unnecessary cost when it could be made out of SS and in theory do the exact same job without potential issues arising from Electrolysis.
I mention Electrolysis because there is the long term potential for it to occur at the interface between the mating surfaces of the Retaining ring and Mid-case.
If the Retaining ring was made out of 904 L Stainless Steel there would be no potential for Electrolysis due to metals being on a different part of the Galvanic scale. Just thinking here
In theory, the Titanium Case-back and Retaining ring could be replaced as a "matched set" at service time in the future in some corrosion(due to electrolysis) is detected at the Titanium Case-back/Retaining ring interface.
Now Rolex may be using a compound that provides an effective insulator between the metals but I doubt it. Perhaps a very thin smear of Teflex could be used as there is no evidence of Duralac? I think, only Rolex knows for sure.

Further, and I could be wrong.
But I have periodically studied the Case-back assembly of both my DSSD's and the two components in question appear to be different materials.
Now, it could simply be the fact that the Retaining ring has a more pronounced colour variation on the machined face where the text is around the perimeter, but it looks like a superbly machined piece of SS to me as opposed to the separate(Titanium) bit in the middle.

I know i'm not about to start scratching at bits on the back of my watches to try to determine a difference in hardness in order to get to the bottom of this.
But I will make an enquiry today that may yield a result after Basel in order to provide further clarification.

Perhaps we could somehow arrange to independently have the separate Case-back components weighed on an accurate Triple beam balance scale to determine the weight of the individual components and get a sense of what is what.
After all, I think one will find the weight of the SS ring will be poles apart from the Titanium Case-back once a half reasonable calculation of cross sectional area is taken into account as required.
It could be simpler than that though, as when they are actually weighed the difference may well be very apparent without further examination or calculations deemed necessary

[antbkny]

Dirt, are you talking about the screw down case back ring? I thing Meganfox was talking about the clamping ring, below the bezel.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by antbkny

Dirt, are you talking about the screw down case back ring? I thing Meganfox was talking about the clamping ring, below the bezel.

Good question.

I think the issue is around the nature of the Case-back?
Not the top of the watch.

Perhaps we are all talking about different parts of the whole in different terms

It's still an outstanding bit of kit regardless

[HL65]

I hope they retire the D-Blue! Rumors of it’s retirement has been circulating for a long time now. We will know soon enough and I am looking forward to Basel!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by antbkny

Dirt, are you talking about the screw down case back ring? I thing Meganfox was talking about the clamping ring, below the bezel.

Going back through it all again I think you are right.

Meganfox is indeed referring to a Titanium Clamping ring at the top of the watch under the bezel as you point out.
Meganfox is absolutely right and I agree in that there is essentially nothing frivolous or superfluous in the design of the DSSD.

Where as aquatimerfla and I are talking about the components that Rolex state as being technically critical to the waterproofness of the watch according to the Rolex blurb.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by HL65

I hope they retire the D-Blue! Rumors of it’s retirement has been circulating for a long time now. We will know soon enough and I am looking forward to Basel!

I hope they retire them both and bring out a Double red DSSD of some description

[WEST HAM ROLEX]

Originally Posted by AK797

Probably go to UK price of 12K, but not selling fast here, it's still a niche watch.

Go to 12k - do you mean the standard black or the JC?

[HL65]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I hope they retire them both and bring out a Double red DSSD of some description

I’d buy it and add to the SD collection along with my new SS Coke!

[Dyim]

Interesting times ahead.

[yannis]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I have studied it myself from time to time since the model came out.
As a Marine Engineer by trade, I have more than a bit of an interest in these matters.

Your picture of the breakdown of the case architecture shows the Case-back as a separate piece as you have indeed previously indicated.
And I fully concur that it is also made of Titanium(Grade 5 to be precise).
The nature of the Retaining ring is inconclusive leading people to come to their own conclusions in accordance with the narrative going on in their individual heads.

I put it to you.
At no time since it's inception have Rolex claimed the Retaining ring is Titanium. In fact the description on the diagram does not support the notion that it is Titanium.
Rolex only ever mentioned the sexy Grade 5 Titanium Case-back.

Three questions if I may?
Why would they not state it on the diagram if the Retaining ring was indeed Titanium?
Why wouldn't they be trumpeting it to the world that they have developed a totally unique "Two piece Titanium case-back"?
Why would the Retaining ring need to be Titanium? when It only holds the really important(and sexiest) bit in place.

Putting my Marine Engineer hat on.
Some things for you all to consider that has never been mentioned by the learned collective on the forum.
A simple Retaining ring made of Titanium would add unnecessary cost when it could be made out of SS and in theory do the exact same job without potential issues arising from Electrolysis.
I mention Electrolysis because there is the long term potential for it to occur at the interface between the mating surfaces of the Retaining ring and Mid-case.
If the Retaining ring was made out of 904 L Stainless Steel there would be no potential for Electrolysis due to metals being on a different part of the Galvanic scale. Just thinking here
In theory, the Titanium Case-back and Retaining ring could be replaced as a "matched set" at service time in the future in some corrosion(due to electrolysis) is detected at the Titanium Case-back/Retaining ring interface.
Now Rolex may be using a compound that provides an effective insulator between the metals but I doubt it. Perhaps a very thin smear of Teflex could be used as there is no evidence of Duralac? I think, only Rolex knows for sure.

Further, and I could be wrong.
But I have periodically studied the Case-back assembly of both my DSSD's and the two components in question appear to be different materials.
Now, it could simply be the fact that the Retaining ring has a more pronounced colour variation on the machined face where the text is around the perimeter, but it looks like a superbly machined piece of SS to me as opposed to the separate(Titanium) bit in the middle.

I know i'm not about to start scratching at bits on the back of my watches to try to determine a difference in hardness in order to get to the bottom of this.
But I will make an enquiry today that may yield a result after Basel in order to provide further clarification.

Perhaps we could somehow arrange to independently have the separate Case-back components weighed on an accurate Triple beam balance scale to determine the weight of the individual components and get a sense of what is what.
After all, I think one will find the weight of the SS ring will be poles apart from the Titanium Case-back once a half reasonable calculation of cross sectional area is taken into account as required.
It could be simpler than that though, as when they are actually weighed the difference may well be very apparent without further examination or calculations deemed necessary

Great post man! I am anticipating the results of your tests/enquiries. Also i would be grateful if you can post on the DSSD thread on my sig also.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by yannis

Great post man! I am anticipating the results of your tests/enquiries. Also i would be grateful if you can post on the DSSD thread on my sig also.

Enquiries made today.
The preliminary results were a little inconclusive.

Perhaps more will be forthcoming after Basel.
Here's hoping

I just quickly checked your thread yannis and I found a wealth of information already.
To be more specific I see that sleddog has posted a most excellent link to a post dated April 2008 that was put up by Tools.
It reflects the fact that the Case-back is held in place with a 904 L Stainless Steel screw down Retaining ring.

See.
This forum was well ahead of the game from the start.
And well done Tools

[Dirt]

yannis,

I was just reviewing the original technical specifications of the DSSD posted by Tools.
It appears the updated pictures of the Case assembly posted by Meganfox are somewhat oversimplified in that a critical component is missing from her picture in the Retaining ring that appears to separate the Case-back gasket from the actual Mid-case.
I assume it's to help prevent the gasket from distorting or trying to bunch up a little upon assembly. That would help make the crush on the seal uniform.

[yannis]

Originally Posted by Dirt

yannis,

I was just reviewing the original technical specifications of the DSSD posted by Tools.
It appears the updated pictures of the Case assembly posted by Meganfox are somewhat oversimplified in that a critical component is missing from her picture in the Retaining ring that appears to separate the Case-back gasket from the actual Mid-case.
I assume it's to help prevent the gasket from distorting or trying to bunch up a little upon assembly. That would help make the crush on the seal uniform.

Wow! Great stuff man! do you have a diagram for that to post directly on the thread?

Maybe i ask Steve to edit the first post of the DSSD thread with some more thorough info.

Actually here is the diagram from Larry's fantastic thread:

[HogwldFLTR]

If both DSSDs are retired and replaced with a comparable model using the 3235 with the 70 hour power reserve I don't see the older models being all that hot.

[Divingdeep87]

I always wanted a d-blue. And just called my ad. He put me on the list and said i will have it in 3 months.

[yannis]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

If both DSSDs are retired and replaced with a comparable model using the 3235 with the 70 hour power reserve I don't see the older models being all that hot.

Hey Lee i partly agree with you. The JC Deep Blue will still climb though me thinks. This is why i will try and locate one when i can and before it is too late. I hope they remain modest in the next few years or i will have to flip something (not the red SD) and do it sooner than later.
Or if it is true what Nejmann above me says (and they keep on being produced) then even better. I would prefer it if it is not discontinued.

[Divingdeep87]

Originally Posted by yannis

Hey Lee i partly agree with you. The JC Deep Blue will still climb though me thinks. This is why i will try and locate one when i can and before it is too late. I hope they remain modest in the next few years or i will have to flip something (not the red SD) and do it sooner than later.
Or if it is true what Nejmann above me says (and they keep on being produced) then even better. I would prefer it if it is not discontinued.

Hope the same as you. Actually want it because i really like it, and would love to wait a little, so I don’t have to move anything else for it. So let see what happens at Basel.

[yannis]

Originally Posted by Nejmann

Hope the same as you. Actually want it because i really like it, and would love to wait a little, so I don’t have to move anything else for it. So let see what happens at Basel.

We are in exactly the same position i think us two...