Why SeaDweller models do not have any gold to them?

[h777]

Why SeaDweller models do not have any gold to them? The submariner came out with some two tone and all gold models. Why not SeaDweller? I could totally go with a two tone SD43 or two tone Deepsea.

[GB-man]

[omx5o]

Imagine the weight of a platinum DSSD !!

[withthesword]

i kinda like the idea of the serious tool watches being offered only in stainless steel like the explorer/explorer 2, sea dweller, and milgauss.

[h777]

Do they not have any gold because of weight purposes? Or is this meant to be mainly a stainless steel line? If this offends anybody as witnessed in post 2, I am sorry for this. Most Rolex lines have gold to them. And just wondering why they kept this stainless steel only?

Perhaps, the Deepsea might be a bad example, but why not a SD43 in two tone? If people like the ceramic sub in gold, I am pretty sure there will be people that will like a bigger Submariner with some gold.

[beshannon]

Why does it need any gold?

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by withthesword

i kinda like the idea of the serious tool watches being offered only in stainless steel like the explorer/explorer 2, sea dweller, and milgauss.

So the Sub isn't a serious tool watch? Or the GMT? Or Daytona? I don't think many here are going to jump on your bandwagon.

[h777]

Originally Posted by beshannon

Why does it need any gold?

Why does the sub need gold?

Some people like to have one watch and not a collection. If I can have a watch with great depth rating and gold, then what is wrong with that?

[withthesword]

it's not my intention for anyone to jump on anything. i simply stated that i kinda like that idea.

besides, the sub has only ever been offered in stainless. the sub date, on the other hand, has been offered in all kinds of materials.

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by h777

Why does the sub need gold?

Some people like to have one watch and not a collection. If I can have a watch with great depth rating and gold, then what is wrong with that?

Why does any Rolex need to be in gold or TT? Almost any Rolex would stand on its own in SS, including the DD. Not that I think they should make a SS version. But look at the Sky Dweller, always in gold until 2017. Is it any less of a timepiece in SS? No.

[DLRIDES]

Originally Posted by gb-man

x2

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by withthesword

it's not my intention for anyone to jump on anything. i simply stated that i kinda like that idea.

besides, the sub has only ever been offered in stainless. the sub date, on the other hand, has been offered in all kinds of materials.

OK... you listed the "serious" tool watches as you see them. And left off the GMT, Sub Date, and Daytona. And for that matter the Sky Dweller and YM II (granted that tool is useful for almost no one). Most here consider all Rolexes, or nearly, tool watches. Despite the material they are offered in.

[Psmith]

Why not? I'd be happy to see a SD or Exp II offered in PMs.

[withthesword]

i appreciate that. i still stand by my opinion. i'm not terribly concerned about convincing you or others to share my view, i'm simply stating my opinion as i view it.

[116500LN]

The SD, DS, and Exp are among the worst selling sports Rolexes relative to their siblings (Sub and GMT2). If there was a demand, you can bet Rolex will issue those watches in PM. Until then, it's not worth the tooling to sell the watch to two guys. The current PMs are already a hard sale.

[hugs]

Originally Posted by withthesword

i kinda like the idea of the serious tool watches being offered only in stainless steel like the explorer/explorer 2, sea dweller, and milgauss.

I like to agree for nostalgic reasons but I don't know how long this will last as really no $10,000 Rolex is a true tool watch in this era of dive computers and G-Shocks

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by h777

Do they not have any gold because of weight purposes? Or is this meant to be mainly a stainless steel line? If this offends anybody as witnessed in post 2, I am sorry for this. Most Rolex lines have gold to them. And just wondering why they kept this stainless steel only?

Perhaps, the Deepsea might be a bad example, but why not a SD43 in two tone? If people like the ceramic sub in gold, I am pretty sure there will be people that will like a bigger Submariner with some gold.

Thinking outside the standard type of forum box a little.
Structural issues come to mind in that the DSSD may not fair very well at extreme depth with PM as the case material.
PM is simply not as strong as Stainless Steel.
Keep in mind if it wasn't for the Ringlock system on the DSSD it would be a beefier watch than it already is.

One of the briefs they were working with in the development of the DSSD is that it had to be compact enough that it could be "wearable".
A PM version would've definitely been heavier and very likely a bigger watch as well to withstand the pressures on the case. The equation would've been very different in PM.

Make no mistake.
The DSSD is just about "all go and no show" in every element of it's design.

The SD until recently with the introduction of the SD43 has always been in a similar boat(no pun intended).
The SD has a much thicker Case-Back to withstand the pressure.
Again in PM the equation would've been different in PM.

The Sub is a different animal altogether.
Structural integrity is not as critical, with the main focus simply being on its water proof qualities.
This obviously gives Rolex some scope to change materials and include PM in the mix.
Note that there are also Jewelled versions of Subs that have no lume on the dial. The Sub certainly has "more show and less go".

Explorers are a different kettle of fish.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Tell us how you really feel, Tom.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

Why does any Rolex need to be in gold or TT? Almost any Rolex would stand on its own in SS, including the DD. Not that I think they should make a SS version. But look at the Sky Dweller, always in gold until 2017. Is it any less of a timepiece in SS? No.

Agreed.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by withthesword

it's not my intention for anyone to jump on anything. i simply stated that i kinda like that idea.

besides, the sub has only ever been offered in stainless. the sub date, on the other hand, has been offered in all kinds of materials.

The standard Sub(no date) is the economy model.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by GB-man

pretty much sums up my feelings as well

[Jakey]

Originally Posted by GB-man

That got me

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Perfect.

[withthesword]

Originally Posted by Dirt

The standard Sub(no date) is the economy model.

I'd imagine the Explorer I would count as the economy model. Unless I'm mistaken the ExpI has been, for the most part, always cheaper than a no date sub

[edit] nevermind, ignore me. i understand now that you meant that it's the economy model of the subs, not over all.

[Chocodove]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Literally made me lol.

[HogwldFLTR]

Actually there is some gold on the standard model, fwiw. Surrounds, hands, etc. It took me a while to figure out what was going on and why no gold on them.