ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

scrog10 · 26 December 2009, 10:08 PM

I have a 7 1/2 inch wrist in the cold. And I've been very fortunate over Christmas. So was thinking either a Seadweller or a ND Submariner or maybe standard Sub with cyclops removed. I really don't like the distortion the cyclops causes.
Your thoughts ?

RJC · 26 December 2009, 10:10 PM

SD my friend.

harvey · 26 December 2009, 10:14 PM

in order of preference... sd, sub date, sub no date... i have all three...

but in saying that you cant go wrong with any of them... all classics!

esm · 26 December 2009, 10:20 PM

if no cyclops, then I'd suggest SD or even a DSSD if you can pull off the size.

crazyfingers · 26 December 2009, 10:21 PM

Definitely the SD. I am not a big fan of the cyclops too. I have the Sub ND and love it a lot, but at times miss a date window.

sambb · 26 December 2009, 11:17 PM

i went SD, and the 16600 can be obtained and decent prices right now!

hflee55 · 26 December 2009, 11:25 PM

SD for sure...

Bullyterrier · 26 December 2009, 11:33 PM

If you don't like the cyclops then the SD is the way to go!

jameshe · 26 December 2009, 11:35 PM

SD. No doubt. No competition (unless you dont want a date, then the ND is unique).

SD on all other counts.

sea-dweller · 27 December 2009, 01:43 AM

I have all three, and for me, in order of preference -

Sub Date - most comfortable for me
SD
Non Date Sub

Sonny Crockett · 27 December 2009, 01:52 AM

SD or Deep Sea, I would and did go for the Deep Sea, either one is a great watch

bryanflowers · 27 December 2009, 02:03 AM

I love the no cyclops look. My SD is awesome and has such a clean look.

PhilM · 27 December 2009, 02:48 AM

SD for me

Speed · 27 December 2009, 03:04 AM

You will have a tougher time finding a new Seadweller...but if you don't mind the thicker watch, get the SD. I could not find one when I was looking and got a Series Y Sub Date. However, I am perfectly happy with it!!!

al_bongo · 27 December 2009, 03:28 AM

14060M would be my choice. Practical and wears well though depends on how much you value the date feature.

Extra thickness of sea dweller, marginally smaller dial, and the extra money involved, at the time, weren't worth it for me - effectively just to get the date feature (not a fan of the cyclops either, though it has grown on me).

Ken Cox · 27 December 2009, 03:29 AM

I think we find the date function on a watch useful because we have it.

When we don't have it, we find ourselves surrounded by date clues nonetheless.

One could also say the same thing about the hour and minute functions, I suppose.

The above said, and considering all the other reasons we so carefully consider which watch to wear, I think the Sub No Date corresponds to the true Classic Watch.

Beautiful, clean, rugged and simple symmetry; and a watch you will not see on very many other wrists.

Swegin · 27 December 2009, 03:34 AM

You truly cant go wrong with any of them.

If you are like many of us you will own all of them at one time or another.

If i was just starting my collection i would go in this order
1. Sea Dweller
2. Sub N/D
3. Sub LV converted to black bezel

RolexCat · 27 December 2009, 03:44 AM

SD. I was looking at a Sub ND, but my AD had a nib SD. So i got it, and never looked back. The ND will be easy to find at an AD, not so with the SD. I would try on the SD, and see whats out there. Ron

slcbbrown · 27 December 2009, 03:44 AM

These watches have completely different prices. It's hard to beat a ND Sub, and for most of us, we don't ever subject ourselves to an environment that is too tough for a Sub.

Can't go wrong with any choice.

JimC · 27 December 2009, 05:15 AM

Of the three, it sounds as though you might be most pleased with the SD. All three are classics and you won't go wrong with any decision. Good luck in your choice and let us know what you pick.

Clay · 27 December 2009, 06:38 AM

You can't go wrong either way.....

26 December 2009, 10:08 PM	#1
scrog10 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Simon Location: Devon U.K Watch: Rolex GMT 2c Posts: 240	Seadweller vs ND Sub vs ? I have a 7 1/2 inch wrist in the cold. And I've been very fortunate over Christmas. So was thinking either a Seadweller or a ND Submariner or maybe standard Sub with cyclops removed. I really don't like the distortion the cyclops causes. Your thoughts ?

26 December 2009, 10:10 PM	#2
RJC "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Cheshire, UK Watch: Sea-Dweller Posts: 1,125	SD my friend. __________________ Current - DSJC 136660 - Sea-Dweller 126600

26 December 2009, 10:14 PM	#3
harvey "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: rolexforums.com Posts: 5,426	in order of preference... sd, sub date, sub no date... i have all three... but in saying that you cant go wrong with any of them... all classics! __________________ And ever has it been that love knows not its own depth until the hour of separation.

26 December 2009, 11:33 PM	#8
Bullyterrier "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: . Posts: 1,343	If you don't like the cyclops then the SD is the way to go! __________________ So Mote it be.

27 December 2009, 01:43 AM	#10
sea-dweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Dennis Location: Bay Area - 925 Posts: 40,018	I have all three, and for me, in order of preference - Sub Date - most comfortable for me SD Non Date Sub __________________ TRF Member #6699 (since September 2007)

26 December 2009, 10:20 PM	#4
esm "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Location,Location Watch: this, bro... Posts: 15,340	if no cyclops, then I'd suggest SD or even a DSSD if you can pull off the size.

26 December 2009, 10:21 PM	#5
crazyfingers "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Arjun Location: India Watch: Submariner 14060M Posts: 347	Definitely the SD. I am not a big fan of the cyclops too. I have the Sub ND and love it a lot, but at times miss a date window.

26 December 2009, 11:17 PM	#6
sambb "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA/UK Posts: 1,375	i went SD, and the 16600 can be obtained and decent prices right now!

26 December 2009, 11:25 PM	#7
hflee55 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Andy Location: Kuala Lumpur, MY Watch: Me Watching You!! Posts: 3,260	SD for sure...

26 December 2009, 11:35 PM	#9
jameshe "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: James Location: UK Watch: AP ROC, SkyDweller Posts: 812	SD. No doubt. No competition (unless you dont want a date, then the ND is unique). SD on all other counts.

27 December 2009, 01:52 AM	#11
Sonny Crockett Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Fla Watch: TT Yacht Master Posts: 309	SD or Deep Sea, I would and did go for the Deep Sea, either one is a great watch

27 December 2009, 02:03 AM	#12
bryanflowers "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: West Palm Beach Posts: 30	I love the no cyclops look. My SD is awesome and has such a clean look.

27 December 2009, 02:48 AM	#13
PhilM "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Phil Location: London Watch: Sea-Dweller Posts: 1,765	SD for me

27 December 2009, 03:04 AM	#14
Speed "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: USA Posts: 19,706	You will have a tougher time finding a new Seadweller...but if you don't mind the thicker watch, get the SD. I could not find one when I was looking and got a Series Y Sub Date. However, I am perfectly happy with it!!!

27 December 2009, 03:28 AM	#15
al_bongo "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Scotland, UK Posts: 444	14060M would be my choice. Practical and wears well though depends on how much you value the date feature. Extra thickness of sea dweller, marginally smaller dial, and the extra money involved, at the time, weren't worth it for me - effectively just to get the date feature (not a fan of the cyclops either, though it has grown on me).

27 December 2009, 03:29 AM	#16
Ken Cox "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Ken Cox Location: Bend, Oregon, USA Watch: GMT Master II Posts: 469	I think we find the date function on a watch useful because we have it. When we don't have it, we find ourselves surrounded by date clues nonetheless. One could also say the same thing about the hour and minute functions, I suppose. The above said, and considering all the other reasons we so carefully consider which watch to wear, I think the Sub No Date corresponds to the true Classic Watch. Beautiful, clean, rugged and simple symmetry; and a watch you will not see on very many other wrists.

27 December 2009, 03:34 AM	#17
Swegin "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: USA Watch: SD Posts: 153	You truly cant go wrong with any of them. If you are like many of us you will own all of them at one time or another. If i was just starting my collection i would go in this order 1. Sea Dweller 2. Sub N/D 3. Sub LV converted to black bezel

27 December 2009, 03:44 AM	#18
RolexCat Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Ron Location: Michigan Watch: SD Posts: 318	SD. I was looking at a Sub ND, but my AD had a nib SD. So i got it, and never looked back. The ND will be easy to find at an AD, not so with the SD. I would try on the SD, and see whats out there. Ron

27 December 2009, 03:44 AM	#19
slcbbrown "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Real Name: steve Location: dallas area Watch: 50's TT t-bird Posts: 3,689	These watches have completely different prices. It's hard to beat a ND Sub, and for most of us, we don't ever subject ourselves to an environment that is too tough for a Sub. Can't go wrong with any choice.

27 December 2009, 05:15 AM	#20
JimC "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Jim Location: Anchorage, Alaska Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,188	Of the three, it sounds as though you might be most pleased with the SD. All three are classics and you won't go wrong with any decision. Good luck in your choice and let us know what you pick. __________________ My collection, in order of acquisition: 16610 Sub (Z serial) 16710 GMT-Master II (Coke and Pepsi) (Z serial) 16570 Explorer II (White) (F serial) 116660 Deepsea (V serial) 79270 Tudor Tiger Chrono (red dial)

27 December 2009, 06:38 AM	#21
Clay Banned Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Up a tree Posts: 4,001	I own both and they are both fabulous watches.... You can't go wrong either way.....

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)