Functionality of Submariner

[dsimon9]

Ok, the GMT was designed for pilots. The seadweller for divers. How about the submariner? At least superficially, it appears to be very similar to the seadweller, but like the others is the submariner designed for a particular profession? If so, how is it suppose to be used (at least in theory) and how does the bezel come into play?

I suppose the implied answer is it was designed for submarine work. But how?

Thanks,

Dex

[WatchTimes]

I would guess it was meant as an all around watch for mariners...
People on the water...
It can be used for most divers needs and is durable for functioning while on the water.

[Tools]

Well, I think you're putting the cart before the horse..

The Submariner was designed and marketed in 1954 for Divers. It could go as deep as any diver could and had a bezel that could be rotated to the start of your dive and was legible enough that you could see how long you were either down, or how long you could rest at each station on the way up after deep dives.

The Seadwller didn't come along until ~1970 and only incorporates a thicker case and crystal to allow a deeper depth rating. It also has the HE release valve as developed with COMEX for diving bell saturation dives. The Sub had it first, but it was dropped from subs and only available with the SD when it came out.

[Leighton]

Originally Posted by Tools

Well, I think you're putting the cart before the horse..

The Submariner was designed and marketed in 1954 for Divers. It could go as deep as any diver could and had a bezel that could be rotated to the start of your dive and was legible enough that you could see how long you were either down, or how long you could rest at each station on the way up after deep dives.

The Seadwller didn't come along until 1980 and only incorporates a thicker case and crystal to allow a deeper depth rating. It also has the HE release valve as developed with COMEX for diving bell saturation dives. The Sub had it first, but it was dropped from subs and only available with the SD when it came out.

And since the word "sub" means "under" or "below", it only makes sense!

[leopardprey]

Most civilian or military tactical dives rarely go below 120 FEET, so the Submariner is a Divers watch.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by Tools

(...)The Seadwller didn't come along until 1980(...)

Well, yes and no. The first SD came in 1967. The Sea-Dweller 4000 came in 1978.

About the Sub Date: As the "Rolex Submariner" booklet that comes with the Sub Date states:

"The Submariner is a handsome watch for business and social wear, yet stays first and foremost a diver's watch."

[Baptistman]

Originally Posted by Tools

The Seadwller didn't come along until 1980

As far as I'm aware the dweller came out in 1971 as a 2000m resistance. However the Sub was unveiled in 1953 and at Basel 1954. In 1980 a new version of the SD was issued with a Sapphire crystal and 4000m resistance ref 16660

go to this site for a history of the Sub

http://www.thewatchquote.com/Sub-Sea-Dweller-No_94.htm

[BiG JeEzY]

Both the Sea Dweller and Submariner were both specifically made for people like divers, snorkelers, and deep sea divers.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by Baptistman

As far as I'm aware the dweller came out in 1971 as a 2000m resistance. However the Sub was unveiled in 1953 and at Basel 1954. In 1980 a new version of the SD was issued with a Sapphire crystal and 4000m resistance ref 16660

go to this site for a history of the Sub

http://www.thewatchquote.com/Sub-Sea-Dweller-No_94.htm

I would still say 1967 and regular production starting in 1971.

The Patent Sea-Dweller.

[Baptistman]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

I would still say 1967 and regular production starting in 1971.

The Patent Sea-Dweller.

I think your right, in 1971 it bacame available for civilian use

[SPACE-DWELLER]

BTW.: There also existed a rare SD without the HEV.:

SD from 1967.

[mopsey]

A Submariner is one who crews a submarine. Maybe it was introduced for them.

[Trurolexer]

SUBMARINER is for Scuba diving when first made.

[nko51]

It's is actually an all around watch.

[Ed Rooney]

Sub is clearly a dive watch, but the durability, practicality and panache of the dive watch has moved it into the mainstream.

[dsimon9]

Thanks for your replies.

Seems like the Sub is more of a real world watch while the SD/DS is more to fill a marketing need. In other words, Rolex's way to keep up/supersede the joneses when it comes to depth claims. Would this be a correct statement?

Dex

[dkpw]

Originally Posted by Ed Rooney

Sub is clearly a dive watch, but the durability, practicality and panache of the dive watch has moved it into the mainstream.

A perfect description and account.

[CoopJr]

I use my bezel for timing steaks on the grill ...a Steakmariner

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by CoopJr

I use my bezel for timing steaks on the grill ...a Steakmariner

Sound so delicious...

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by CoopJr

I use my bezel for timing steaks on the grill ...a Steakmariner

Me too. I have no intention of getting mine deeper than a shallow sink while washing.

As Ed stated above, the Sub has been embraced by the masses. Somwhat like the Land Rover owner in Beverly Hills that has never gotten the tires muddy.

[Tony-GB]

Originally Posted by dsimon9

Thanks for your replies.

Seems like the Sub is more of a real world watch while the SD/DS is more to fill a marketing need. In other words, Rolex's way to keep up/supersede the joneses when it comes to depth claims. Would this be a correct statement?

Dex

Slightly OT:

I'm not nearly as knowledgable as the other guys on the forum, but did ask a London AD what the purpose of the new DSSD is as opposed to the 16600. He stated Rolex have developed it purely as an exercise in technology & to show other companies who are more fashionable at the moment, who's boss.

That's why the DSSD is bigger (to compete with the big watch fashion) & can go to such a massive depth (to prove they still can develop technology)

He also stated that no human can go to such depths, unless in a diving submersible, which means the watch will not be in the water anyway!!!

I hope the more experienced members can correct me on any innacuracies

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by Tony-GB

Slightly OT:

That's why the DSSD is bigger (to compete with the big watch fashion) & can go to such a massive depth (to prove they still can develop technology)

He also stated that no human can go to such depths, unless in a diving submersible, which means the watch will not be in the water anyway!!!

I hope the more experienced members can correct me on any innacuracies

Well he's probably as close to the truth as anyone outside of the very secretive Rolex org can be.
We have some VERY seasoned divers here that I hope can weigh in, but it's not just water that creates a problem at depth. Helium atoms are very small and can inside a watch at depth in a diving bell. As one returns to normal atmosheric pressure, the helium, if unvented, can pop off a crystal.

I think the SDDS is a bogus watch, mostly because of the silly writing on it. Lots of folks are excited about getting one though and I'm happy for them.

[Ed Rooney]

I don't have a problem with Rolex or others producing a "best effort" piece, regardless of their potential sales.I'm just waiting for them to strap the DSSD to the outside of a sub and see what it can do.

[WatchTimes]

Most people who own a Sub will never test its limits.
A guy who used to do true deep water dives for work
said they never would wear a watch as they were always in
contact with above through radios and that makes sense.

We still buy them, why? I don't know!
I have always liked the sub but its too common for my tastes so I was
going to get a SD and then I heard about the SDDS, I talked to my AD
and he promised me one of his first ones. Even though I am hesitant about
my wrist being too small I am still getting it.

Its not always about "needing it" sometimes its about having the coolest
toy on the block

[JJ Irani]

The Submariner was designed for JJ's wrist - end of story!!!

[f16570]

Are not all Rollies all round watches?