SD43 owners - No one has caliper?

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by MCOSUB

the dial diameter in the photo in this thread for the Subc is 29.5. Lee measured the dial on the SD50 at 27?

The answer might be that the measurement of the SubC included the thickness of the sapphire crystal on the sides but the SD43 did not...

However, I don't know for sure, I was kind of hoping that the dial not he SD43 would be larger than the SubC but the opposite (if anything) appears to be the case.

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by MCOSUB

the dial diameter in the photo in this thread for the Subc is 29.5. Lee measured the dial on the SD50 at 27?

The answer might be that the measurement of the SubC included the thickness of the sapphire crystal on the sides but the SD43 did not...

However, I don't know for sure, I was kind of hoping that the dial not he SD43 would be larger than the SubC but the opposite (if anything) appears to be the case.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

The answer might be that the measurement of the SubC included the thickness of the sapphire crystal on the sides but the SD43 did not...

However, I don't know for sure, I was kind of hoping that the dial not he SD43 would be larger than the SubC but the opposite (if anything) appears to be the case.

I just measured my subC. Interior rehaut to rehaut or dial appears to be 27 mm.

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by Etschell

I just measured my subC. Interior rehaut to rehaut or dial appears to be 27 mm.

OK thanks for that, so it seems that the dial size for the SD43 is identical to the SubC.

In that case, there seems to be no reason for me to go larger save to build up my left bicep

[mtb]

Originally Posted by lee fowler

Ok hopefully this will help. I have done the best I can with some digital verniers and of course trying to not mark the watch!!!!!

The case thickness excluding the Cyclops is approx. 15.2mm
Lug to lug on the outside is approx. 27.5mm
Bezel width just the black bit approx. 3.75mm
Dial diameter approx. 27mm
Clasp is approx. 19mm
Strap width at case is approx. 21.6mm

Hope this helps???

Thanks Lee for the numbers!
Could I request for 1 set of dumb number? Distance between springbars

Thanks in advance!

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

OK thanks for that, so it seems that the dial size for the SD43 is identical to the SubC.

In that case, there seems to be no reason for me to go larger save to build up my left bicep

You can also use it in leui of a weight belt when diving

[lhawli]

Originally Posted by Etschell

I just measured my subC. Interior rehaut to rehaut or dial appears to be 27 mm.

You cannot measure dial with a cased watch. What is visible on the watch is not actually the true size of the dial but only what you see through the crystal. The case sometimes overlaps the dial. Could that be a possibility and can someone confirm this?

In any case, my fear was that the SD43 would be 3mm thicker at the bezel and not enlarging the dial also. Photos are deceiving as in some it looks as big the the DSSD in others as big as the SubC.

I have to see it in the metal :sigh:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by lhawli

You cannot measure dial with a cased watch. What is visible on the watch is not actually the true size of the dial but only what you see through the crystal. The case sometimes overlaps the dial. Could that be a possibility and can someone confirm this?

In any case, my fear was that the SD43 would be 3mm thicker at the bezel and not enlarging the dial also. Photos are deceiving as in some it looks as big the the DSSD in others as big as the SubC.

I have to see it in the metal :sigh:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I get that. Just saying what it appears to be.

[GB-man]

Thanks for your efforts Lee.

[brucethemanlee]

Thanks for all the measurements Lee!

This is a big help for all those who haven't seen or tried on the watch in person.

I can say measurements are one thing and watch on wrist is another thing. From a measurement perspective the watch should be a perfect fit for my wrist. However trying the watch on last week everything was just a tad bit large on my wrist.

That said I tried on a Tudor Pelagos yesterday everything seemed perfect. Pelagos has the same lug to lug of 50mm but 42mm diameter. just 1mm difference with SD43 can make or break how the watch looks overall!

Again thanks for the specs!

[N_Swe]

15,2 thick - seems like identical to the old sd?

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by lee fowler

Ok hopefully this will help. I have done the best I can with some digital verniers and of course trying to not mark the watch!!!!!

The case thickness excluding the Cyclops is approx. 15.2mm
Lug to lug on the outside is approx. 27.5mm
Bezel width just the black bit approx. 3.75mm
Dial diameter approx. 27mm
Clasp is approx. 19mm
Strap width at case is approx. 21.6mm

Hope this helps???

Using a ruler, on my DSSD:
- Bezel diameter 43.0 mm
- Bezel black ceramic part width ~4.5 mm (in pics, the SD43 bezel ceramic part looks the same to me as the DSSD, but the measurement above is closer to that of the Subc--see below)
- Width of bracelet end piece 21 mm

Subc:
- Bezel black ceramic part width ~3.75 mm
- Width of bracelet end piece 20 mm

Second hand on both appear the same (~17.5 mm)
Minute hand on both appear the same (12 mm from tip to center point)
(Hour hands are different designs, with DSSD same as that of the GMT)
Dial diameter at bottom of rehauts appear the same (27 mm)
Removable links the same (15 mm)
Clasp width the same (17 mm)

[jdojoby]

I think the case back makes this item a bit of a 'wrist roller' ... and I think my name will be taken off the list...deep sea all over again!

[Fletcher UK]

I can't believe that the dial on the SD43 is exactly the same size as a sub at 27mm. That has really shocked me. The SD43 dial does look bigger. It must be an optical illusion. Was hoping it would be 1 or 2mm bigger

[G'ed]

Originally Posted by Fletcher UK

I can't believe that the dial on the SD43 is exactly the same size as a sub at 27mm. That has really shocked me. The SD43 dial does look bigger. It must be an optical illusion. Was hoping it would be 1 or 2mm bigger

My previous side-by-side comparison with Rolex pictures shown that both dials having the same diameter. Hand-on measurement confirmed that, I guess.

[AK797]

And these are the perils of being first, you're inundated like the White House Press Sec on the day a scandal breaks out. Where are you CJ?

[wb55]

I didn't get an anchor in the box. Did anyone else?

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by AK797

And these are the perils of being first, you're inundated like the White House Press Sec on the day a scandal breaks out. Where are you CJ?

Thank God it wasn't me ... no calipers here

[sheldonsmith]

Here's a table that I whipped together using the data I had off my website combined with the data I gleaned from this thread.

Corrections / additions appreciated





-Sheldon

[pd999]

Thanks for the measurements

[Chalet]

Originally Posted by sheldonsmith

Here's a table that I whipped together using the data I had off my website combined with the data I gleaned from this thread.

Corrections / additions appreciated





-Sheldon

I thought the 6 digit sub and GMT case, and therefore lug to lug, were there same size?

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by sheldonsmith

Here's a table that I whipped together using the data I had off my website combined with the data I gleaned from this thread.

Corrections / additions appreciated





-Sheldon

Thanks Sheldon. Very surprising to see that SD4K lug to lug is even less 5 digit GMT II, damn, that is shocking to me. Glad I own 114060 over SD4K.

[sheldonsmith]

Originally Posted by Chalet

I thought the 6 digit sub and GMT case, and therefore lug to lug, were there same size?

The Sub 116610and GMT 116710 are two completely different cases. The GMT is a thicker case with flatter case back whereas the Sub has a thinner case but thicker more protruding case back. Overall the same total thickness but the proportions are noticeably different when viewed side-by-side.

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by sheldonsmith

The Sub 116610and GMT 116710 are two completely different cases. The GMT is a thicker case with flatter case back whereas the Sub has a thinner case but thicker more protruding case back. Overall the same total thickness but the proportions are noticeably different when viewed side-by-side.

Mid case is the correct term for that.

[Chalet]

Originally Posted by sheldonsmith

The Sub 116610and GMT 116710 are two completely different cases. The GMT is a thicker case with flatter case back whereas the Sub has a thinner case but thicker more protruding case back. Overall the same total thickness but the proportions are noticeably different when viewed side-by-side.

Thanks for explaining! I've not had a sub so haven't done that real in depth comparison.

You know what they say about 'assumptions parents'!

If SD43 is 2mm more that GMT I think it will be ok for me!

[moby33]

Originally Posted by lee fowler

Clasp is approx. 19mm

Am I the only one that isn't thrilled the clasp grew in width by 2mm? I never hear any talk of this, but this is the only aspect of the watch I'm not a fan of (on paper at least).

I've said it many times before, but I don't like the wider clasps of my Omega dive watches and always thought it a breath of fresh air to put on the thinner Rolex clasps. But now it appears even the clasps are gaining width. Damn. At least there's still a taper from lug to clasp.

What's your take on the wider clasp? Am I fretting over 2mm too much?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by moby33

Am I the only one that isn't thrilled the clasp grew in width by 2mm? I never hear any talk of this, but this is the only aspect of the watch I'm not a fan of (on paper at least).

I've said it many times before, but I don't like the wider clasps of my Omega dive watches and always thought it a breath of fresh air to put on the thinner Rolex clasps. But now it appears even the clasps are gaining width. Damn. At least there's still a taper from lug to clasp.

What's your take on the wider clasp? Am I fretting over 2mm too much?

As the watch presents it's clasp width is inconsequential because it's in proportion to the rest of the bracelet.
When worn on the wrist the clasp is noticeably wider if one is used to a narrower model.

Talking about styling criticisms and with all the talk about bracelets and how the SEL's fit at the case.
To be specific, I'm utterly surprised that no one has picked up about the unsightly gap under the bezel where the SEL fits to the case on the new SD.
I first saw it in the early pics and was wondering how it presented in the flesh.
My conclusion is that whilst it's still quite noticeable, the enjoyment of the watch will surpass any flaws in the fullness of time

[coleburns]

Originally Posted by sheldonsmith

Here's a table that I whipped together using the data I had off my website combined with the data I gleaned from this thread.

Corrections / additions appreciated



[IMG]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170503/754439f7d909b873ab73457fc6d3db8f.jpg[/IMG

-Sheldon

If these measurements are correct in comparison to exp ii (lug 2 lug) then it might fit my small wrist. Thanks for this

[gt0279a]

Originally Posted by moby33

Am I the only one that isn't thrilled the clasp grew in width by 2mm? I never hear any talk of this, but this is the only aspect of the watch I'm not a fan of (on paper at least).

I've said it many times before, but I don't like the wider clasps of my Omega dive watches and always thought it a breath of fresh air to put on the thinner Rolex clasps. But now it appears even the clasps are gaining width. Damn. At least there's still a taper from lug to clasp.

What's your take on the wider clasp? Am I fretting over 2mm too much?

Agree. Rolex has been using 20mm bracelets that tapered to 15.5mm links at the bracelet for a long time now. Looks proportional for a 40mm watch.

The problem with Omega is they would use links that tapered to 18mm on a XL Planet Ocean with 22mm end links, but would keep that 18mm taper on the Planet Ocean with 20mm end links so only the larger PO looks proportional.

Would be interesting to know the width of the removable links for the SD43.

[Chalet]

It's a jump!