Sea dweller 126600 hate?

[Deep Sea]

I love mine. Wears great, and the size increase is perfect. I wear my 40mm Sub every day, but really like the SD43 when I take it out for a spin.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by MJ EXPLORER

Wow! That makes a lot of sense. I've tried them both on and somehow thought the SD was too big but not the DSSD. I'm beginning to think lug-to-lug measurement is more important.

It’s very important to me for determining comfort as well a looks on the wrist

[dmash]

I think it’s actually kind of funny that people state the cyclops on a SD isn’t right. Yet Rolex would have put it on the SD since its inception if it had the technology to do so. Saying the cyclops isn’t ‘right’ is simply stating you don’t like Rolex progressing as a brand. And to be technical, it’s actually more ‘Rolexesque’ to have a cyclops on any model which has a date.

Oh, and as a SD43 owner, yes, it definitely wears smaller than 43. It’s got to be worn in the flesh and not judged on paper, way more so than a sub or gmt, it’s an awesome watch and quite frankly the best diver ever in my opinion. It honestly made my 6 digit Sub feel incredibly boring/pedestrian. All that’s been mentioned before, matte dial+ red text, fully graduated/wider bezel….it’s special.

[el3ctronick]

Originally Posted by dmash

I think it’s actually kind of funny that people state the cyclops on a SD isn’t right. Yet Rolex would have put it on the SD since its inception if it had the technology to do so. Saying the cyclops isn’t ‘right’ is simply stating you don’t like Rolex progressing as a brand. And to be technical, it’s actually more ‘Rolexesque’ to have a cyclops on any model which has a date.

Oh, and as a SD43 owner, yes, it definitely wears smaller than 43. It’s got to be worn in the flesh and not judged on paper, way more so than a sub or gmt, it’s an awesome watch and quite frankly the best diver ever in my opinion. It honestly made my 6 digit Sub feel incredibly boring/pedestrian. All that’s been mentioned before, matte dial+ red text, fully graduated/wider bezel….it’s special.

totally agreeing with you. it's like complaining for not having the 1575 caliber. who needs 70 hours power reserve?:P or why it has now sapphire and no plexi glass like it used to? ceramic bezel also is a disaster. it should go back to aluminium :P

[Clockwork24]

It is really nice 👍

[aquanaut]

It’s a great watch, perfect for me. Have no issues with the fit etc and as I am getting older the cyclops is needed, lol. Offshore with it now…usually have the deep sea for that but it’s back at Rolex UK for service / repair :(

[el3ctronick]

Originally Posted by aquanaut

It’s a great watch, perfect for me. Have no issues with the fit etc and as I am getting older the cyclops is needed, lol. Offshore with it now…usually have the deep sea for that but it’s back at Rolex UK for service / repair :(

maintenance or damage repair? :S

[aquanaut]

Both…although not to much repair..it gets well battered offshore! That’s what it’s built for anyway.

[Ganymede]

I don’t understand the need for the 43mm Sea-Dweller. It’s simply a larger, bulkier version of the 41mm SD, but offers nothing more aside from the newer calibre (which could easily fit in the 41mm SD case). For a mere 1mm increase in size, you can get the DeepSea SD, which is arguably Rolex’s greatest watch from a technological standpoint.

The 41mm SD made more sense. I just don’t understand the need for the 43mm SD.

[Watch Maniac]

They will only go up in value over time.

[donas]

Originally Posted by Ganymede

I don’t understand the need for the 43mm Sea-Dweller. It’s simply a larger, bulkier version of the 41mm SD, but offers nothing more aside from the newer calibre (which could easily fit in the 41mm SD case). For a mere 1mm increase in size, you can get the DeepSea SD, which is arguably Rolex’s greatest watch from a technological standpoint.

The 41mm SD made more sense. I just don’t understand the need for the 43mm SD.

Well, speaking only for myself, there is no "need" merely a want. The 41 feels essentially like a sub while the the Deep Sea just felt way to thick for my liking. The SD43 is the perfect "happy medium" between the two. As far as technical specs, I nor 99% of those who wear any of the divers will ever come close to needing any of it; it boils down to what feels good and looks good in the eyes of the owner. For me, the SD43 looks and wears great.

[el3ctronick]

Originally Posted by Ganymede

I don’t understand the need for the 43mm Sea-Dweller. It’s simply a larger, bulkier version of the 41mm SD, but offers nothing more aside from the newer calibre (which could easily fit in the 41mm SD case). For a mere 1mm increase in size, you can get the DeepSea SD, which is arguably Rolex’s greatest watch from a technological standpoint.

The 41mm SD made more sense. I just don’t understand the need for the 43mm SD.

I will give you my view. following this logic there's no need for sea dweller to exist at all. nobody dives at 4000 feet with a rolex. at the same time there's no need datejust model, it does less from a submariner. basically rolex could only produce submariners since the caliber fits a 40mm case. or why did they increase submariners by 1mm?

anyway, deepsea is super thick and it's not for everyone's wrist...the same way submariners are..they are very small for my wrist..the 43mm sea dweller is for the first time a watch that fits perfect the size of my wrist.. wide enough and the thickness on point :)

[Clockwork24]

Lovely watch

[Saoirse32]

Originally Posted by epc2

Same thing happened to me , loved the watch and size ,hated the comfort, sold it and got a Dblue , never looked back , I still apprecciate and love the look of the SD43 , it just didn’t work for me .

Same for me!

[teabags001]

I used to daily my SD43 for 6 months. I would have still done that if the 126610 subs didn’t exist. The 126610 is the Perfect watch imo. I hate the small bracelets of the 116610 subs. The sd43 was a little too thick. So no hate I just find the 126610 LV to be a better daily wearer for me.

The dial size of the sub 41 and the SD43 are about the same size. The sd43 has a thicker rehault. Both are beautiful and congratulations. I personally like a little color pop so the LV versions of the subs are more my style. I love the red lettering of the SD43.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oxfordian]

Hate is a very strong word, people may dislike aspects of the watch, the cyclops for many is a big no no, others find the shape of the caseback awkward on their wrist and this makes the watch uncomfortable to wear, others find the size an issue, some find all of these issues a problem.

But for many the watch is just stunning, a real gem and one of the best watches that Rolex produces.

We are all different, we all like different things which gives us the great choices that we have today.

Enjoy your watch OP.

[Boaters]

Originally Posted by samson66

Most of the hate comes from two sources, those who hate the cyclops, and those with smaller wrists who hate that they made the Sea Dweller too big for them to wear. To the rest of us who found the Sub a little small and lacking in wrist presence it was practically a dream

Very well said

[rambo99]

Originally Posted by samson66

Most of the hate comes from two sources, those who hate the cyclops, and those with smaller wrists who hate that they made the Sea Dweller too big for them to wear. To the rest of us who found the Sub a little small and lacking in wrist presence it was practically a dream come true.

agree! plus the protruded caseback, SD43 is not for the weak!

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Rori

Unless some wrists are made of steal or marble, the caseback is cleverly designed the way it is to make a flatter case dimensions possible without scarifying underwater depth support.
The SD43 when worn properly “snug and above wrist bone” it wears as flat and low as a sub “almost” same goes for it’s center of gravity. This caseback design is responsible of making the watch looks slimmer, wears lower and steadier on the wrist. It is an ingenious feast of design.

Agree with this completely. The protruding caseback is what makes this watch look so perfect on the wrist. For me anyway the caseback helps is settle down into my wrist just a little giving the illusion of a much thinner watch, and helps it stay planted. No slopping around. The height of the watch on the wrist looks absolutely perfect for the diameter. I love the DSSD but the lack of a protruding caseback is what makes it look like a hockey puck when wearing. I know some have experienced wrist discomfort but I have never noticed this in 3+ years of wearing.

[Rori]

Originally Posted by samson66

Agree with this completely. The protruding caseback is what makes this watch look so perfect on the wrist. For me anyway the caseback helps is settle down into my wrist just a little giving the illusion of a much thinner watch, and helps it stay planted. No slopping around. The height of the watch on the wrist looks absolutely perfect for the diameter. I love the DSSD but the lack of a protruding caseback is what makes it look like a hockey puck when wearing. I know some have experienced wrist discomfort but I have never noticed this in 3+ years of wearing.

Rolex designers are not stupid after all.:-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Longhorn]

Originally Posted by samson66

Agree with this completely. The protruding caseback is what makes this watch look so perfect on the wrist. For me anyway the caseback helps is settle down into my wrist just a little giving the illusion of a much thinner watch, and helps it stay planted. No slopping around. The height of the watch on the wrist looks absolutely perfect for the diameter. I love the DSSD but the lack of a protruding caseback is what makes it look like a hockey puck when wearing. I know some have experienced wrist discomfort but I have never noticed this in 3+ years of wearing.

Agreed, I found it visually appearing thinner and akin to a submariner at certain angles. Also echo the experience of it feeling planted and not sliding up and down like other pieces.

[APPRF]

Originally Posted by Longhorn

Agreed, I found it visually appearing thinner and akin to a submariner at certain angles. Also echo the experience of it feeling planted and not sliding up and down like other pieces.

+1

[Mikichi]

I like the SD43 except its protruding case back which causes some discomfort on the wrist. In fact the Sub also has the same design for the case back however to a lesser extent so it's fine but the SD43 is a little too much, at least for me.

[Ganymede]

In my view, the Submariner is the ‘standard’, if you will.

Some people want a more technologically impressive watch than the Sub, maybe don’t want the Cyclops, but still like the size and appearance of the Sub. That’s where the original Sea-Dweller comes in. Others want the most bad-ass production Rolex ever made and don’t care about the size. That’s where the 44mm DSSD comes in.

I’m not sure what category the 43mm SD fills.. those who want a bigger watch with a cyclops lens?

[ferrissteve11]

The SD43 hits that sweet spot between the Sub being too small and the DSSD being too overly thick. It really does fill/check a lot of boxes. It has the Cyclops (which my eyes really appreciate) but has more heft than a Sub (which I always felt was a bit small).

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Ganymede

In my view, the Submariner is the ‘standard’, if you will.

Some people want a more technologically impressive watch than the Sub, maybe don’t want the Cyclops, but still like the size and appearance of the Sub. That’s where the original Sea-Dweller comes in. Others want the most bad-ass production Rolex ever made and don’t care about the size. That’s where the 44mm DSSD comes in.

I’m not sure what category the 43mm SD fills.. those who want a bigger watch with a cyclops lens?

People who want a larger, more capable, more special Sub with more wrist presence, but don't want to wear a hockey puck on their wrist. That's the category for the SD43.

[Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Ganymede

In my view, the Submariner is the ‘standard’, if you will.

Some people want a more technologically impressive watch than the Sub, maybe don’t want the Cyclops, but still like the size and appearance of the Sub. That’s where the original Sea-Dweller comes in. Others want the most bad-ass production Rolex ever made and don’t care about the size. That’s where the 44mm DSSD comes in.

I’m not sure what category the 43mm SD fills.. those who want a bigger watch with a cyclops lens?

Goldilock's tale seems to apply here. Preferable dimensions, aesthetics, wearability? The original Sea-Dweller is DEAD, long may the SD43 reign!

[kans86]

I too like the SD43 but also have issue with its case back. Have been wearing the DSSD and had no such issue though. Hate is too strong a word.

[Uncle Meat]

I originally wanted a Sub but when I tried it on it was just too small. It looked like a mid sized watch on my wrist.
I then tried on a Sea Dweller and it fit like a glove. Now I prefer it to the Sub.

Oh and I Really like the cyclops as it actually allows me to see the date.

[stockae92]

I like the SD43 when it first came out. Definitely strike a good balance between the the 40mm SD and 44mm DSSD. Never liked it enough to pull the trigger, until Rolex release the TT SD43. That pushed me over the edge and got one. That's an whole other story .. :D