ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

langejl · 1 April 2007, 11:19 AM

I am leaning towards the SD because of the "ruggedness". Is it truely worth it? I am expecting to wear my Rolex everyday for everything. I would want a watch that I would not have to worry that I am wearing my Rolex while I am doing "rugged" things.

leopardprey · 1 April 2007, 11:45 AM

The Sub has preven it's ruggedness over the last 50 years. I bought one cause I knew peers in the military who had put subs/rolex GMTs through it all. SCUBA, HALO, Para, feild ops, mountain climbing, cold weather training etc. THe SD does give that extra depth rating, but unless you plan on doing any saturation diving below say 300 feet, will not be needed. The Sub also fits flatter on the wrist and does not stick up as much as the SD. Some members have comp[lained before about the SD getting banged alot cause of the height. Also the SD cost more to service, due to the additional water pressure rating and helium escape valve.

langejl · 1 April 2007, 12:00 PM

Is the sub just as rugged besides the depth rating?

mike · 1 April 2007, 12:00 PM

Here's a recent thread on the sub vs. sd,

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=14723

nko51 · 1 April 2007, 12:14 PM

In a practical sense the case and crystal on a Seadweller are thicker than the Sub, so obviously it will protect the movement better.

Kris · 1 April 2007, 12:25 PM

As an SD owner, below is my list of minor strikes against the SD;

1. Bracelet fitment. The watch is bigger, and top heavy. Depending on the size of your wrist, this may or may not be an issue.

2. Saphire crystal is thicker and sticks out a little more on top than a SUB. Some people here have accidentally bumped the watch into an object and have chipped the corner of the crystal.

3. Maintenance cost when it goes in may cost a little more than a SUB.

I believe it to me a rugged watch. I don't know if you've read my postings here about my experience with my SD, but I believe the issue I had was a manufacture/assembly defect in the braclet link and not anything I did with the watch.

langejl · 1 April 2007, 12:34 PM

Haven't run across your previous post about the defect. What happend?

colemanitis · 1 April 2007, 12:55 PM

The Sub is just as rugged as the SD. I prefer the thickness of the SD over the Sub. Try them both on, then you'll know which is the right one for you.

JJ Irani · 1 April 2007, 01:11 PM

I think the main issue boils down to whether you like the CYCLOPS or not.

If not, then the SD would be the automatic watch of choice. I have it and simply love the FLAT crystal look - also much easier to clean. Of course, I love the cyclops too.

You will also find the dial of the SD is only 28.5 mm as against the SUB's dial which is 30 mm....so you will find the SD looking a wee bit smaller. The case diameter of both watches however is the same - 40 mm.

Go with whichever one that smiles back at you. If you have a big wrist the SD is a good buy. If you have a smaller wrist, the Sub would be more practical.

JJ

rolexfan21 · 1 April 2007, 01:15 PM

I think the cyclops is the most important part when you differ the two watches... in the end it doesnt make too much of a difference... its really just the depth they go to and the cyclops... thats it,

langejl · 1 April 2007, 01:49 PM

I do have a small wrist. Haven't sized myself yet.

JJ Irani · 1 April 2007, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by langejl

I do have a small wrist. Haven't sized myself yet.

Then the Sub-date would be a better buy. You might find the SD sitting too high and starting to get a bit top heavy.

JJ

Blue Bull · 1 April 2007, 01:57 PM

"Rugged" ?? .... The one will scratch just as easy as the other

I favour the Dweller by a margin of 55 to 45.So,its close ...

padi56 · 1 April 2007, 06:46 PM

Well its all down to personal choice,but the sub is as rugged as the SD in every way to the average guy.Now the SDs extra performance will only ever come into the equation if its going to be used for it was intended for deep saturation diving.Now at a rough guess 75% of all Rolex sports watches,make that most dive type watches in general.Dont see any water deeper than the local pool,occasional splash in the sea, or if really daring a wash in the shower.

langejl · 1 April 2007, 11:22 PM

When I was trying on the two, the SD bracelet seemed more solid and "quiter". The AD kept telling me they atre exactly the same. I know that the SD gas more links and I believe the SD SEL are solid and the Sub are hollow. Is that true?

padi56 · 1 April 2007, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by langejl

When I was trying on the two, the SD bracelet seemed more solid and "quiter". The AD kept telling me they atre exactly the same. I know that the SD gas more links and I believe the SD SEL are solid and the Sub are hollow. Is that true?

Both sub/date and SD now have SEL, the SD has extra link, polished sides, and different divers extention.

Blue Bull · 1 April 2007, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by padi56

Both sub/date and SD now have SEL, the SD has extra link, polished sides, and different divers extention.

SD has one extra full link on the 6H00 side.The Sub has a half link.

Mr. K · 2 April 2007, 12:35 AM

For ruggedness the SD takes all. But for daily life and diving for normal people the SUB is more than enough.

If however you want bragging rights for the toughest. The the SD is the one you want.

Erix · 2 April 2007, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by langejl

I am leaning towards the SD because of the "ruggedness". Is it truely worth it? I am expecting to wear my Rolex everyday for everything. I would want a watch that I would not have to worry that I am wearing my Rolex while I am doing "rugged" things.

I had the same problem when I was shopping for my watch..In the end the SubDate sat better on the wrist, It felt better and it "smiled" at me.

What it boils down to is your personal preference. both are close in price soo that should not make any difference. Take the one you like the most.

Alex Stylianou · 2 April 2007, 03:43 AM

Rugged ??

sevykor · 2 April 2007, 04:01 AM

Both are the same in terms of ruggedness. If you drop both from 20 feet onto a hard floor, damage will be the same (esp. inside the case)... I also do not think the case of the SD needs to be thicker than a sub because the Helium release valve serves the problem of internal pressure. External pressure is more likely to effect a seal rather than case thickness, therefore it's not an issue. Case thickness may only aid pressure resistance if Rolex (the company) decided to use a larger crystal to allow for a wider gasket, a thicker case for more threads on the screw in crown, and a thicker case to allow for more threads on the case back. I don't have an SD, so can't confirm if that is the case (no pun). More threads in the case back and crown would add to the H2O proof. I'm not sure if that would define it as more rugged, just more pressure proof.

1 April 2007, 11:19 AM	#1
langejl Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york, usa Posts: 51	Submariner v. SD ruggedness I am leaning towards the SD because of the "ruggedness". Is it truely worth it? I am expecting to wear my Rolex everyday for everything. I would want a watch that I would not have to worry that I am wearing my Rolex while I am doing "rugged" things.

1 April 2007, 12:14 PM	#5
nko51 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Alex Location: USA Watch: TT Blue Sub Posts: 2,542	In a practical sense the case and crystal on a Seadweller are thicker than the Sub, so obviously it will protect the movement better. __________________

1 April 2007, 12:55 PM	#8
colemanitis "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Jeff Location: Florida Watch: PAM 1090 Posts: 3,723	The Sub is just as rugged as the SD. I prefer the thickness of the SD over the Sub. Try them both on, then you'll know which is the right one for you. __________________ Member #471

1 April 2007, 01:11 PM	#9
JJ Irani Fondly Remembered Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: JJ Location: Auckland, NZ Watch: ALL SOLD!! Posts: 74,319	I think the main issue boils down to whether you like the CYCLOPS or not. If not, then the SD would be the automatic watch of choice. I have it and simply love the FLAT crystal look - also much easier to clean. Of course, I love the cyclops too. You will also find the dial of the SD is only 28.5 mm as against the SUB's dial which is 30 mm....so you will find the SD looking a wee bit smaller. The case diameter of both watches however is the same - 40 mm. Go with whichever one that smiles back at you. If you have a big wrist the SD is a good buy. If you have a smaller wrist, the Sub would be more practical. JJ __________________ Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!

1 April 2007, 06:46 PM	#14
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 53,024	Well its all down to personal choice,but the sub is as rugged as the SD in every way to the average guy.Now the SDs extra performance will only ever come into the equation if its going to be used for it was intended for deep saturation diving.Now at a rough guess 75% of all Rolex sports watches,make that most dive type watches in general.Dont see any water deeper than the local pool,occasional splash in the sea, or if really daring a wash in the shower. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

1 April 2007, 11:45 AM	#2
leopardprey Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Chad Location: Around the world Watch: Panerai 233 Posts: 4,204	The Sub has preven it's ruggedness over the last 50 years. I bought one cause I knew peers in the military who had put subs/rolex GMTs through it all. SCUBA, HALO, Para, feild ops, mountain climbing, cold weather training etc. THe SD does give that extra depth rating, but unless you plan on doing any saturation diving below say 300 feet, will not be needed. The Sub also fits flatter on the wrist and does not stick up as much as the SD. Some members have comp[lained before about the SD getting banged alot cause of the height. Also the SD cost more to service, due to the additional water pressure rating and helium escape valve.

1 April 2007, 12:00 PM	#3
langejl Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york, usa Posts: 51	Is the sub just as rugged besides the depth rating?

1 April 2007, 12:00 PM	#4
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	Here's a recent thread on the sub vs. sd, http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=14723

1 April 2007, 12:25 PM	#6
Kris Banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Canada Watch: Sea-Dweller Z-ser. Posts: 313	As an SD owner, below is my list of minor strikes against the SD; 1. Bracelet fitment. The watch is bigger, and top heavy. Depending on the size of your wrist, this may or may not be an issue. 2. Saphire crystal is thicker and sticks out a little more on top than a SUB. Some people here have accidentally bumped the watch into an object and have chipped the corner of the crystal. 3. Maintenance cost when it goes in may cost a little more than a SUB. I believe it to me a rugged watch. I don't know if you've read my postings here about my experience with my SD, but I believe the issue I had was a manufacture/assembly defect in the braclet link and not anything I did with the watch.

1 April 2007, 12:34 PM	#7
langejl Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york, usa Posts: 51	Haven't run across your previous post about the defect. What happend?

1 April 2007, 01:15 PM	#10
rolexfan21 Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Toronto Watch: 16610 Posts: 379	I think the cyclops is the most important part when you differ the two watches... in the end it doesnt make too much of a difference... its really just the depth they go to and the cyclops... thats it,

1 April 2007, 01:49 PM	#11
langejl Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york, usa Posts: 51	I do have a small wrist. Haven't sized myself yet.

1 April 2007, 01:57 PM	#13
Blue Bull Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,887	"Rugged" ?? .... The one will scratch just as easy as the other I favour the Dweller by a margin of 55 to 45.So,its close ...

1 April 2007, 11:22 PM	#15
langejl Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york, usa Posts: 51	When I was trying on the two, the SD bracelet seemed more solid and "quiter". The AD kept telling me they atre exactly the same. I know that the SD gas more links and I believe the SD SEL are solid and the Sub are hollow. Is that true?

2 April 2007, 12:35 AM	#18
Mr. K "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Mark Location: Seattle-ish Posts: 6,074	For ruggedness the SD takes all. But for daily life and diving for normal people the SUB is more than enough. If however you want bragging rights for the toughest. The the SD is the one you want.

2 April 2007, 03:43 AM	#20
Alex Stylianou "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: UK Posts: 1,785	Rugged ??

2 April 2007, 04:01 AM	#21
sevykor "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 469	Both are the same in terms of ruggedness. If you drop both from 20 feet onto a hard floor, damage will be the same (esp. inside the case)... I also do not think the case of the SD needs to be thicker than a sub because the Helium release valve serves the problem of internal pressure. External pressure is more likely to effect a seal rather than case thickness, therefore it's not an issue. Case thickness may only aid pressure resistance if Rolex (the company) decided to use a larger crystal to allow for a wider gasket, a thicker case for more threads on the screw in crown, and a thicker case to allow for more threads on the case back. I don't have an SD, so can't confirm if that is the case (no pun). More threads in the case back and crown would add to the H2O proof. I'm not sure if that would define it as more rugged, just more pressure proof.

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