ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

dieseldragon · 15 November 2011, 05:30 AM

Quick question, I am considering a Sea Dweller, having sold both my Subs. Is it noticeably thicker than a Submariner when on the wrist?

moviefreak · 15 November 2011, 05:32 AM

Nope.. it might feel just a little bit heavier.. but you will get used to it in minutes...

brownbear · 15 November 2011, 05:33 AM

does not feel "thicker", just feels "better".

sea-dweller · 15 November 2011, 05:35 AM

The SD sits "higher", while the Sub sits flatter.

Avs Fan · 15 November 2011, 05:37 AM

The SD case back is a little deeper, and this raises case edges off my wrist. So to me, it feels like the SD is a little thicker.

greg in denver

gregmoeck · 15 November 2011, 05:42 AM

The SD circumference appears smaller than the sub, the sub more shiny due to the thin crystal. The SD bezel is thicker and cut sharper so it looks like diamonds shining in the sun light. The SD is heavier, but that's a good thing, it feels well built and wears better than a sub.

rad87gn · 15 November 2011, 05:44 AM

The thicker case back of the SD makes it sit different on my wrist than my Subs. I actually think the SD feels more comfortable.

TB72 · 15 November 2011, 05:45 AM

The Seadweller is a little thicker but I can honestly say it's a very comfortable watch to wear. Prefer it to the submariner.

azguy · 15 November 2011, 05:46 AM

I'm surprised at the responses; the SD is thicker and heavier and sits higher in the wrist

I would never consider wearing everyday, unlike my Sub, which is very comfortable

brownbear · 15 November 2011, 05:48 AM

words can not describe a SD..

nauticajoe · 15 November 2011, 05:58 AM

Yes, it's slightly thicker but very comfortable.

subtona · 15 November 2011, 06:06 AM

yes it is thicker and it is heavier.

and i can tell you from experience that it can be like trying to shop in a crowded store with a back pack on.... it just hits stuff, coming from a submariner, there will be an adjustment period.

SD is a great watch! and so is the Sub.

willang · 15 November 2011, 06:11 AM

SD sits higher, just a tad heavier and fits better than the Sub on my wrist. If possible, you should test out both to see which one you like better :)

dieseldragon · 15 November 2011, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willang

SD sits higher, just a tad heavier and fits better than the Sub on my wrist. If possible, you should test out both to see which one you like better :)

I would love to try it, but there is no one within 500 miles that has one!
I am also considering a 16800 with matt dial..

usbzoso · 15 November 2011, 06:38 AM

To me SD feels a little bit unbalanced on my wrist while Sub feels completely balanced.

brownbear · 15 November 2011, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dieseldragon

I would love to try it, but there is no one within 500 miles that has one!
I am also considering a 16800 with matt dial..

Ian, you know you are going to buy a SD eventually..
... Just get it now...

lefty scott · 15 November 2011, 07:26 AM

I went for the sub because when I saw then side by side the sd just looked smaller to me..

subtona · 15 November 2011, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lefty scott

I went for the sub because when I saw then side by side the sd just looked smaller to me..

it is smaller.
it is fatter
it is heavier
it is cool

sub is also cool

there is no wrong answer here

Gretsch · 15 November 2011, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subtona

it is smaller.
It is fatter
it is heavier
it is cool

Sub is also cool

There is no wrong answer here

+1

Eric88 · 15 November 2011, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brownbear

does not feel "thicker", just feels "better".

This!

Paulie 50 · 15 November 2011, 09:06 AM

It all depends on what you consider " high on the wrist " ok the SD sits higher on my wrist than say, my Daytona. or my Sub. but it's only noticeable for about three minutes, and then, it's normal.

rkammer · 17 February 2012, 05:13 PM

I think the Sea Dweller has a more balanced look than the Sub because of the 1mm smaller dial and the 1mm wider bezel. To me the Sub dial looks disproportionately too large for the bezel.

Of course, there's always the cyclops vs no cyclops thing too. Non cyclops fans love the SD.

There is also a little mentioned difference in the bracelets too. The Sea Dweller links are polished on the sides vs brushed on the Sub so the SD links match the polished sides of the case better.

And the link next to the clasp on the SD is a full size link vs the 1/2 size link on the Sub. On my wrist at least, this gives a more centered fit.

I guess one can tell I'm a Sea Dweller fan.

SS Oyster · 17 February 2012, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkammer

I think the Sea Dweller has a more balanced look than the Sub because of the 1mm smaller dial and the 1mm wider bezel. To me the Sub dial looks disproportionately too large for the bezel.

Of course, there's always the cyclops vs no cyclops thing too. Non cyclops fans love the SD.

There is also a little mentioned difference in the bracelets too. The Sea Dweller links are polished on the sides vs brushed on the Sub so the SD links match the polished sides of the case better.

And the link next to the clasp on the SD is a full size link vs the 1/2 size link on the Sub. On my wrist at least, this gives a more centered fit.

I guess one can tell I'm a Sea Dweller fan.

Not sure what Sub you are talking about with brushed sides. The LV I owned has polished sides to the bracelet. The LVc I own has polished sides to the bracelet. Even the service replacement bracelet on the 5513 I owned had polished sides.

sdwtchlvr · 17 February 2012, 07:09 PM

As all have mentioned, the SD is thicker. And it wears thicker too, it looks quite substantial on the wrist and I have big wrists.

dysondiver · 17 February 2012, 07:26 PM

are the older sd thinner ??

padi56 · 17 February 2012, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dieseldragon

Quick question, I am considering a Sea Dweller, having sold both my Subs. Is it noticeably thicker than a Submariner when on the wrist?

The dial on the SD is 1mm smaller than the sub,and the bezel on SD is 1mm wider than the sub but both 40mm. The sub date weighs 135 grams and 13mm case depth, the SD 147 grams and 14.65mm case depth not a huge difference and myself fine no difference when on wrist .

dddrees · 17 February 2012, 08:19 PM

The SD is a bit thicker and it has a slightly bigger wrist presence than the Sub. It's wrist presence is about the same of the GMTIIC which is really nice.

Edit: Just noticed this is an old thread.

Ebruner · 17 February 2012, 10:31 PM

Mine seems smaller on the wrist to me. I really dig the SD, just different enough, but not too much.

-Eddie

captiva · 17 February 2012, 10:33 PM

My vote goes to Deep Sea, simply love the weight and size.

SWIMPRUF · 17 February 2012, 10:48 PM

A little thicker, but I think you'll get used to it.

15 November 2011, 05:30 AM	#1
dieseldragon "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Real Name: Ian Location: Spain Watch: Ω & ♛ Posts: 1,321	Sea Dweller 16600 vs Submariner 16610 Quick question, I am considering a Sea Dweller, having sold both my Subs. Is it noticeably thicker than a Submariner when on the wrist? __________________ Rolex GMT, Zenith Chronomaster Sport, Zenith Pilot type 20 40mm, IWC mkXVI, Tudor BB58, Glashütte Original SeaQ 39. 5

15 November 2011, 05:32 AM	#2
moviefreak "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: in my house... Posts: 5,524	Nope.. it might feel just a little bit heavier.. but you will get used to it in minutes... __________________ Cheers, Eduardo Be a WIS not a WUSS... and remove all the stickers..

15 November 2011, 05:37 AM	#5
Avs Fan "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,504	Yes, a little thicker The SD case back is a little deeper, and this raises case edges off my wrist. So to me, it feels like the SD is a little thicker. greg in denver

15 November 2011, 05:44 AM	#7
rad87gn "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Chad Location: Des Moines, Iowa Watch: Rolex, PAM, Omega Posts: 1,607	The thicker case back of the SD makes it sit different on my wrist than my Subs. I actually think the SD feels more comfortable. __________________ Rolex P-Series SS GMT II Black, Rolex Y-Series Sea-Dweller, Rolex F-Series TT Blue Sub, Rolex F-Series Sub LV, Rolex D-Series Ladies SS/WG DJ for wife, Panerai K-Series PAM 112, Omega Speedmaster Pro 3570.50, Omega Seamaster 300M Chrono 2594.52

15 November 2011, 06:06 AM	#12
subtona "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 26,548	yes it is thicker and it is heavier. and i can tell you from experience that it can be like trying to shop in a crowded store with a back pack on.... it just hits stuff, coming from a submariner, there will be an adjustment period. SD is a great watch! and so is the Sub. __________________

15 November 2011, 05:33 AM	#3
brownbear "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: Danny Location: georgia Watch: it Bub Posts: 1,334	does not feel "thicker", just feels "better".

15 November 2011, 05:35 AM	#4
sea-dweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Dennis Location: Bay Area - 925 Posts: 40,018	The SD sits "higher", while the Sub sits flatter.

15 November 2011, 05:42 AM	#6
gregmoeck "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Maui Watch: Patek Posts: 2,032	The SD circumference appears smaller than the sub, the sub more shiny due to the thin crystal. The SD bezel is thicker and cut sharper so it looks like diamonds shining in the sun light. The SD is heavier, but that's a good thing, it feels well built and wears better than a sub.

15 November 2011, 05:45 AM	#8
TB72 Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Scotland Posts: 55	The Seadweller is a little thicker but I can honestly say it's a very comfortable watch to wear. Prefer it to the submariner.

15 November 2011, 05:46 AM	#9
azguy Banned Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: ------- Location: ------- Watch: --------- Posts: 12,609	I'm surprised at the responses; the SD is thicker and heavier and sits higher in the wrist I would never consider wearing everyday, unlike my Sub, which is very comfortable

15 November 2011, 05:48 AM	#10
brownbear "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: Danny Location: georgia Watch: it Bub Posts: 1,334	words can not describe a SD..

15 November 2011, 05:58 AM	#11
nauticajoe "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Joe Location: PA Posts: 14,774	Yes, it's slightly thicker but very comfortable.

15 November 2011, 06:11 AM	#13
willang "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: NJ Posts: 489	SD sits higher, just a tad heavier and fits better than the Sub on my wrist. If possible, you should test out both to see which one you like better :)

15 November 2011, 06:38 AM	#15
usbzoso Banned Join Date: Apr 2011 Real Name: Stan Location: Dallas Watch: 16610/16600/16800 Posts: 1,231	To me SD feels a little bit unbalanced on my wrist while Sub feels completely balanced.

15 November 2011, 07:26 AM	#17
lefty scott "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: New Jersey Posts: 49	I went for the sub because when I saw then side by side the sd just looked smaller to me..

15 November 2011, 09:06 AM	#21
Paulie 50 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Lancs. England Posts: 999	It all depends on what you consider " high on the wrist " ok the SD sits higher on my wrist than say, my Daytona. or my Sub. but it's only noticeable for about three minutes, and then, it's normal.

17 February 2012, 05:13 PM	#22
rkammer "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Central Florida Posts: 440	I think the Sea Dweller has a more balanced look than the Sub because of the 1mm smaller dial and the 1mm wider bezel. To me the Sub dial looks disproportionately too large for the bezel. Of course, there's always the cyclops vs no cyclops thing too. Non cyclops fans love the SD. There is also a little mentioned difference in the bracelets too. The Sea Dweller links are polished on the sides vs brushed on the Sub so the SD links match the polished sides of the case better. And the link next to the clasp on the SD is a full size link vs the 1/2 size link on the Sub. On my wrist at least, this gives a more centered fit. I guess one can tell I'm a Sea Dweller fan. __________________ Regards, Ray K.

17 February 2012, 07:09 PM	#24
sdwtchlvr "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: SoCal Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,308	As all have mentioned, the SD is thicker. And it wears thicker too, it looks quite substantial on the wrist and I have big wrists.

17 February 2012, 07:26 PM	#25
dysondiver "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: tom Location: northern ireland Watch: my fins Posts: 10,063	are the older sd thinner ??

17 February 2012, 08:19 PM	#27
dddrees "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2010 Real Name: Dan Location: USA Watch: This N That Posts: 34,253	The SD is a bit thicker and it has a slightly bigger wrist presence than the Sub. It's wrist presence is about the same of the GMTIIC which is really nice. Edit: Just noticed this is an old thread. __________________ When it captures your imagination, that's when you know you have found your passion. Loyal Foot Soldier of The Nylon Nation. Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

17 February 2012, 10:31 PM	#28
Ebruner "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Eddie Location: Kentucky Watch: 118208 Posts: 2,510	Mine seems smaller on the wrist to me. I really dig the SD, just different enough, but not too much. -Eddie __________________

17 February 2012, 10:33 PM	#29
captiva Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: US Posts: 138	My vote goes to Deep Sea, simply love the weight and size.

17 February 2012, 10:48 PM	#30
SWIMPRUF "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: * Posts: 2,323	A little thicker, but I think you'll get used to it. __________________ Member# 52,675 Est. 3/2011

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