Deep Sea 4000?

[SW0000]

I currently own a Sub-C, GMTII (Batman) and a Yachtmaster II, all purchased within the past 3 years. I am considering purchasing the new Deep Sea to add to my collection however, on the Rolex website it looks very similar to a Sub-C. Same dial sans the cyclops for the date and of course the additional thickness of the piece. I believe the bracelet is the exact same one as the Sub also.
I suppose it seems a little redundant to own this piece and the Sub but would appreciate some feedback from the Forum. I also love the Sub and have no desire to sell it at this point in time.
Thanks for you comments.

[77T]

If you won't be diving deeper than 1000', it would seem to be redundant...

[jack81]

Believe me when i say this. DSSD has it class on its own. The bracelet is more advance than the one sub c has. And the dome cristal is just gorgeous. You should try that at yout AD n take lots of wrist shot. Oh n dont forget to post it here.

[Degas]

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=343896

[jimi]

I think he meant the SD 4000 rather than the Deep Sea 116660.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kilyung]

This picture by StaceeJaxx pretty much says it all.

[jack81]

Ups i thought you meant the DSSD.. the sdc i guess mike's picture says it all..

[psv]

Are you talking about the Deepsea/DSSD or the new Sea-Dweller 4000? Two completely different watches.

If you are talking about the new SD4000, yes, on the surface, it is rather close to the SubC. To me, the shorter case with thinner lugs makes all the difference. The lack of cyclops is a bonus in my book but the real technical difference is the addition of a diving extension so I can use watch with a wetsuit.



Now if you are not a diver and/or a dive watch collector, then I don't really see the point of getting a Sea-Dweller in addition to a Submariner.

[Rolexpharm]

I agree that the SD4000 looks a lot like the SubC from a distance and that is why I went for the DSSD. I like the bigger, thicker case and the bracelet with the glide lock and divers extension. The SD4000 has that but just in a smaller 40mm package compared to the 44mm of the DSSD

[Brian Page]

They are very different watches, the SD has the raised crystal that really adds a lot to the look, I like to dive with mine and keep it on the steel bracelet, wear my sub C on NATO a lot. I also have a BLNR and the feel of the BLNR and Sub C are much more similar than the SD4000.

[SW0000]

Thanks folks the quick responses. Still on the fence but definitely interested in actually seeing the SD4000 in person at an AD. So for now I will keep looking for one before I make a decision.

[swils8610]

I really like my SD4000. I much prefer the lugs compared to the new chunky Sub lugs.

[yld2rob]

I was thinking the same thing. I was going to sell my Sub c and get the SD 4000 since they look so similar.

[nyc2la]

I'd say SDc; it's an elegant tank...

[PrimareSPA21]

The look is very similar the feel is very different. I love the SDc but I would probably buy a Daytona instead if I already had a SubC(I've got the BLNR) and it is different enough for me. Fantastic watch anyway take your Sub in to an AD and try them on together that's what i did when deciding on the SDc, good luck.

[AK797]

If you already think they look similar I think this will be borne out, I would trade your LNc for the LVc or TT Bluesy and get the SDc.

[regnant]

You should take another option instead . Why not go for the DSSD with blue dial the newest edition released by Rolex . Judging by your YMII , size of it should not bother you at all

[14060m]

sub

[chris975d]

If we are talking about the newest SeaDweller 4000 vs a Sub-C, I say SD4000 all day long. I just recently let go of my Sub for an SD, and couldn't be happier. It takes care of everything that I didn't like about the Sub, and has a better look on wrist.

[nathaniel]

I agree, it is a little redundant to have both a 116610 and a 116600. Personally, I would choose SD4000 over SubC. Maybe consider looking at Explorer or Explorer 2 or Daytona?

[rjarr]

I agree not to have a Sub-c and the sd-4000 together unless it is these two.

[PrimareSPA21]

Originally Posted by rjarr

I agree not to have a Sub-c and the sd-4000 together unless it is these two.

Very cool, nice collection.

[kilyung]

I've got a YM2, SubC, and just added the SDc. Don't see a problem with them being in the same box.

[Lew Archer]

The nature of collecting is often owning multiple examples of very similar things. The collector, however, sees great differences in any variance between those similar things.

Are the SDc and SubC similar? Of course. They are not identical, though. Each is the result of a slightly different lineage and history.

They are different in some respects...the cyclops (or lack of it), case thickness, depth capability, case shape, etc. For the collector, those differences make them very different watches.

Personally, once I decided to call myself a collector of fine watches, it made it easy to rationalize spending a lot of money on something that non-enthusiasts would consider almost identical to what I already own!

As the Jeff Goldblum character said in "The Big Chill", rationalizations are more important than sex...after all, when did you go a week without a rationalization??

[h999r]

You already have subC. Don't buy sea 4000 , feels like wearing the same watch.
Get DSSD or new blue dial DSSD my opinion. Feels different.
I bought SD 4000 and I flipped it the next 2 days beacuse feels like Im wearing my sub C :(

[joli160]

The difference is in the details, but I also would recommend trying a Deepsea. The DS compared with a Sub is obviously very different.
You can't go wrong really.

[AK797]

I would trade the subc for an LVc or TT Bluesy, Rolex sunbursts are just marvellous, and get the SDc.

[busytimmy]

I have the LVc and still think the SDc would be redundant. Then again, I'm not big on owning 'similar' watches.

[MortgageGuy]

I have both with black dials and wouldn't consider getting rid of either. Plenty different enough IMHO to add to your collection.