Sea-Dweller Date Window

[lzz73]

On the SD4K, is the date window too far inward?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rogdogg]

I don't think it looks bad but I definitely think they could have put some more thought into it to make it perfect. There was another thread on this topic yesterday where a member photoshopped an image of a SDc to have a date window the same size and shape as the 9 o'clock hour marker to improve the dial symmetry. I thought it looked really good. You should check it out.

[Tools]

The date window is where it is to show the date on the datewheel of a 3135 movement..

Where else could it be

[Ste_J]

I'm happy with it where it is? I'd like the numbers to be a bit bigger but that's jus cos I'm getting old!

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by lzz73

On the SD4K, is the date window too far inward?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes

[LuminousMaximus]

i like it

[presario]

Nope. Where it should be. Same as on the Deep sea.

[Abdullah71601]

Yes, and the bezel is too shiny

[GB-man]

No doubt. Ideally there would be a movement made to fit the case sans cyclops. That said, the sd has history and it doesn't bother me as much as on other watches.

[Mickyfin]

I like mine as it is, all dates are perfectly aligned.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by GB-man

No doubt. Ideally there would be a movement made to fit the case sans cyclops. That said, the sd has history and it doesn't bother me as much as on other watches.

The SD (and DSSD) date window only looks OK to us now because we got used to it. Rolex should have made a specific movement with an appropriate calendar ring for use without a cyclops.

If Rolex had done that, we'd all be praising them for attention to detail, good design, etc.

I love my DSSD, but the placement of the date window is one element of the dial design (and that of the SD and SDc) that isn't optimal.

[belligero]

Originally Posted by eonflux

The SD (and DSSD) date window only looks OK to us now because we got used to it. Rolex should have made a specific movement with an appropriate calendar ring for use without a cyclops.

If Rolex had done that, we'd all be praising them for attention to detail, good design, etc.

I love my DSSD, but the placement of the date window is one element of the dial design (and that of the SD and SDc) that isn't optimal.

Agreed; it's a weakness. I still like my 116600 & 116660, but there's no question that they would be improved with a fit-for-purpose date wheel. Or for the Sea-Dweller, (gasp!) a Cyclops.

[presario]

From a design standpoint, I believe it is exactly where it's supposed to be. Further out to the edge and you have too much negative space on the inside. It's pretty much in the middle of where the marker should be. I really don't want a huge date window as the vertical dimensions mirror that of the 6 and 9 o'clock index. It's simple, clean, and unobtrusive.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Tools

The date window is where it is to show the date on the datewheel of a 3135 movement..

Where else could it be

[belligero]

Originally Posted by Tools

The date window is where it is to show the date on the datewheel of a 3135 movement..

Where else could it be

Rolex has modified their date display by upscaling it for the 3136, 3156 and 3187 movements.

There's nothing stopping them from making a similar effort for the Sea-Dweller, and it's not like they lack the resources to do it. I realize that the older models used movements unmodified from their Submariner counterparts, but would be nice if the modern version had this extra attention to detail.

But the fundamental issue is that their excellent date system is designed to have the distinctive magnifier fitted; it balances perfectly on every other model.

[Speed]

Lazy Rolex...they just print money no matter what they do.

[kirksingleton]

I think it looks fine

[eltonbalch]

Every single watch I now own or have ever owned has some minor niggling detail that bothered me but certainly did not prevent me from enjoying the overall effect. The SD 4000 is no exception, but I think the date window is just fine as is.

[Rashid.bk]

There's always, always.....always, something someone will eventually find wrong with their Rolex as a consequence of staring at it too long looking for something to find wrong with it.

Rolex is so good at making a watch so obsessive that when we can't find a genuine flaw, we make one up. Awesome.

Originally Posted by Mastergreenhand

i think it's fine. it lines up with the distance of the 6 and 9 baton markers. If they moved it over some, it would look out of balance to me.

And definitely agree with this statement.

[Mastergreenhand]

i think it's fine. it lines up with the distance of the 6 and 9 baton markers. If they moved it over some, it would look out of balance to me.

[Jocke]

Originally Posted by Tools

The date window is where it is to show the date on the datewheel of a 3135 movement..

Where else could it be

Paul ask the same when his date didn't shows up.

[douglasf13]

The original SeaDweller was better in this regard, because the dial was smaller, but, ultimately, it's a movement with a date window designed for a cyclops, so the proportions are off. Like I mentioned in another thread, I'm not really sure why Rolex added a date to the SeaDweller line in the first place.

[Wingman244]

It's interesting, I pulled the SD4000 off the Rolex site. Copied and overlaid it on top of itself after flipping the image. You can see the date window does not match up with the 9 o'clock marker. The date window is offset closer to the center.

[Racerdj]

I'm not bothered by the depth or size.

[Suboc]

Originally Posted by Wingman244

It's interesting, I pulled the SD4000 off the Rolex site. Copied and overlaid it on top of itself after flipping the image. You can see the date window does not match up with the 9 o'clock marker. The date window is offset closer to the center.

Could just be that the photo was not taken perfectly straight on. Very hard to say.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by belligero

.

But the fundamental issue is that their excellent date system is designed to have the distinctive magnifier fitted; it balances perfectly on every other model.

No need for an ugly Cyclops protruding from the sapphire. The crystal is fine the way it is.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

No need for an ugly Cyclops protruding from the sapphire. The crystal is fine the way it is.

Point being, the location of the date wheel is based on the cyclops, which is why it isn't balanced without the cyclops.

[cht]

Originally Posted by Suboc

Could just be that the photo was not taken perfectly straight on. Very hard to say.

Not really, it's clearly closer to the center of the dial...

I personally think it would look better i they pushed it a smidge closer to the edge to create more symmetry....but I'm not selling watched by the millions and making billions at the same time!

[Suboc]

Originally Posted by cht

Not really, it's clearly closer to the center of the dial...

I personally think it would look better i they pushed it a smidge closer to the edge to create more symmetry....but I'm not selling watched by the millions and making billions at the same time!

Clearly? I still don't see it. Time to break out the micrometer. He flipped it but included a dark area that looks to be creating a bit of an illusion. Not criticizing his mad Photoshop skills.

[tfduff723]

I can't read my SD4K date anyway without my glasses.