Rolex Sea-Dweller 50th Anniversary Edition

Rolex Sea-Dweller 50th Anniversary Edition

Author
Discussion

Rich_AR

Original Poster:

1,958 posts

203 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all






https://www.rolex.com/watches/sea-dweller/m126600-...


Over to you!






Edited by Rich_AR on Wednesday 22 March 12:42

bobbybee

872 posts

153 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
43mm, cyclops = ruined.

It'll probably sell really well

ellroy

7,005 posts

224 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Underwhelming.

Wills2

22,666 posts

174 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
I like it but I won't like the price...

Rich_AR

Original Poster:

1,958 posts

203 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
The cyclops has ruined it for me too.

pikeyboy

2,349 posts

213 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
I like my old sea dweller because it doesn't have a Cyclops and thus isn't immediately seen as a rolex.

Mansells Tash

5,713 posts

205 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Well, given it is a 50th Anniversary watch it'll almost certainly sell well and retain high residuals. I notice the feedback is not positive on the Rolex Forums, almost universal hatred for the Cyclops...I don't quite understand that as you can have it removed if you want.

Personally I'm sold on it.

Wills2

22,666 posts

174 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
£8350 apparently, having looked at a few more images I absolutely love it.

The want is strong.


x5x3

2,422 posts

252 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Mansells Tash said:
I don't quite understand that as you can have it removed if you want.
might I ask where you got this information from please?

Animal

5,246 posts

267 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Want one! Any ideas when they'll be with dealers?

Spice_Weasel

2,286 posts

252 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
I think it's a touch big at 43mm and the cyclops is just wrong. Why nod to the red SD heritage with red writing but then add a feature that has never been a design element of the SD?

Red writing, 42mm case and no cyclops would have been the sweet spot for me and halfway between the SD4kC and the DSSD.

I'd rather have the SD4kC.

jshell

11,006 posts

204 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
x5x3 said:
Mansells Tash said:
I don't quite understand that as you can have it removed if you want.
might I ask where you got this information from please?
Normally the cyclops is easily removed, we had my wife's Datejust cyclops removed. It's only glued on. BUT, seemingly the 'dweller has anti-reflective coating under the cyclops so can't be removed without ruining watch.

Wills2

22,666 posts

174 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Very nice!







Doesn't look too thick to me, the back case should sit into your wrist like it does on the Omega 2500 PO if you choose a snug fitting.



Edited by Wills2 on Wednesday 22 March 13:07

bunglesprout

562 posts

90 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
43mm is too big for me, so no thanks. Is this running alongside to SD4K or does it replace it?

Mansells Tash

5,713 posts

205 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
jshell said:
x5x3 said:
Mansells Tash said:
I don't quite understand that as you can have it removed if you want.
might I ask where you got this information from please?
Normally the cyclops is easily removed, we had my wife's Datejust cyclops removed. It's only glued on. BUT, seemingly the 'dweller has anti-reflective coating under the cyclops so can't be removed without ruining watch.
Top Rolex trivia, I'd wait until someone on the Rolex forum tried it first wink

NickXX

1,546 posts

217 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
bunglesprout said:
43mm is too big for me, so no thanks. Is this running alongside to SD4K or does it replace it?
Replacing it I believe. I was asking about the 4K at a Rolex AD in NYC a couple of weeks ago who said it had been discontinued.

andy_s

19,397 posts

258 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
I think the cyclops is unnecessary on this considering it's an anniversary model. (I don't mind the Cyclops in its place). 43mm plus its depth is quite a chunky watch. In general I also think it's getting to be a very overpriced watch nowadays, eight thousand pounds for a pretty uncomplicated basic watch is pretty steep really, it used to be a normal albeit good watch that people dived with (I did amphibious stuff in the army back in the eighties and a lot had a sub or a seadweller), the latest models seem too over-engineered to me personally. Could say the same about a lot of things though I guess.

andy tims

5,571 posts

245 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Red text is nice, but.....

Too thick (looks to be nearing DSSD proportions), the cyclops is just wrong on an SD and with the inevitable supply issues / instant mark-up by "speculators" = A big no from me.

jshell

11,006 posts

204 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
Mansells Tash said:
jshell said:
x5x3 said:
Mansells Tash said:
I don't quite understand that as you can have it removed if you want.
might I ask where you got this information from please?
Normally the cyclops is easily removed, we had my wife's Datejust cyclops removed. It's only glued on. BUT, seemingly the 'dweller has anti-reflective coating under the cyclops so can't be removed without ruining watch.
Top Rolex trivia, I'd wait until someone on the Rolex forum tried it first wink
thumbup

Ascayman

12,732 posts

215 months

Wednesday 22nd March 2017
quotequote all
I like it, i'd buy one tomorrow if I could, I wonder what the wait / premium will be?