New Submariner LV
Discussion
LukeBird said:
ShadownINja said:
I have absolutely no idea what you lot are talking about? Not even one picture posted. Bloomin' forum noobs!
New - 
Old-
At the moment, the 'new shape' Ceramic Sub is only available in gold/bi-metal, the Stainless version is yet to be released.
The difference people don't like (and it is very noticeable when you look, the photos don't do the difference justice, is in the shape around the lugs. The new one is much chunkier and looks very heavy-handed; it also has the added effect of making the bracelet look small.
I personally don't like it; tried on an 'old' Sub LV the other day at an AD that had the new ones in, they looked ghastly in comparison.
OK before someone shoots me down, yes I do have a Sea Dweller, but when I started commercial diving, there was not much else around, and at £200 it was a steal. They do look good though.
el stovey said:
cyberface said:
The splendidly hilarious thing is that the all-stainless version of the new Sub is already available as a replica before Rolex have released it.
Do they have the ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX around the inside of the case like the GMTs?AFAIK all the models now have ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX and the Serial Number (at 6 o' clock) on the rehaut.
Incredible Sulk said:
Here it is without the linky.
As a 16610LV wearer, all I can say is 'Fark me, that is ugly.' Matches the rest of the Rolex range as updated. IMHO. They've gone off their collective trollies. Bracelets which are a thing of understated beauty look way too thin with these new chunky cases.
That screams "Invicta". As a 16610LV wearer, all I can say is 'Fark me, that is ugly.' Matches the rest of the Rolex range as updated. IMHO. They've gone off their collective trollies. Bracelets which are a thing of understated beauty look way too thin with these new chunky cases.
Vipers said:
but most commercial divers do not wear their Rolex's in the water.
OK before someone shoots me down, yes I do have a Sea Dweller, but when I started commercial diving, there was not much else around, and at £200 it was a steal. They do look good though.
There are quite a few commercial divers (and one of them said about what his friends wear as well) over on TZ that wear 'proper' divers' watches while doing commercial dives. Sea-Dwellers, Plo-profs, DSSD, SMPs that sort of thing.OK before someone shoots me down, yes I do have a Sea Dweller, but when I started commercial diving, there was not much else around, and at £200 it was a steal. They do look good though.
I appreciate that may not be a common occurrence though!
Oh and as you paid £200 for that SD, I'll give you £500, can't say fairer than that!
It's gorgeous by the way; just stunning...!!
Incredible Sulk said:
el stovey said:
Do they have the ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX around the inside of the case like the GMTs?
There are some replicas out there that have the engraved rehauts.AFAIK all the models now have ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX and the Serial Number (at 6 o' clock) on the rehaut.
I can't imagine there would be any replicas without, it'd be so obvious that they weren't the real thing. As cyberface said they look basically identical to the real thing so are now disguising other parts to make them near enough indistinguishable.
As mentioned, a shame Rolex hadn't worked on the movement and done a few other things to the 'new' Sub. They've in essence done not a great deal and will no doubt whack a big price-rise on it...
CommanderJameson said:
Seeing the shape of things Rolex to come has only strengthened my conviction that the Rolex I want to own one day is the 16600 Sea Dweller.
[pic]http://www.dream-watch.com/pic/Rolex/SeaDweller-
16600-8a.jpg[/pic]
Do it! I bought one last Saturday and it just looks and feels so right.
>starts saving 10p pieces<
[pic]http://www.dream-watch.com/pic/Rolex/SeaDweller-
16600-8a.jpg[/pic]
Do it! I bought one last Saturday and it just looks and feels so right.
>starts saving 10p pieces<
Edited by CommanderJameson on Saturday 20th March 16:28
LukeBird said:
There are quite a few commercial divers (and one of them said about what his friends wear as well) over on TZ
Oh and as you paid £200 for that SD, I'll give you £500, can't say fairer than that!
It's gorgeous by the way; just stunning...!!
Whats TZ by the way, and is £500 you best offer? Oh and as you paid £200 for that SD, I'll give you £500, can't say fairer than that!
It's gorgeous by the way; just stunning...!!
Just wish I had brought a bunch of them back in 76, personally I think for what they do, they are overpriced, a lot of the later day commercial divers wear Seiko's.But always nice to sit offshore with the "Mature" divers, and look at each wearing his Rolex at the dinner table, what other occupation would you see so many Rolex.s
Edited by Vipers on Saturday 20th March 20:58
Vipers said:
Whats TZ by the way, and is £500 you best offer? Just wish I had brought a bunch of them back in 76, personally I think for what they do, they are overpriced, a lot of the later day commercial divers wear Seiko's.
But always nice to sit offshore with the "Mature" divers, and look at each wearing his Rolex at the dinner table, what other occupation would you see so many Rolex.s
TZ is a watch forum, found here. Just wish I had brought a bunch of them back in 76, personally I think for what they do, they are overpriced, a lot of the later day commercial divers wear Seiko's.But always nice to sit offshore with the "Mature" divers, and look at each wearing his Rolex at the dinner table, what other occupation would you see so many Rolex.s
£500 is more than doubling your money!
Is yours a matte dial 1665? I must get around to buying a 16610 at some point, just don't have the cash knocking around (because I spend it on other bloody watches!!
) at the moment. cyberface said:
The crown guards were always the first tell on replica Subs, but the new one has very regular crown guards and the replica is identical...
(not condoning anything here, so no flames please)
Its an interesting point, one of the biggest things I like about the SD is that the crown sits very high in the case. This takes it a long way away from the wrist one of the benefits being that it never digs into the back of my hand or wrist. There is a good reason for this and its described in that link I gave to the 3135 movement, despite being 6mm thick the crown axis is literally right under the dial and has its own bridge. To see just how big a difference this makes look at the Marathon SAR powered as it is by a common ETA movement, its a similar thickness to an SD/sub and has a similarily chunky crown but I just couldn't wear the thing as the crown was always digging into my wrist. (not condoning anything here, so no flames please)
..Picture linked from Chris Hoopers site, its a normal sub the crown high in the case effect is much more pronounced looking on the SD. On the SD the crown guards are clearly asymmetrical in that the cutout for the crown is narrower at the bottom then the top as the crown sits so high. In that SAR v sub comparison look carefully at the height of the top of the case rather then bezel, and also note that on the SAR the crystal is lower then the bezel so there is very little difference between the 'real' thickness of the 2 watches. I have a similar problem with SMP's just can't get on with them, its important point to make as most common ETA powered watches have this same problem as the position of the crown is pretty much determined by the movement and how thick everything else is i.e. you can only get the crown higher in the case by making a really chunky watch. Now though we have a situation with this latest sub where the case looks much thicker and the crown seems to sit more or less in the middle of the case. It would be interesting to take some measurements and see if this key IMHO feature of the Rolex design is still present or not, as its still a 3135 movement I guess it must be but its just not at all apparent or so obvious as it was with the older case designs.
el stovey said:
cyberface said:
The splendidly hilarious thing is that the all-stainless version of the new Sub is already available as a replica before Rolex have released it.
Do they have the ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX around the inside of the case like the GMTs?I'd have liked to see Rolex do something a little bit more innovative because the replica chaps have shown that a watch of that design and specification can be made for a few hundred dollars, not a few thousand (and the replicas I'm talking about are just as waterproof as the Rolex genuines).
The case isn't as elegant as the previous model, but the bracelet is far superior. The fine adjustment mechanism on the clasp *is* innovative design - shame it hasn't extended to the rest of the watch (I don't really consider the ceramic bezel a huge leap forward - as noted, the replica guys seem to be able to make ceramic bezels identically to Rolex so the technology can't be *that* esoteric).
But I suppose for Rolex, the steel Sub is a massive cash cow, virtually everyone has one (well, exaggeration, but in the City it's a crazily popular watch, an almost 'de facto' choice) and making radical changes would be risky...
cyberface said:
I'd have liked to see Rolex do something a little bit more innovative because the replica chaps have shown that a watch of that design and specification can be made for a few hundred dollars, not a few thousand
Christ I am bored of hearing this same s
te every week from you. I don't go around slagging JLC for making fragile movements or Omega for bracelets held together with push pins etc so why do you have to slag off Rolex at every opportunity?NJH said:
cyberface said:
I'd have liked to see Rolex do something a little bit more innovative because the replica chaps have shown that a watch of that design and specification can be made for a few hundred dollars, not a few thousand
Christ I am bored of hearing this same ste every week from you. I don't go around slagging JLC for making fragile movements or Omega for bracelets held together with push pins etc so why do you have to slag off Rolex at every opportunity?te every week? FFS wind it back in. Selective quoting at its worst. The next sentence after that praised Rolex for their new bracelet design, which I consider the best of any bracelet I've seen.I'm not slagging off Rolex. I find it irritating that the counterfeiters are doing such a job of copying Rolex to the last detail, and it means that many people automatically consider a Rolex wearer as possibly wearing a fake. This annoys me. That's why I owned a Daytona, because the counterfeiters haven't got *that* one right yet, and because it's a great looking watch. Only the lack of date irritated me.
I'm hardly a Rolex hater. I've owned and worn Rolexes for years. If you want to interpret my words thusly, go ahead, but you're wrong.
cyberface said:
I find it irritating that the counterfeiters are doing such a job of copying Rolex to the last detail, and it means that many people automatically consider a Rolex wearer as possibly wearing a fake. This annoys me. That's why I owned a Daytona, because the counterfeiters haven't got *that* one right yet, and because it's a great looking watch. Only the lack of date irritated me.
I'm hardly a Rolex hater. I've owned and worn Rolexes for years. If you want to interpret my words thusly, go ahead, but you're wrong.
Rolex just might be the most popular luxury watch in the world, so of course the counterfeit market will be quick to keep up with them (and even overtake them!). As for pricing, Rolex are taking the biscuit now, but that doesn't mean that counterfeiters arent using extortionately cheap labour to design and manufacture their wares.I'm hardly a Rolex hater. I've owned and worn Rolexes for years. If you want to interpret my words thusly, go ahead, but you're wrong.
aeropilot said:
olly2000 said:
The thing I like about my LV is that its a doddle to change the green metal bezel to black thus making a funky "maxi dial" version of the sub....the new LV means you have to really like green
Are you saying changing the bezel is a DIY job on a Sub....?Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff