Rolex Sea Dweller
Author
Discussion

ayton 1

Original Poster:

69 posts

200 months

Friday 12th August 2011
quotequote all
Is the sea dweller a better watch than the submariner, I like both
& have seen a couple of sea dwellers for sale at less money than Subs ?

Buster73

5,630 posts

184 months

Friday 12th August 2011
quotequote all
I bought a non date sub years ago due to not liking the cyclops.

Bought my son a sd for his 21st , I like both watches but to me the sd is a little too heavy.

Personal choice is the answer , buy the one you like.

NJH

3,021 posts

240 months

Saturday 13th August 2011
quotequote all
Allegedly much rarer and of course much greater water resistance which is unlikely to be of any benefit to most ppl. I had one and the two negatives where that it sat high on my wrist and wobbled around a lot, but, crucially this was only after I started doing a lot of wrist and forearm strengthening exercises for car racing resulting in my wrists becoming much less 'flabby'. Before that it was my favourite watch by a wide margin. I was also always a bit concerned about how much the crystal sits proud of the bezel, mine had a chip on it and tbh it just seems vunerable to that sort if damage. Oh you get a nice little screwdriver which is perfect for adjusting Rolex bracelets, sounds unimportant but I have a load of standard screwdrivers and none of them fitted the bracelet screws properly.

hungry_hog

2,915 posts

219 months

Sunday 14th August 2011
quotequote all
Differences between SD (16600) and Sub (16610)

SD is thicker and heavier, this applies to the bezel, crystal (which sits slightly proud) and case
The face is very slightly smaller (I think case diameter is the same though)
No cyclops
The divers extension is more robust
SD is 1200 depth rated, Sub is 300m. Somewhat academic for most of us!
SD has helium escape valve
SD has an engraved back, which is a nice touch

Price wise - the 16610LV (green bezel) Sub and the Sea Dweller both seem to be in the 4k - 4.6k range.
A mint black Sub 16610 can be had for 4k
The no date Sub (14060) is cheaper still, a minter can be had for 3.5k. There is also a COSC rated version - the 14060M.

I went for the SD - I like the clean looks and it's less common.

Edited by hungry_hog on Sunday 14th August 00:55

kazino

1,596 posts

249 months

Sunday 14th August 2011
quotequote all
I went for the SD, primarily because I like the depth of engineering required to take a watch to that depth. Also I do the occasional dive so I like the touch they have given to the bracelet which allows it to be adjusted very easily.
I have a Omega SMP and when I switch to it, the weight of the SD really tells as the SMP feels very light in comparison. The SD is a heavy watch.
Now that I have the SD aesthetically I prefer it not having a cyclops for the date wheel to the sub.

Which one are you leaning towards?

dace

202 posts

241 months

Sunday 14th August 2011
quotequote all
I too have the SD and it is heavy, however you do get used to it. Very robust watch for sure

NJH

3,021 posts

240 months

Sunday 14th August 2011
quotequote all
I wouldn't say that roughly 145g is heavy. The thing is though the bracelet is very light so it doesn't balance it out as well as the other sports Rolex models with an oyster bracelet and oysterlock clasp. I owned an oysterquartz at the same time and amazingly the SD was only 20g heavier on my scales, I think the difference to the sub date is the same.

andy tims

5,606 posts

277 months

Sunday 14th August 2011
quotequote all
ayton 1 said:
I like both & have seen a couple of sea dwellers for sale at less money than Subs ?
SD's of similar age & condition are usually dearer than Sub Dates & quite a bit dearer than Sub ND's

NJH

3,021 posts

240 months

Sunday 14th August 2011
quotequote all
I sold mine complete set b&p but with the chip in the glass and really just about in need of a service for £3.1K about 6 months back. At the time it was easy to get a newer/fresher sub date for the same or less money.

ayton 1

Original Poster:

69 posts

200 months

Monday 15th August 2011
quotequote all
Thanks for replys guys all very helpfull, Think I am now leaning towards the Sub date as dont mind the Cyclops & would prefer the slightly lighter & slimer Sub.

Riff Raff

5,462 posts

226 months

Monday 15th August 2011
quotequote all
I've got a Sub and a SD. TBH, for me, they don't wear much differently. I don't really notice the extra weight, or the extra height. The SD has an advantage over the ordinary Sub (apart from the fact that it is more sought after) in that the deeper case back makes it sit bit higher on the wrist so the crown doesn't tend to dig into your wrist.

Fact is for me, since I bought the SD earlier this year, it gets about equal wrist time with my Tudor Heritage Chrono. The Sub has been sitting in the safe untouched for a couple of months. Others MMV.