Sea Dweller vs Submariner

[Lexington59]

Yes yes nobody can get them without waiting 25 years etc or paying over the odds, but ignoring the obvious is there anything major to consider when choosing between the two?

SD seems less popular so perhaps is easier to obtain ? I could be wrong of course...

[rallye101]

Sea dweller for me please, I've been on the wait for a green millgauss for !? 2+ years and nothing....
Emailed the Bond St WOS 2 weeks ago for an oyster perpetual 41 and got a very prompt and polite reply asking me to come on in to " register my interest" in person...silly times
....its a bloody watch at the end of the day

[Deep]

Lexington59 said:

Yes yes nobody can get them without waiting 25 years etc or paying over the odds, but ignoring the obvious is there anything major to consider when choosing between the two?

SD seems less popular so perhaps is easier to obtain ? I could be wrong of course...

They are quite different watches due to size and thickness. You really need to try them on and see which you prefer.
I prefer the SD as I am powerfully built and find the sub, though a lovely and comfortable watch, a little small for me.

However as more people prefer the size of the sub the SD is a little easier to get from an AD.

(I'm assuming you're referring to the regular SD and not the Deep Sea...the Deep Sea's proportions are too big even for my tastes)

Good luck.

[Jamescrs]

I would go for Seadweller too given the choice. I have relatively big wrists so the size works better for me.

[andy tims]

I prefer the older models of both.

A 16600 SD was the first Rolex I bought as I preferred that look sans cyclops. I've since had a Great White SD, Red Sub & a 3 Kermits, but the 16600 has been a constant in my collection for many years.

Would be the last watch I sell.





Just perfect IMHO.

[okgo]

Should be much quicker to get SD than Sub. 6 months for me for a SD which I think is fairly unique among the dive watches. Also prefer the look of it and you see fewer of them which is nice.

[Crumpet]

I’d take the 16600 every single time. No question about it. From a time when they weren’t as flashy and were just a very nice tool watch - a lot more subtle. The Sub is maybe slightly more comfortable and the SD43 is the one to go for if you want people to know about it. It’s bordering on ‘too much’ and it rarely gets worn, I certainly wouldn’t wear it in public these days!

[Deep]

andy tims said:

I prefer the older models of both.

A 16600 SD was the first Rolex I bought as I preferred that look sans cyclops. I've since had a Great White SD, Red Sub & a 3 Kermits, but the 16600 has been a constant in my collection for many years.

Would be the last watch I sell.





Just perfect IMHO.

Looks gorgeous!

[Deep]

Crumpet said:

I’d take the 16600 every single time. No question about it. From a time when they weren’t as flashy and were just a very nice tool watch - a lot more subtle. The Sub is maybe slightly more comfortable and the SD43 is the one to go for if you want people to know about it. It’s bordering on ‘too much’ and it rarely gets worn, I certainly wouldn’t wear it in public these days!

Nice collection!

[Pflanzgarten]

16600 for me too, best watch I ever sold.

[The Moose]

I have a Sub, SD43 and Deep Sea. I like, and wear, my sub the most and then the Deep Sea. I almost never wear my SD43.