DSSD: History Repeating Itself

[petespendthrift]

Originally Posted by Maxseven

I'm going to insist that Rolex didn't have their Marketing Hats on when they developed the Deepsea. It is pure function over form. Name one other watch that has a depth rating even close to the Deepsea that isn't a bigger watch (relative to 40mm).

Come on - stop fooling yourself! It's the solution to a problem that never existed. If they had function in mind it would have a depth rating that in some way relates to real world use but the fact is that mechanical dive watches are now obsolete for professional saturation divers.

The only reason to make it be able to go that deep is owner bragging rights and because they wanted to make it big. What you own is a beautifully made object of desire but it is no more useful than the old Sea Dweller and likely (because I'm willing to guess that you are not a Sat Diver) no more useful to you than a Datejust.

[Maxseven]

Originally Posted by petespendthrift

The only reason to make it be able to go that deep is owner bragging rights and because they wanted to make it big. What you own is a beautifully made object of desire but it is no more useful than the old Sea Dweller and likely (because I'm willing to guess that you are not a Sat Diver) no more useful to you than a Datejust.

I agree with your above statements. Rolex's efforts with the Deepsea are completely about "bragging rights", as it is with all Rolex watches. I think the extreme depth rating is similar to having diamonds on a watch - not useful, but definitely a brag.

All I say is, that in order to meet the depth rating, the watch case/crystal dimensions have been designed for function (going deep!), and are not cosmetic or driven by marketing for big watches.

If Rolex ever produces a ~43mm x 17.5mm (or larger) Daytona or DJ, I will stand corrected.

Wait! The Yachtmaster II is 44mm???? But how thick is it?