Finally saw the new Sea-Dweller 4000

[Lew Archer]

Oh, boy. What a watch!

Definitely my favorite of the current Rolex line up of dive watches...

With regret, I handed it back to the salesman.

Oh, boy, what a watch.

[2Redbulls]

I haven't seen one in person. What makes it different?

[Mr Daytona]

It's the best sport watch made today!

[iazrollie]

It's a beautiful watch. It's like the sub date without the cyclops. However, I can't say I understand the price premium.

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by Mr Daytona

It's the best sport watch made today!

Agree 100%

[2Redbulls]

Besides the ceramic bezel are there any changes over the old sea-dweller?

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by 2Redbulls

Besides the ceramic bezel are there any changes over the old sea-dweller?

Solid center links, Glidelock clasp, 60-min gradations on bezel, matte dial, etc.

[Mick P]

Chaps

I think the Sea Dweller is the only watch that is ruined by the ceramic bezel.

It just looks vulgar with all those extra minute markings.

Mick

[Mr Daytona]

Originally Posted by iazrollie

It's a beautiful watch. It's like the sub date without the cyclops. However, I can't say I understand the price premium.

Price premium.......luxury watch.........yeah, don't even bother trying to figure that one out........

[Mr Daytona]

Originally Posted by Mick P

Chaps

I think the Sea Dweller is the only watch that is ruined by the ceramic bezel.

It just looks vulgar with all those extra minute markings.

Mick

Vulgar??? Wow that's harsh.....LMAO....

[Mick P]

Originally Posted by Mr Daytona

Vulgar??? Wow that's harsh.....LMAO....

Yes I suppose it is just a question of taste.

If is much more bulky than a ceramic sub and it just screams Rolex and appears loud due to that big black shiny bezel with all those white markings.

I prefer the older model.

Mick

[2Redbulls]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

Solid center links, Glidelock clasp, 60-min gradations on bezel, matte dial, etc.

Ah...thank you!

[GoingPlaces]

Considering the Deepsea can survive 4x greater depths and has the elaborate helium escape valve, I think the price difference is negligible. For me it's a no brainer.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by GoingPlaces

Considering the Deepsea can survive 4x greater depths and has the elaborate helium escape valve, I think the price difference is negligible. For me it's a no brainer.

In your opinion, what makes the DSSD's helium escape valve more "elaborate" than the one found on the SD4000?

[watchwatcher]

Saw my first one the other day at my AD...meh, take it or leave it.

[tkerrmd]

It's a great watch

[leicashot]

So the controversy and arguments begin, again. It's obviously 'that' good that it gets DSSD and Sub-C owners feeling insecure to the point they feel the need to spread negative comments around. Yes! I'm being serious cause there's no need to bash a 'watch'. I could say the Sub-C is too blingy and the ridiculous wide lugs are hideous, but that would be immature and stupid to say in such a way. If I felt that I would say it more nicely, like I don't have a hidden agenda.

At the end of the day, argue that this piece looks crap all you like, but it's alright in my book.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Mick P

Yes I suppose it is just a question of taste.

If is much more bulky than a ceramic sub and it just screams Rolex and appears loud due to that big black shiny bezel with all those white markings.

I prefer the older model.

Mick

C'mon Mick a black 40mm ss Rolex diver can't be vulgar. when you add colors, precious metals etc things can be different but a black ss is never vulgar c'mon

[T01]

It's a great piece

[swils8610]

I really like the thicker case and thinner lugs than on the sub.

[versatile1]

Originally Posted by leicashot

So the controversy and arguments begin, again. It's obviously 'that' good that it gets DSSD and Sub-C owners feeling insecure to the point they feel the need to spread negative comments around. Yes! I'm being serious cause there's no need to bash a 'watch'. I could say the Sub-C is too blingy and the ridiculous wide lugs are hideous, but that would be immature and stupid to say in such a way. If I felt that I would say it more nicely, like I don't have a hidden agenda.

At the end of the day, argue that this piece looks crap all you like, but it's alright in my book.

Blue dial or camera angle?

[leicashot]

Originally Posted by versatile1

Blue dial or camera angle?

Thats the sky reflecting off the matte dial....here is another angle where the dial is jet black. Either way, legibility exceeds any current Rolex diver easily.

[Wesley Crusher]

Sometimes, the SD4000 looks a bit off in pictures. If you're on the fence about this watch, you need to try it on in person. I was pleasantly surprised. It's quite a watch.

Having said that, I prefer the SubC.

[versatile1]

Originally Posted by leicashot

Thats the sky reflecting off the matte dial....here is another angle where the dial is jet black. Either way, legibility exceeds any current Rolex diver easily.

Very nice!
I have to admit, when I saw the pic of what looked like a blue dial, I thought I found a reason for a new Rolex

[datejust24]

I thought the 93160 bracelet for the 16600 sd had solid center links ?

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by datejust24

I thought the 93160 bracelet for the 16600 sd had solid center links ?

It had solid END links not solid center links.

[leicashot]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

Sometimes, the SD4000 looks a bit off in pictures. If you're on the fence about this watch, you need to try it on in person. I was pleasantly surprised. It's quite a watch.

Having said that, I prefer the SubC.

This is the way to objectively talk about a watch. Well said.

[GB-man]

It is a really nice piece! Love the satin dial. If i could have only 1...it would certainly be in contention.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by leicashot

So the controversy and arguments begin, again. It's obviously 'that' good that it gets DSSD and Sub-C owners feeling insecure to the point they feel the need to spread negative comments around. Yes! I'm being serious cause there's no need to bash a 'watch'. I could say the Sub-C is too blingy and the ridiculous wide lugs are hideous, but that would be immature and stupid to say in such a way. If I felt that I would say it more nicely, like I don't have a hidden agenda.

At the end of the day, argue that this piece looks crap all you like, but it's alright in my book.

Come on, do a bit of research before you start slagging off DSSD and subc owners. Only Mick has said he doesn't like them and he doesn't like anything. Only your reaction sounds defensive and insecure.

[leicashot]

Originally Posted by AK797

Come on, do a bit of research before you start slagging off DSSD and subc owners. Only Mick has said he doesn't like them and he doesn't like anything. Only your reaction sounds defensive.

I'm not talking about 'everyone', and my reaction 'is' defensive, and I'm not slagging off anyone. I'm merely speaking up because the negative comments are getting ridiculous. Same can be said for people bagging the Sub-C's lugs etc. Everyone who negatively talks about certain watches in 'such a manner' has an agenda to sway popularity on this forum and I decided to call it out. Like it or leave it.