ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
22 January 2014, 02:01 AM | #31 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Serg
Location: US of A
Watch: AP
Posts: 7,437
|
Quote:
I love it when people state personal opinion as fact.
__________________
How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat???? |
|
22 January 2014, 02:07 AM | #32 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 26,599
|
Quote:
I think the increase in dial size & legibility would have been appreciated, especially by those using the DSSD as a dive watch?
__________________
|
|
22 January 2014, 02:11 AM | #33 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Serg
Location: US of A
Watch: AP
Posts: 7,437
|
Quote:
__________________
How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat???? |
|
22 January 2014, 02:20 AM | #34 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 26,599
|
Quote:
Cant help but think Rolex could have sorted that to increase dial size while of course maintaing the critical ring lock.
__________________
|
|
22 January 2014, 02:25 AM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Real Name: Trav
Location: singapore
Watch: it
Posts: 2,316
|
every word in this thread is a personal opinion. I sold the ds after one day, that's a fact.
|
22 January 2014, 02:45 AM | #36 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Serg
Location: US of A
Watch: AP
Posts: 7,437
|
Fair enough.
__________________
How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat???? |
22 January 2014, 02:57 AM | #37 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Real Name: Trav
Location: singapore
Watch: it
Posts: 2,316
|
|
22 January 2014, 03:30 AM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: France
Posts: 114
|
Also I haven't seen a lot of watches with that kind of configuration, which makes it even more unique
|
22 January 2014, 07:12 AM | #39 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 2,205
|
Quote:
|
|
22 January 2014, 09:54 AM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 184
|
This discussion is similar to a "16610 vs 116610" or "16710 vs 116710"
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and some, like myself vary their opinion based on the model. I'll let my pictures show which version I like more. |
22 January 2014, 12:10 PM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Francisco, Ca
Watch: Oyster Perpetual
Posts: 1,629
|
For a diver , either watch is suitable.
|
23 January 2014, 04:21 AM | #42 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2012
Real Name: Rob
Location: Thousand Oaks
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 1,017
|
|
23 January 2014, 06:29 AM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: US
Watch: 1680 Red & 16622
Posts: 2,449
|
I agree. I like some features of the DSSD and it's a striking watch, but not for me. On the other hand, I'm loving the SD and have been considering picking one up!
|
23 January 2014, 11:12 AM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: TEXAS
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 7,648
|
Hands down the SD.
|
23 January 2014, 12:29 PM | #45 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas
Watch: 12800ft = 3900m
Posts: 11,173
|
Quote:
Now that is closer to fact. The Deepsea is a better watch period. Fact. It's just too big for the average Rolex purist. The Sea Dweller is a great iconic watch, with a most important feature it seems, small. Yet somehow I still read threads that say its even too heavy for some, go figure. Of course just because I say fact doesn't make it so, but one thing does....all the stats, engineering and research that went into the Deepsea has produced a better diving machine, but yeah its too big. So its a big watch, that doesn't make it inferior, and the text on the ring is a non issue, only a person looking at pictures on a screen would complain as it disappears in real life much the same as the rehaut engraving disappears in real life. I find it almost comical that anyone who has a Deepsea doesn't bad talk the Sea Dweller but just about every Sea Dweller owner has almost insulting things to say about the Deepsea as if they feel threatened in some way by the mere existence of the Deepsea. It's not the Deepsea's fault Rolex stopped producing the SD4000. It's just a watch, and that article was written by a TMZ type reporter searching for attention, who seems he doesn't know a damn thing about anything technical relating to the DS except what was written on the dial, he sounds completely immature and childish in his review, and I wish these types of stupid articles didn't find their way into our community because there was nothing informative whatsoever except what PSV wrote in the comments. Why can't people just like their watches....so weird. |
|
23 January 2014, 01:45 PM | #46 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 983
|
"...the Deepsea has none of the subtlety of the reference 16600, it will always look like it – and by association its owner – is trying just a little too hard. Like the rest of Rolex’s current line-up, it was designed for people who want to show off rather than get a job done."
Couldn't agree more.... |
23 January 2014, 02:59 PM | #47 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: California
Watch: A Rolex of course.
Posts: 1,067
|
DSSD all day
|
23 January 2014, 03:06 PM | #48 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Phong
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,718
|
Quote:
Couldn't disagree more. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.