Ball-Bearing Rotation System for Deep Sea Bezel?

[Tempo]

Does Promo material state if its Deep Sea Dweller's Bezel rotates using the smoother new ball bearing system of the GMT IIC?

Reason I ask is because the Deep Sea's Bezel is unidirectional, unlike the GMT IIC. Did Rolex manage to adapt the ball bearing system for unidirectional bezels? If not, is Rolex reverting to the old ratchet and spring system in the old subs and SD's to maintain unidirectionality?

Thanks!

[Nigel Tufnel]

I don't see how it would be possible to have a unidirectional dive timer without a ratchet mechanism. In fact, at least on my SD, I wouldn't want to change the bezel one bit, as it is very crisp, precise and exact (better than that of a Submariner, IMHO). When I had a GMT Master (16750), I could understand why a smoother operating bezel would be nice, but its purpose is completely different than that of a dive watch.

But to directly answer your question, I have not seen any literature for the DSSD.

[colemanitis]

I bet Bo can answer your question. He's methodically researched this watch and already has his money tucked away waiting for the day it's available!

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Thanks, Jeff, but I've not seen pics of the SDDS bezel construction, yet. Judging from the video on Rolex, however, it does seem to have a ratcheting system but with 60 clicks, not 120 like on the conventional SD (and Sub Date).

[Tempo]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

Thanks, Jeff, but I've not seen pics of the SDDS bezel construction, yet. Judging from the video on Rolex, however, it does seem to have a ratcheting system but with 60 clicks, not 120 like on the conventional SD (and Sub Date).

Thanks, Bo, Nigel and Jeff.

I don't actually mind the way my SD bezel rotates, but I do find the feel of the GMT IIC bezel to be more slick, more effortless, smoother and less crude, as it turns on ball bearings.

I had assumed that the ceramic bezel on the Deep Sea implied a ball bearing system, like in the GMT IIC. This would seem to be in line with the overall design philosophy for Deep Sea to incorporate Rolex's newest technology. Can anyone confirm this?

Perhaps the reduction from 120 to 60 clicks indicates the use of a ball bearing bezel rotation system. I appreciate Jeff's point about the Bezel having to be precise for diving purposes. Hopefully, precision does not have to come at the expense of slickness.

The other question is if the Deep Sea uses Paraflex absorbers instead of traditional KIF. Does Paraflex offer improved performance over KIF?

Thanks.

[sheldonsmith]

There might be some info imbedded in this patent .pdf file...

http://www.minus4plus6.com/pdf/GMTII-SUBBezel.pdf

-Sheldon

[WatchTimes]

I do not think the ball-bearing would be an option in the new DSSD with the pressure ratings....

[Tempo]

Thanks for your replies, folks. Looks like official information about this is hard to come by. Hope it won't remain one of the mysteries of the Deep.

For those who physically handled the Deep Sea dummy mock ups, did the bezel movement feel smoother than that of the SD and Sub?

For those, like Bo, already planning to buy the Deep Sea, would it make a difference if the DSSD Bezel rotation were still based on the old ratchet and spring system?

Would Bezel rotation that is more refined, yet more definite, be a major clinching point for potential buyers?

[vjb.knife]

The bearing detent system of the GMTIIC could easily be made unidirectional. so it is certainly possible that a version of it is on the DSSD. It does work much smoother and easier than the old models. I have a Kobold that has a ball detent click system and it is unidirectional.

Originally Posted by JYogi

I do not think the ball-bearing would be an option in the new DSSD with the pressure ratings....

This has nothing to do with the depth rating of the case so I don't understand what you could possibly be getting at here.

ANOTHER QUOTE FROM A FORUMER:
In fact, at least on my SD, I wouldn't want to change the bezel one bit, as it is very crisp, precise and exact (better than that of a Submariner, IMHO).

This I don't understand either as they are the same other than the profile of the bezel.

[Tempo]

Vince (and other pros), do you think the improved specs of the Deep Sea Dweller have sufficient practical relevance for professional divers to want to wear it to work?

Will it win a measure of the street (or sea) credibility in pro circles attained by the Sub and SD?

That would make it all the more thrilling to own for folks who only dive vicariously.

The view from the trenches (underwater ones, that is) that you bring adds a whole new dimension to these discussions!