Sea dweller, is it worth the money?

[Anthon]

Originally Posted by SC11

Yep there's nothing he can do it the AR would be visible!

Only way to do it is with a crystal swap off a 114060.

AR-coatings can be polished off.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by eco8gator

It accounts for a problem that a Sat Diver can experience. Truthfully the most my watch will experience regarding water is washing my hands, shower and the pool.

This is a technology refined with COMEX...yeah its an additional thing that might fail but how many of them have actually caused an issue for us normal folks. I don't have any issues with it.

So yes the watch has a better depth rating, it has accommodations for SAT diving applications, and it comes with no Cyclops by design.

Personally I think Seiko's SAT diver design (the TUNA) is much nicer than the Rolex Design. They invented an L seal that significantly reduces the rate that He atoms can make it past the seal. They also designed a case with only 2 holes vs 3 in the Rolex Sub and 4 in the SD. If you consider the Spring Drive variant and the fact that I has a much more accurate movement than the Rolex one could say that the watch is superior in all aspects with the logic that simpler is better...it just doesn't have the status associated with it.

Spring drive is advertised at +/- 1spd Rolex at 2 +/- spd in a true mechanical. I would say the Rolex is impressively accurate...

[sensui]

In all seriousness....in short....,yeah it's worth it to me. The only subs I'd buy are the LV and the no date for the balanced dial. Slim wrap around lugs, lack of cyclops, indexed bezel and overall a more comfortable watch balance wise (comparing to my LVc) makes it worthy to me.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by breitlings

Spring drive is advertised at +/- 1spd Rolex at 2 +/- spd in a true mechanical. I would say the Rolex is impressively accurate...

pfffft! I had a Spring Drive which gained a second in two months. They are way more accurate than mechanicals, for obvs reasons.

On a wider note, more humans have walked on the Moon than dived below 300m. And no diver these days would rely on a watch, they all use dive computers, so the "tool watch" motif is bogus.

[Dr. Robert]

How comfy is the new sea dweller, 116600 versus the previous model, 16600?

[Ferdelious]

Yes it is.

[eco8gator]

I owned a Spring Drive watch and I can also claim experiencing about 1s drift in a months time...amazing technology. And from what I read its movement is resilient to shocks and magnet field.

[eco8gator]

In regards to comfort they feel the same to me.

I do prefer the 16600 since the lug shape just looks better to me...they really beefed up the 116600...they took a hammer and made a bigger hammer.

[Kippers]

I have the SD4K. Wanted a dive watch and this one was perfect. I have the GMT BLNR which is basically a Subc but not as thick. If I try to imagine the BLNR as a diver I would say that it doesn't have the presence or heft I would want in a diver even though a GMT or even a DJ could be used as a diver.









NB. Just realised something freaky, 1st and 3rd pics were taken 4 months apart but on the same date in the month and almost to the same second of day!
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

[Coincollector]

This Is one I have for now I'm thinking the sea dweller but leaning more now on a Daytona

[Thatguy]

Originally Posted by Hollister

And no diver these days would rely on a watch, they all use dive computers, so the "tool watch" motif is bogus.

I would disagree with this. I wear my sub diving as a backup and it came in quite handy when my computer flooded during a dive.
A lot of divers have a mechanical watch as backup.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Glidelock]

I own both and will tell you that after a year with my SDC4K, it absolutely dominates the wrist time on my rotation! So....that should give you an idea of my opinion!

[japenney]

Basically, the sea dweller does not hold its value near as well as the submariner. I would buy second hand if possible to reduce depreciation. I would also do this with models like the explorer 2 and milgauss. I would not let this discourage you from purchasing a SD. It is significantly more comfortable than the submariner with its lower caseback. It also looks more aesthetically pleasing IMO because it has more tapered lugs and looks less blocky. It is an amazing watch and differentiates itself from the more common submariner. It can be a great conversation piece. I highly rrcommend this watch. Good luck.

Josh

[Ckci]

Love the looks of the 4k. I went w DSSD blue but I really like the 4k a lot.

[Sfbrian]

To each their own. Do what works for you. I saved for 15 years to get my first Rolex. Honestly always wanted a Sea Dweller but could not justify the price. Went to the AD with the wife intending to buy a sub c date. Tried on all of them, sub date, no date, and SD. In the end, wife laughed and said "I see why you love the Sea Dweller, F-it. Get the watch your going to love forever just like how you love me".

[Sfbrian]

SD4K on my wrist now and probably until I die.

[jschmidtdmd]

I just picked one up this week for the summer. I have been through 2 dssds and just decided this was the better piece for me. I had a pre ceramic one and sold it, and am very happy to have the ceramic back in the collection. I like how it sits higher on the wrist and for me, it will beat out my SS subs any day of the week.

[LostInTime]

Originally Posted by Sfbrian

To each their own. Do what works for you. I saved for 15 years to get my first Rolex. Honestly always wanted a Sea Dweller but could not justify the price. Went to the AD with the wife intending to buy a sub c date. Tried on all of them, sub date, no date, and SD. In the end, wife laughed and said "I see why you love the Sea Dweller, F-it. Get the watch your going to love forever just like how you love me".

Great story, man. Huge congrats on focusing and saving that long to get what you wanted, I hope you enjoy the hell out of your watch over the next 15 years. Bigger congrats on having a great relationship with your wife.

[Oscarpapa]

Originally Posted by Mick P

Coincollector

I penned this for another posting a few months ago, but in my humble opinion, it sums up the pros and cons of each model.




Sub v Sub Date v Sea Dweller, herewith are my humble comments that possibly state the obvious, however I do so in a spirit of helpfulness and counsel.

The Sea Dweller is the most water tight and goes down to great depths. If you are physically capable of going down 4000 ft and need reminding of the date, this is the watch for you. It has a date function but no cyclops, which is good for looking cool but bad if you are short sighted. Also it is the most bulky of the 3 watches, so some people will think you must be someone important to wear such a big watch whilst others will think you are a poseur.

The Sub is the coolest looking of the 3 watches and you can use it to dive down to about 1000 ft (depending on if its a recent model). When you are in the casino, women will drool over you because they can see you don't have to keep looking at the thing just to remind yourself what the date is. Women admire men who can remember the date.

The Sub Date is the most popular of the three because you can dive down to about 1000ft and easily read the date thanks to the Cyclops.

All three watches are truly tool watches and have a loyal following of devotees who can never make their mind up which one is the best.

I wear a Sub Date purely because it was a good deal when I bought it.

As regards to which one is the best, I would say that depends on how you use it and here you must be honest with yourself.

If you buy these expensive, highly water tight watches just to splash about in the pool or for the occasional snorkel dive, the Sub or Sub date is your best bet.

If you have the ability to remember what day it is, opt for the Sub, if you need to constantly look at the date, go for the Sub Date so you can see that it is the 28th when you are halfway to the bottom of the pool.

If you are a tough guy and one of the 0.00000001% who will be going down 4000 ft, then the Sea Dweller is the one for you.

Of course, if you actually do go down to 4000 ft, there is a good chance that you may be attacked by man eating sharks and if you are really unfortunate, you will also be eaten by the shark who will digest you and will shit you out as nature intended.

The main advantage of the Sea Dweller now comes into its own. It will be shat out with you and will sink, intact and ticking, to the bottom of the ocean and will lie and remain water tight on the ocean floor, gently ticking away, thanks to the ocean currents, as an ever lasting memorial to you.

I hope that helps.

Regards

Mick

Great post and alot true, even allowing for the tongue in cheek. Haha.

[Mfrankel2]

Originally Posted by Thatguy

I would disagree with this. I wear my sub diving as a backup and it came in quite handy when my computer flooded during a dive.
A lot of divers have a mechanical watch as backup.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If diving is multi day (or even multi dives on one day) the only real back up is two computers; both going on all dives. Once you're into a multi dive, multi level profile, you're going to have a pretty hard time converting back to any sort of analog tables. I do wear my watch under water; mostly because when traveling it's safer there than anywhere else but also because it's easier than pushing buttons to see what time it is (OK, and maybe to take an UW wrist shot?)

[Mfrankel2]

Originally Posted by Sfbrian

To each their own. Do what works for you. I saved for 15 years to get my first Rolex. Honestly always wanted a Sea Dweller but could not justify the price. Went to the AD with the wife intending to buy a sub c date. Tried on all of them, sub date, no date, and SD. In the end, wife laughed and said "I see why you love the Sea Dweller, F-it. Get the watch your going to love forever just like how you love me".

Great wife!

[WhyMe]

Not sure if SD worth extra money, but I wanted to get SD, so I had to pay more to get it.

[mapalfa]

Originally Posted by Mfrankel2

If diving is multi day (or even multi dives on one day) the only real back up is two computers; both going on all dives. Once you're into a multi dive, multi level profile, you're going to have a pretty hard time converting back to any sort of analog tables. I do wear my watch under water; mostly because when traveling it's safer there than anywhere else but also because it's easier than pushing buttons to see what time it is (OK, and maybe to take an UW wrist shot?)

I agree on the two computers point, especially if your regular buddy's one runs a different algorithm, but I always do a quick backwards check from the computer's time to clear nitrogen loading and tables so I know what my max bottom time would be if I have a computer failure on a subsequent dive.

Then again I'm one of those divers who has a set of laminated tables in my BCD and pre-plans all my dives using v-planner


On the original question, I'd say that they're quite different watches. The Sub (date or non-date) is clearly a Rolex at a glance. The SD looks far more like a generic diver's watch due to the lack of cyclops and bezel design.

Try them both and see which you prefer. It's pointless worrying about a grand at this level of spending if, by saving a little bit, you end up with a watch you're not totally happy with.

[brookish]

The dial without the cyclops is nicer

[chloebear]

Originally Posted by Sfbrian

To each their own. Do what works for you. I saved for 15 years to get my first Rolex. Honestly always wanted a Sea Dweller but could not justify the price. Went to the AD with the wife intending to buy a sub c date. Tried on all of them, sub date, no date, and SD. In the end, wife laughed and said "I see why you love the Sea Dweller, F-it. Get the watch your going to love forever just like how you love me".

I love this post! As much as we spend on watches you may as well get the one that looks the best or you'll be flipping it before long.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by japenney

It is significantly more comfortable than the submariner with its lower caseback.

If only that were true! Quite the opposite in my experience. I love it anyways.

[waterman1]

Probably depends on wrist shape but I agree SD is more comfortable than sub due to lower caseback lifting crown off of wrist.

[strafer_kid]

Originally Posted by Pmt2

The Subc is a very special Piece. I was comparing these two watches today and I couldn't make the trade. The 114060 is a keeper.

Would agree. Picked up the SDc on its release and despite being an SD guy (16600 and all that), I just never took to it - ended up flipping it. Anyway went for the SubC and really like it!

[fishingbear]

I love mine. I bought it when they first came available and now you can get them discounted from our trusted sellers. Do it

[jschmidtdmd]

^agreed. For what they cost now, it's a good value IMO.