12 Yrs of Rolex Divers and why the SubC Won (after multiple Subs, SD, DSSD & SD43)

[moby33]

I’m writing this lengthy 12 year summary of my search for the perfect diver in hopes that my journey might help to clear up some common questions that others might be wrestling with. It took me that many years and a bunch of watch flipping to finally realize why the Pros & Cons of every watch eventually led me to the SubC.

Let me begin by saying I grew up loving watches, but wasn’t a fan of Rolex (don’t shoot me, I eventual came around). When I was in high school in the early 90’s, I drove to a local jeweler and asked to see a Tag chrono. The owner smiled and asked if I’d ever held an Omega SMP300 chrono…when I reported I hadn’t and didn’t really know about them, he let me try one on. “Son, the Tag is fine, but if you want to experience a watch at another level, just hold the Omega, try the pushers and tell me what you think.” I was hooked and instantly became an Omega Man (well, at that time more like a zit faced 16 yr old Omega kid).

I longed for that watch for the rest of HS and all through college; after graduation I deployed as a newly commission officer in the Navy and saved enough to buy my beloved SMP300 Chrono for at that time around $2K. It was ALL the money in the world to me, but I loved that watch (and still own it) and didn’t take it off my wrist for over five years. In 2003 my brother got married and his bride purchased him the only watch he ever wanted – a Rolex Sub 16610. I remember holding that watch next to my SMP and thinking, “Wow, this is a toy. The head feels nice, but the bracelet is thin & light, the clasp feels cheap and the watch overall didn’t feel substantial at all.” My lack of interest in Rolex was only strengthened.

Then around 2005 I started really getting into trying different watches. I purchased a number of different Breitlings, Bell&Ross, Omega, a number of micro-brands, dozens of vintage & new Seiko divers…all except Rolex. But then in 2006 it hit me, “I’m a watch lover…I can’t bash Rolex unless I actually give them a try for long-term review.” So I set out to determine once and for all why Rolex divers have been so loved for so long.

Naturally I wanted something a little different, the Sub was just “too common”, so I researched and fell in love w/ the Sea-Dweller history. I purchased a 2006 16600 online, no test fit. When the watch arrived I was so excited, I tried it on and was blown away at just how tiny it looked and felt on my wrist. I was in my late 20’s, had been wearing 42-44mm chrono’s daily, so the 40mm SD with slim lugs just seemed small. The SD’s crystal had the effect of making the dial look even smaller, even more reason to make the watch seem extremely small on my wrist. I was willing to give it some time and maybe that little voice would change in my head, but in walks my wife and hit the final nail in the proverbial coffin:

“Hey honey, what do you think of my new watch?”

“Seriously? That looks like a girl’s watch on your wrist…why so small?”

Damnit…no way I was going to get that comment (and my own doubt) out of my head. But alas, I had to give it some time. I also wasn’t thrilled with the tiny thin clasp. Coming from an Omega SMP with a wide metal bracelet and zero taper, it was a real shock to wear the tapered band and thin clasp. ‘Kids watch’ kept coming into my head. But a funny thing happened after a few weeks of wearing that SD…I eventually started to enjoy the feel of it. And there was no denying the quality of the watch. The head felt solid and the timekeeping was perfect. And that funny taper of the band?...it started to grow on me too to the point when I put on my beloved Omega, I started to think its wide band was cumbersome and not a clean design. What? This Rolex made me start to question some of the design features of my glorious Omega…how can this be?

I couldn’t get the small look on my wrist (nor the small markers and hands w/ their limited lume) out of my head. I never take my watch off at night and actually use the lume to tell time nightly, so the SD just wasn’t cutting it for me.

That’s when I discovered the SubLV and that glorious new thing called “Maxi-Dial”. So the SD was swapped for the LV and my love for the watch grew even more. But, it wasn’t perfect…as the green just wasn’t for me as a daily color choice. So yes, can you believe I sourced a genuine Rolex black metal insert and researched how to pop out the green LV insert in order to go black? Yep…I was probably one of the only guys running around with a FrankenLV simply because I wanted the look of a classic black Sub, but the better lume of the LV markers and hands. It was now around 2007 and I decided to start reading and sharing stores on this new to me forum called TheRolexForums.

Then Baselworld 2008 hit and the glorious Deepsea was debuted. WOW…I was hooked. A bigger watch to meet my 7.75” wrists and this new Glidelock clasp…it seemed like the perfect watch. I purchased one about a year later and fell in love. I was now in my early 30’s and still enjoyed big divers as my daily watch, and the DSSD was so good I didn’t take it off for over two years. Yep…if you search you’ll see threads I posted back then when I would dive with it, I would snow ski with it, I would boat with it…I did EVERYTHING w/ the DSSD. People reported too think? Nah, it’s fine…you just need bigger wrists. People reported 44mm (actually, back then Rolex called it 43mm if you recall) was “too big” and how the 40mm SD & Sub was “perfect”. Really? What is perfect? I debated others as we’ve all done on this forum. It was a fun time, I enjoyed my watch and getting to know people here.

But a little over 2 years and shortly after Baselworld 2010, something clicked with me (almost overnight). I started to see flaws in the DSSD and couldn’t get it out of my head. The inner chapter ring started to really annoy me…not because of the writing (in person you really don’t see the writing like you do in pics), but due to its size, it really started to make the dial look too small to my eyes when you considered the massive case. And all of a sudden, the thickness started to annoy me. I wouldn’t say it was uncomfortable for me at that time; it just started to let me know it was there? And being a watch addict, I would be lying if I didn’t admit I was very interested in the new SubC w/ those cool looking fat lugs that came out that same year. Many people bashed it back then (and still today), but to me, I thought the maxi-case was a HUGE improvement simply because it did make it look ‘less elegant’. And now the Sub finally had a clasp worthy of the watch (after two years with the DSSD Glidelock, I was hooked and realized there was no way I could sport a watch without micro-adjustment). So I flipped the DSSD and purchased a SubC.

At first it took some getting used to…there’s no mistaking when you go from a DSSD to a SubC as a daily watch. The watch was light, thin and I hardly even felt it. When I looked down at my wrist, it definitely looked smaller, yet strange thing is when you looked at it on the wrist via a mirror, it really didn’t look that much smaller. I was shocked at how this 40mm watch could appear so much bigger on the wrist. I would swap out my 42mm Omega and again, via the mirror test, the 40mm maxi-cased SubC looked identical to the 42mm Omega. The more I tried to convince myself this wasn’t really the case, the more I couldn’t deny it. I wasn’t complaining, I was just shocked at how much different it looked compared to the 40mm SD I owned a few short years previously. Lugs make all the difference on the Sub.

And so I wore that SubC for almost 3 years and thought, “This is it, I’ve found the ultimate 1-watch that can do it all…” but come on, we all know how that ends. Around year four of SubC ownership that little voice started to chime in, “You know, this watch is too small for your fat wrists, don’t you miss your DSSD?” I couldn’t get it out of my head, so I sold the SubC and bought another DSSD. At first I was in love, but I quickly realized the thickness of the DSSD wasn’t comfortable. I was now in my late 30’s and obviously not the early 20’s ‘kid’ that would wear 45mm wide, 18mm thick watches and think they were fine. Was pushing 40 years old finally changing how I felt about comfort and what I would & wouldn’t stand for on a daily basis? Maybe.

The second DSSD didn’t last very long, and since I knew I wouldn’t want it long-term, I sold it around 2016…and from then until not too long ago, I had no Rolex divers in my collection/rotation. But not a big deal as I started to follow the rumors of Basel 2017 and had a feeling something special was coming regarding the SD. And sure enough, when the Sea-Dweller 43mm was debuted I was knocked over. Rolex had FINALLY built the perfect watch for me. Larger than 40mm, but not overly so. Not as thick as the DSSD, cyclops (yes, I’m in the camp that likes the cyclops for actually reading the date which I do all the time) and considering the history of how Rolex tried to put a cyclops on the original SD, I wasn’t offended that they finally did it (so what if it took them 50 years to accomplish?). The red lettering – nice cherry on the top.

So I waited, and waited and waited…I don’t even want to go into the pains of trying to get one. Eventually I secured the SD43 (in early Aug) and the minute I put it on, I could tell – “This is it!” Right away it felt more substantial than the SubC, but by no means on par w/ the DSSD in the weight category. I agree with those that have stated the SD43 wears more like a big SubC as opposed to a little DSSD. I wore that watch quite a bit for the first 30 days, but I couldn’t believe it, I started to think about the SubC! What?!?! Are you kidding me little voice, how can you be asking about the SubC again? You’ve given it up multiple times for a bigger watch, it’s time I admit I can’t wear 40mm and be happy – right?

Well maybe it’s because I’m now in my early 40’s and no longer the young pup I use to be, but comfort has quickly taken the first position when it comes to watch criteria. But I didn’t want to give up the SD43 without a head-to-head comparison. So I purchased yet another SubC and put them in rotation…with hopes of going at least 30 days before making a decision. But it only took two days…after 48 hours of wearing the SubC I knew it was the winner. When I woke in the morning w/ the SD43 on my wrist I always felt it, not so with the SubC. When I chased my little kids, I felt the SD43, not so with the SubC. I like to wear my watches on bracelets a little loose…something I can do with comfort w/ the SubC, but with the SD43 I quickly learned it moved too much and definitely let me know it was there. Unlike the DSSD, which started to actually annoy due to the weight & thickness, the SD43 doesn’t annoy, but it does let you know it’s there. Not so with the SubC. I’ve been telling my watch friends lately, the only way I could justify keeping the SD43 is if I were constantly putting it in rotation. But alas, I’m a 1-Rolex diver kind of guy…I just can’t justify tying up so much $$$ in multiple similar watches. So for me, considering my 12+ years of multiple diver models and all the criteria, when it comes down to a single watch winner, it has to be the SubC. The SD43 was recently sold, and I have no regrets.

In the end the look on my wrist was almost identical (again, chock it up to those crazy fat lugs of the SubC)…yet the comfort level isn’t close…the SubC simply dominates. And because of this, I can FINALLY embrace this final SubC purchase and stop looking for others. At least until Rolex drops the 3235 movement in the next Sub…then the madness will continue! Thanks for reading…hopefully this helps 1 or 2 people that might be on the fence which is best for them. Good luck!

SD43 vs SubC


SD43 on wrist


SubC on wrist

[HogwldFLTR]

Looks great on your wrist. The 114060 didn't due well on my 6.5in wrist as it felt large to me. I personally love the smaller foot print on 116600. Glad you got something that works for you.

[moby33]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Looks great on your wrist. The 114060 didn't due well on my 6.5in wrist as it felt large to me. I personally love the smaller foot print on 116600. Glad you got something that works for you.

It's all about proportions. I've never understood the saying, "XXmm watch is the "perfect" size..." There's no one size that's perfect IMO...all depends on wrist size, activity level and obviously personal preference.

[tommy91]

Same with me i have flipped many subs and always bought back. There is somthing about 114060 for me that no watch can compare with. I have learnt my lesson and will never flip any of my subs ever again.

[moby33]

Originally Posted by tommy91

Same with me i have flipped many subs and always bought back. There is somthing about 114060 for me that no watch can compare with. I have learnt my lesson and will never flip any of my subs ever again.

Ha, I hear ya. Yeah, when I hear people say (essentially) derogatory things about the Sub such as, "Too common...", "Bland...", "Dime a dozen..." I chuckle because it's obvious why the watch is so popular. It just does everything right...not in a "LOOK AT ME" kind of way, but quietly and simply to the point.

I also use to be a 911 hater (no joke...I was an American muscle car lover through & through)...but just like the Rolex revelation years ago, I said the same thing about the 911, "Hey, I'm a car lover, I've got to give them a shot."

So I bought my first classic air-cooled ('79 SC) coupe and quickly learned just how fun the classic air-cooled cars are. By no means the fastest, but an absolute blast to throw into corners HARD. That spiraled into many 911 purchases over the last 8 years and now I hate to admit I'm "one of those guys" that sings the praises of the car to anyone that listens. My '87 G50 3.2 coupe was the first car I could easily execute an effortless heel/toe downshift...something I could never do w/ all my C2 Vettes, 1st gen Mustangs or GTOs.

[HNIC]

It’s for said reasons in this write up, I have 5 and six digit Rolex models. Sometimes it’s a 5 digit on NATO, other times could be the SD43 on bracelet, or the BLNR on Everest.

Instead of finding the “right fit” I’ve learned to wear different watches and appreciate their fit, feel, and differences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeRookie]

Great write up! I have a similar debate but it’s between my BLNR and Omega Planet Ocean 42mm. The PO isn’t uncomfortable but it doesn’t feel as good as my BLNR. You feel it. The BLNR disappears. I won’t sell the Omega as I’m still a fan but I don’t wear it as often. The BLNR wins...

[moby33]

Originally Posted by TimeRookie

Great write up! I have a similar debate but it’s between my BLNR and Omega Planet Ocean 42mm. The PO isn’t uncomfortable but it doesn’t feel as good as my BLNR. You feel it. The BLNR disappears. I won’t sell the Omega as I’m still a fan but I don’t wear it as often. The BLNR wins...

I can see that. I'm a sucker for blue too...

[Rutgers]

Thanks for the great review. The sub keeps on finding its way back into my collection too. It’s embedded in my DNA or something- can’t live a normal life without it.

[Z-Sub]

Glad you're able to find the "one"

[Jerodp716]

One of the best posts I have ever read on this forum. Very well done, thank you!!

For me, the Sub is the perfect watch. I have a pretty large collection that runs the full spectrum. Daytona, DD, DJ, SD,etc....the watch I consistently reach for again and again is the Sub. I have bought, sold and traded the Sub many, many times over the past several years yet it always finds its way home and onto my wrist. It is the perfect watch. Classic, simple and understated. Ready to go anywhere and do anything. From shorts and tees in the morning to a tuxedo at night it handles it all and does so with relative ease. The watch never looks out of place. I am a fanboy of the Sub and have no shame admitting such!

[moby33]

Originally Posted by Jerodp716

One of the best posts I have ever read on this forum. Very well done, thank you!!

For me, the Sub is the perfect watch. I have a pretty large collection that runs the full spectrum. Daytona, DD, DJ, SD,etc....the watch I consistently reach for again and again is the Sub. I have bought, sold and traded the Sub many, many times over the past several years yet it always finds its way home and onto my wrist. It is the perfect watch. Classic, simple and understated. Ready to go anywhere and do anything. From shorts and tees in the morning to a tuxedo at night it handles it all and does so with relative ease. The watch never looks out of place. I am a fanboy of the Sub and have no shame admitting such!

You just summed my post up...damn, I knew I used too many words!

[makak]

Really enjoyed the read. Thanks for sharing

[moby33]

Originally Posted by Rutgers

Thanks for the great review. The sub keeps on finding its way back into my collection too. It’s embedded in my DNA or something- can’t live a normal life without it.

Originally Posted by makak

Really enjoyed the read. Thanks for sharing

Thanks guys!

[Mystro]

The journey is part of the fun. I agree with the Sub-C for the same reasons. It disappears on your wrist and is a perfect travel watch when you don’t have time to fuss with a watch on the go.

[hnn17]

Wow, the only rolex diver that op haven't try is the Seadweller 4k, 40mm ceramic.

[moby33]

Originally Posted by hnn17

Wow, the only rolex diver that op haven't try is the Seadweller 4k, 40mm ceramic.

I thought about it...but what most people rave about (the better proportioned lugs) was actually a knock for me. I honestly like the chunky lugs and narrow bracelet of the SubC.

My own prediction for the next upgraded SubC is two-fold: Rolex is going to drop in the 3235 movement (not surprising) and I feel they might actually slim the lugs to provide the same aesthetic flow that we see w/ the updated DSSD & new SD43. Maybe that's a stretch as it would require completely reworking of the current cases, but it wouldn't surprise me.

My 'Rolex Conspiracy Theory 101' likes to think that's part of the reason you can't find Subs in AD cases...they aren't making anymore and trying to burn through stock since they know when the 3235 Sub comes out it will also have slimmer lugs.

From my own unscientific approach, it seems there are more fans on this forum that would like to see the case adjusted as opposed to my desire to keep the chunky lugs & guards. For selfish reasons I hope they do redesign the case...would make it easy for me to stick w/ my 116610 simply because a longer power reserve isn't needed for me and I'm a total Fan-Boy of the big lugs. Time will tell...

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by moby33

My own prediction for the next upgraded SubC is ...they might actually slim the lugs to provide the same aesthetic flow that we see w/ the updated DSSD & new SD43.

I've wondered about that. It's plausible, but it would be a radical (by Rolex standards) break with tradition. Since their debuts, the Sub and GMT have been fraternal twins. With the new GMTs this year, it's clear they're keeping the Supercase. If Rolex follows tradition, then the Sub will keep its Supercase as well when the 12-series comes out.

An alternate theory is what you postulated: a diver family with its own design DNA, distinct from the GMT. If so, then perhaps the Sub will revert to look more like a 5-digit design, or possibly bump up to 41mm to keep a larger look to offset narrower lugs.

My money is on the Sub keeping the 40mm Supercase. The Sub and GMT are the stars of the Rolex sports lineup while looking nearly identical; why mess with success? Rolex has been surprising us recently, though, so I wouldn't completely rule out the alternative.

[moby33]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

I've wondered about that. It's plausible, but it would be a radical (by Rolex standards) break with tradition. Since their debuts, the Sub and GMT have been fraternal twins. With the new GMTs this year, it's clear they're keeping the Supercase. If Rolex follows tradition, then the Sub will keep its Supercase as well when the 12-series comes out.

An alternate theory is what you postulated: a diver family with its own design DNA, distinct from the GMT. If so, then perhaps the Sub will revert to look more like a 5-digit design, or possibly bump up to 41mm to keep a larger look to offset narrower lugs.

My money is on the Sub keeping the 40mm Supercase. The Sub and GMT are the stars of the Rolex sports lineup while looking nearly identical; why mess with success? Rolex has been surprising us recently, though, so I wouldn't completely rule out the alternative.

I think you’re probably correct that more than likely the Sub supercase will stay, but only because of relatively recent history, we really don’t know with Rolex. They definitely are moving on changes much quicker than years & decades past. I remember when EVERYONE was declaring “There’s no way the SD4K will be killed off so soon...it’s too new & Rolex would NEVER waste so much on changing the tooling so soon...”. We all know how that turned out. So really, we just don’t know (which I actually like...always keeps me guessing right up to the end of March).

[PalmTreeVIP]

Originally Posted by moby33

I thought about it...but what most people rave about (the better proportioned lugs) was actually a knock for me. I honestly like the chunky lugs and narrow bracelet of the SubC.

My own prediction for the next upgraded SubC is two-fold: Rolex is going to drop in the 3235 movement (not surprising) and I feel they might actually slim the lugs to provide the same aesthetic flow that we see w/ the updated DSSD & new SD43. Maybe that's a stretch as it would require completely reworking of the current cases, but it wouldn't surprise me.

My 'Rolex Conspiracy Theory 101' likes to think that's part of the reason you can't find Subs in AD cases...they aren't making anymore and trying to burn through stock since they know when the 3235 Sub comes out it will also have slimmer lugs.

From my own unscientific approach, it seems there are more fans on this forum that would like to see the case adjusted as opposed to my desire to keep the chunky lugs & guards. For selfish reasons I hope they do redesign the case...would make it easy for me to stick w/ my 116610 simply because a longer power reserve isn't needed for me and I'm a total Fan-Boy of the big lugs. Time will tell...

That was scary accurate

[nikesupremedunk]

Great post, enjoyed reading it! That SD43 looks perfect on you size wise but I prefer the glossy black dial of the Sub, just not a fan of matte black dials.

I love my Sub C date as well, the only downside (if you can call it that) is that it's TOO popular and almost every person I see wearing a sports Rolex is wearing a Sub C date! Enjoy in good health!

[Seibei]

Bravo! Standing ovation to the OP, wonderful post, words and pictures.

Furthermore, it makes me very happy to read, because what you have written confirms my ideas 100%. I guess the choice is easier for me, I have a smaller than average wrist which rules out the bigger Rolex dives anyway.

[dualcarb]

It’s a great watch...I have very puny six and a half inch wrists. Like the younger you, I used to like “bigger” watches. But now, the 40 some year old me also likes to have something light, simple and easy to wear. Thank you very much for your honest and down to earth review of this modern day classic...have a fantastic Submariner Sunday everyone...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tony-GB]

Outstanding post- thank you.

Thats what this passion is about in my eyes, the journey. It'll be very interesting to see what you write in the next few years and see what happens in the next chapter!

[mailman]

Moby we've both been here for a minute or two I remember quite a bit of what you posted above. Great journey for you. The only way to know what you like is to try different things. I remember how much you liked the DSSD and your enthusiasm when the SD43 was announced.

My wrists are a little over 8". I've tried other models but always come back to a SubC for a lot of the reasons you mentioned above. I started with a 16610, tried going back from 6 digits to a 16610LV a few times. I even changed out the insert like you. I tried a 16613 and a 16610 again I've had 5 or 6 116610LN's, almost as many 114060's and one LVC. Like you I liked the LVC, but the green is too much for me as a daily. I won't mention the BLNR's, EXPII's or SD4K.

I'm at the point where I'm happy with my 114060. I like the thick lugs, and bracelet. I'm a big fan of the maxi dial and hands. The Glidelock is in a league of it's own. I use the bezel to time things quite a bit. I love the clean look of the dial and crystal without the cyclops. The size and shape of the watch doesn't get lost on my wrist. Not having the date has taken some getting used to. I look at the date in the morning and most times I remember it.

Ironically the only watch I can see me flipping it for would be a 116610. Maybe. I've always loved the Sub Date in any form. At this point I prefer the clean look of the 114060. There's no wrong choice. I'm glad you found the one for you

Full disclosure....I like the 126710. A lot. Chances of me getting one at MSRP are the same as me winning the Powerball and I'm ok with that. I'm a diver guy at heart

[moby33]

Originally Posted by mailman

Moby we've both been here for a minute or two I remember quite a bit of what you posted above. Great journey for you. The only way to know what you like is to try different things. I remember how much you liked the DSSD and your enthusiasm when the SD43 was announced.

My wrists are a little over 8". I've tried other models but always come back to a SubC for a lot of the reasons you mentioned above. I started with a 16610, tried going back from 6 digits to a 16610LV a few times. I even changed out the insert like you. I tried a 16613 and a 16610 again I've had 5 or 6 116610LN's, almost as many 114060's and one LVC. Like you I liked the LVC, but the green is too much for me as a daily. I won't mention the BLNR's, EXPII's or SD4K.

I'm at the point where I'm happy with my 114060. I like the thick lugs, and bracelet. I'm a big fan of the maxi dial and hands. The Glidelock is in a league of it's own. I use the bezel to time things quite a bit. I love the clean look of the dial and crystal without the cyclops. The size and shape of the watch doesn't get lost on my wrist. Not having the date has taken some getting used to. I look at the date in the morning and most times I remember it.

Ironically the only watch I can see me flipping it for would be a 116610. Maybe. I've always loved the Sub Date in any form. At this point I prefer the clean look of the 114060. There's no wrong choice. I'm glad you found the one for you

Full disclosure....I like the 126710. A lot. Chances of me getting one at MSRP are the same as me winning the Powerball and I'm ok with that. I'm a diver guy at heart

Yep...circa 2007-09...the economy was going to hell, but at least we could talk watches! I has very active back then simply because it was pre-kids...but after 2010 when my first boy dropped (and now 3 boys & 1 girl later)...I've found the watch talk needs to take a back seat.

I've been close to pulling the trigger on the 114060 a few times simply because it's impossible to deny how clean that design is...but alas, for the life of me I can't remember the date. I'll reference my watch multiple times a day and legitimately can't remember (maybe it's because I know I've always got a date on my wrist I just don't use the brain power to remember).

But it's the same reason why I also need divers (or chrono's)...I time multiple things every day and feel naked if I don't have a bezel to spin or a pusher to hit.

[AK797]

Great post and details of your journey, to which I can relate. I too have settled on the Subc being just about the perfect size for me. At times after wearing a DSSD or AP ROO I have felt it is too small, and then after a Nautilus I can feel it is too large and thick, but objectively it is the best balanced watch for me.

[Rashid.bk]

You're post might as well be my story. I now have a D-Blue. I'm a bit older now. Having owned Deepseas in the past I'm familiar with the weight but now it actually has begun to bother me, to the point I don't want to wear it. I may look at a rotation if feasible, smaller is always better, lighter and thinner is always better.
For this, the grandmaster reigns supreme and I think ultimately my one diver will be the 114060.
Great write up, I didn't want to read it all at first but then it sounded just like my thoughts.

The Submariner will always be special, whether popular or common, who cares. It is everything it is, because it is just so so good at what it offers. Sadly, it takes about a decade for most to realize this with so many great Rolex watches on offer today.

[Katzos]

Sold the deepsea 116660 because it was just too heavy for me. Currently wearing SD43, feels a lot better. At the same time, I rotate with my 5513 to give my wrist a rest. Just added 114060 in September but it has so far stayed in the plastic coffin unworn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Alex_TA]

Sorry but your emotional post contains zero information.
You don’t compare accuracy, reliability, legibility- only sharing your inner voice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk