submariner vs sea dweller

[Gasoil4ever]

They are different when side by side.

SD : smaller lugs, thicker case, raised crystal, satin dial, smaller crown guards, HEV, thicker engraved back, heavier, diver extension link, no cyclop, minutes marker all around the bezel.

A few live pictures :

[cervantes]

Originally Posted by Gasoil4ever

They are different when side by side.

SD : smaller lugs, thicker case, raised crystal, satin dial, smaller crown guards, HEV, thicker engraved back, heavier, diver extension link, no cyclop, minutes marker all around the bezel.

A few live pictures :

Great photos! Smaller Lugs and crown guards do it for me...

[bbressler]

Originally Posted by Gasoil4ever

They are different when side by side.

SD : smaller lugs, thicker case, raised crystal, satin dial, smaller crown guards, HEV, thicker engraved back, heavier, diver extension link, no cyclop, minutes marker all around the bezel.

Great summary

[rick101]

thank g for this thread! i'm actually thinking of flipping my sub c for the sd and getting the hulk

[mailman]

SD4K is a cool watch. The kugs, dial, bezel and crystal all attribute to it. It sits higher on your wrist due to the taller caseback. It's noticeably heavier than a Sub also.

Ultimately I flipped the SD for a SubC. It just works better for me

[Wcdhtwn]

They wear very differently. The SD sits higher on the wrist, noticably. The Sub has the Maxi-case, I've seen called tthe Super Case, so lugs and overall width of the case feels larger than the SD. They are both 40mm but if you try them on side by side you'll swear the Sub's diameter is bigger. I personally prefer the SD but I have a Seamaster Pro which is very similar to the Sub. It always surprises me to hear how many people don't like the cyclops, I need it to see the date, that's the drawback of the SD for me. But with reading glasses and a smart phone the small date window can be overcome as a problem. If I were buying the thicker/higher case, the bezel, and the uniqueness to the Sub would make me pull the trigger on an SD.

[beer]

i prefer the SD because the maxi case is less pronounced, so the bracelet does not look disproportionately small as with the maxi case

just my opinion

[landroverking]

Don't know about the new "C" models.
There were only two parts outside of the movement that they had in common.
The old SD had a smaller dial but larger bezel for example.
I would like to know if this carried over to the current models.

[Gasoil4ever]

Old vs new SD's.

[ferrissteve11]

This will be a constant back and forth between these models...Personally it comes down to choice and what you deem important. Either is a great watch. I started wearing Rolex with an older Sea Dweller - that was stolen...tried 1 vintage Sub and 1 Sub C and ultimately settled on the DSSD. I prefer the over engineering capabilities of the DSSD and also have a big wrist. So while I'll probably get a Sub down the road to even out the collection the DSSD is a stunner. Though as with all Rolex's YMMV.

[sensui]

Good and fun thread...I thought I was decided on the sub no date but I guess the internal battle rages on. Have to try again at the ads.

[GB-man]

SDc offers the best look at expense of a bit of heft.

[artschool]

i currently wear both a sub no date and a sd4k in circulation. i personally am not keen on the cyclops.

i thought buying the sd4k would make me sell the sub but they wear differently.

the sub sits a lot flatter on the wrist.

[sco]

The sea dweller is just too thick for me for an everyday piece.. Sub Date all the way..

[silverbullet818]

Best comment so far...

.... heard women love men with the no date model more because the love men that can remember the date. Apparently it's more sexy. Something about the date model and the association of the man having the onset of Alzheimer's.

[arty11001]

Had a 16610 sub date and absolutely loved it! I changed a few months ago to a 16600 SD and do not regret the change in the slightest. It still surprises me just how much more 'right' it feels! It's hard to tell in photos... Even side by side comparison shots. They look too similar. Initial try on of the SD and thought 'meh'! Then I looked again and made the change anyway... It only took a matter of hours wearing it to know I made the right choice. Chunkier without being bigger, cleaner whilst keeping the date and just feels like a heavier duty watch, whilst still looking similar. Overall no regrets!

Good luck!

[Vinyasa]

I went with the SD4000 (116600) due to the (over) engineering, more profiled case/lugs and no cyclops. But, FWIW, I plan to dive to 1220m one time... when I'm buried at sea.

[Duke84]

Both great watches. I love the slimmer lugs of the SeaDweller and the fact that it doesn't have a cyclops for the date. Because of those things, I'm willing to overlook the taller height of the SeaSweller.

[strafer_kid]

Would totally agree - the Sub and SD both great watches in their current of earlier guise, and you could not go wrong with either. I think that the SDs wear a big heavier but no big deal really!

[buddymunster]

SD is more subtle. Sometimes you want to wear a Rolex without people knowing it's a Rolex. The cyclops is a big give away.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brucethemanlee]

Originally Posted by buddymunster

SD is more subtle. Sometimes you want to wear a Rolex without people knowing it's a Rolex. The cyclops is a big give away.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Totally agree!
One of the reasons why I have it
+
Slimmer lugs
Kick butt depth rating
Matte dial
No Cyclops
= one of the best Rolex imho





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

sd is sloppy compared to sub.

[xelor69]

for me both a lil too bulky and blingy, so flipped my 116600 and went back to classic

[997.2]

What Mick said


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Galion]

I like the cyclops.

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by silverbullet818

I love the brand so the next comment is not penned in a derogatory manner.



So, is there really much ado about nothing between these two models?



The differences are 'subtle' in appearance. Performance with respect to depth rating is clearly obvious but what about wearability.



Can someone who is fortunate enough to own both concurrently or have owned them each at one point in time kindly provide their thoughts?



It would be helpful for me in making my future decision.



Thanks

So far which one are you favoring based on comments? What about older models rather than the ceramics?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nobbylon]

The matt dial on the sd4k swings it for me.

[sirish19]

I am in the same dilemma at the moment debating between the 114060 ND Sub and the 116600 Sea Dweller 4000 to add as my first dive watch. I currently have the 16710 GMT Master II with black bezel and am considering to swap out with either a pepsi or coke bezel to differentiate with the diver.

I am a diver although a relative beginner to this point but will be logging more dives and would like a true diver watch to strap on. As such, I like the over-engineered SD with the He escape valve and thicker sapphire crystal and the look of the tapered lugs. Having a taller profile also seems to give more differentiation from the GMT and make it "feel" like a true diver. Finally, I like to have a date and the absence of the cyclops is a nice touch. Finally, I really really like the the matte dial on the SD.

Based on the above, the SD should be an easy choice for me, however, my question is, do all of these minor differences really justify the higher price of the SD (almost $2000). For that price differential I could get my own wetsuit, BCD and dive computer.

If the Sub had a matte black dial, it would be an easier call.

Thoughts?

[Xerxes77]

Sub

[Gerry62]

begins by the classic Submariner then add the SD