Did Rolex lose it's soul with the 43mm Sea Dweller?

[thlax]

Originally Posted by samson66

I think it's the other way around. The date wheel is smaller and places the window closer to the center of the dial BECAUSE of the cyclops. So the SD4K date window is placed where a cyclops should be - a cyclops IOU is what I call it. If they put out a watch without a cyclops they should produce a larger date wheel, to push the date outward where it should be located. The inset date window is the perfect placement to accommodate a cyclops

i.e., follow what AP did with a date wheel position change recently with a new movement in the 15400 vs 15500


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[LigerBelair]

Originally Posted by Centron

No.
Rolex made it better and more distinct from the Submariner. 25 years ago I bought a submariner over the seadweller as I just couldn't justify the large price difference between them as they were so similar in appearance and size.

Now, it’s Rolex’s best diver ever in my opinion. And I couldn’t throw them my money fast enough. Movement, materials, bracelet, proportions, and that red line is icing on the cake. It stands on its own and will have lasting impact.

Well said.

[dkast85]

went to my AD today to pick up a serviced piece. Spotted the 44 MM SD. Would never wear that thing.

[Amochosto]

.

[djgallo]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

^^they are all gimmicky fashion watches for sure , just felt like Rolex really stretched when they threw red writing in the new SD along with a cyclops. The DSSD was them pushing the limits....the SD43 just seems cobbled together.
And I didn’t make any hp analogies...

And what school did you get your watch design degree from?

Cobbled together?......contrary to your opinions, the SD43 is designed by real watch designers, experts in their fields, and in conjunction with Rolex‘s long and well respected dive watch history. The red writing is a honorable nod to the vintage double red SD, and the cyclops is a detail that would have been on the SD in the past if the technology would have been available.

The SD43 Anniversary Sea Dweller will continue to lead....long into the future!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by djgallo

And what school did you get your watch design degree from?

Cobbled together?......contrary to your opinions, the SD43 is designed by real watch designers, experts in their fields, and in conjunction with Rolex‘s long and well respected dive watch history. The red writing is a honorable nod to the vintage double red SD, and the cyclops is a detail that would have been on the SD in the past if the technology would have been available.

The SD43 Anniversary Sea Dweller will continue to lead....long into the future!

I don't know about leading
Maybe leading up the garden path

[Verdi]

Originally Posted by djgallo

Cobbled together?......contrary to your opinions, the SD43 is designed by real watch designers, experts in their fields.........,,:

Hahaha, yes.......but so was the DJ2.
They managed to make that sucker bigger than a Submariner!

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by djgallo

And what school did you get your watch design degree from?

the cyclops is a detail that would have been on the SD in the past if the technology would have been available.

The SD43 Anniversary Sea Dweller will continue to lead....long into the future!

I don’t have a watch degree, do you? Your cyclops explanation is very lame. I realize Rolex positions it that way, but that’s like saying the Sea Dweller would have been a digital dive computer but the technology wasn’t yet available
I had a SD43 and sold it. I find the DSSD superior in every way....you don’t and that’s fine. I realize the SD43 is more popular, but I like what I like. Enjoy your watch that is on the cutting edge of technology

[Roli4life]

The SD43 is a modern embodiment of a true tool watch.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by dtwer

The SD was once smaller than 43mm? That was terrible. I am so glad we have the choices of differing sizes today.

We did before too with DSSD, Exp 2, YM2, and smaller sizes as well under 40mm

[crazycarlitos]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Your cyclops explanation is very lame. I realize Rolex positions it that way, but that’s like saying the Sea Dweller would have been a digital dive computer but the technology wasn’t yet available

The only lame thing I see is ur analogy.

U realize that’s what Rolex says.. but u determine that’s lame because u cannot accept it?

I realize everyone has an opinion... but u prob should start keeping ur biased perspective to urself.

Enjoy ur watch.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by crazycarlitos

The only lame thing I see is ur analogy.

U realize that’s what Rolex says.. but u determine that’s lame because u cannot accept it?

I realize everyone has an opinion... but u prob should start keeping ur biased perspective to urself.

Enjoy ur watch.

You are like the annoying kid at school that couldn’t mind his own business (or spell). Having owned both watches, my perspective is just about as unbiased as they come. Let’s see what you got next smart fella!?

[Hibbyx]

Originally Posted by SearChart

You're about 11 years late mate, 2008 is when they lost their soul with the 44mm monster DSSD

Got to say I have a Seadweller 2005 and it's stunning, my mate has a SD44 and it looks nice but when I tryed it on it was just to big and bulky for me, I'm a big guy so it's not I'm a skinny wrist, the 40mm SD sits smaller than my 40mm TT Blusey mainly I think as it has smaller shoulders

[djgallo]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

I don’t have a watch degree, do you? Your cyclops explanation is very lame. I realize Rolex positions it that way, but that’s like saying the Sea Dweller would have been a digital dive computer but the technology wasn’t yet available
I had a SD43 and sold it. I find the DSSD superior in every way....you don’t and that’s fine. I realize the SD43 is more popular, but I like what I like. Enjoy your watch that is on the cutting edge of technology

Well, I’m glad that you are confirming you have NO expertise in regard to watch design, and dive watch history. Comparing the SD43 to a digital dive computer is apples and oranges. Oh....and the only thing that is lame around here...are your lame uniformed comments directed at Rolex‘s SD43.....which mean nothing to informed people.

[Chaching]

. . . Really? SD43 is an amazing watch! One of Rolex’s best in a long time!

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by djgallo

Well, I’m glad that you are confirming you have NO expertise in regard to watch design, and dive watch history. Comparing the SD43 to a digital dive computer is apples and oranges. Oh....and the only thing that is lame around here...are your lame uniformed comments directed at Rolex‘s SD43.....which mean nothing to informed people.

This is getting really fun. So many sensitive SD43 fans! People around here make fun of the disproportionate DSSD every day ...who cares?
By the way, you still didn’t answer me. Where is your watch degree from? How about your “expertise in watch design and and dive watch history”

Maybe you and crazy Carla should get together and discuss the technological marvel that is the SD43 ultra rare, red writing, commemorative masterpiece!

[waterman1]

I dont think the debate will ever end with these sea dwellers. Here is what I have to say....after watching that Hodinkee "talking watches", to find out the 1st Deep Sea special was ss and gold, no one can ever say the TT SD43 is not a real dive watch.

I have DSSD, SD43, and SD4K with no intent to sell any. They are all serious robust divers that can hold their own against any other watch and can be used as tools or jewelry, whichever you prefer. With prices where they are today most will tend to be concerned of getting them banged up so they are considered jewelry. But I have a feeling any of them would be more robust, sturdy, and reliable than most any watch out there. From my perspective it is impossible to say one is truly better than the other. They all go deeper than any human can go so equal there in my opinion. Visibility is huge consideration as one diver here has commented, so I would have to give an edge to the SD43 with larger dial by a fraction. In terms of wearability, interesting that I find the DSSD more comfortable that SD43 in some regard (caseback), and then from a weight perspective the SD43 more comfortable during certain activities where the weight is bothersome. I did not start this to do a review and complete comparison but it has turned out sort of that way....SD43>DSSD>SD4K overall! Just my point of view.

[Toivonen]

Originally Posted by subdateII

The professional line has always evolved driven by innovation. Here is my grip with this version:

1. The increase in size from 40mm did not come with any increase in performance. The watch is still rated for 4,000 feet.

2. I don't understand the addition of the two tone version in 2019 for such a technically capable watch.

43 may be ok, no problem at all
BUT
Cyclope first, and two tone as ‘finish him’ à la mortal combat, to
Me the lowest point in the whole Rolex History, that day ended to be meant as tool watch at all
IMHO

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

Rolex is an enigma that makes good watches.

This says it all.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by djgallo

And what school did you get your watch design degree from?

Cobbled together?......contrary to your opinions, the SD43 is designed by real watch designers, experts in their fields, and in conjunction with Rolex‘s long and well respected dive watch history. The red writing is a honorable nod to the vintage double red SD, and the cyclops is a detail that would have been on the SD in the past if the technology would have been available.

The SD43 Anniversary Sea Dweller will continue to lead....long into the future!

Quite honestly if we want to talk design, the SD43 is the first watch where Rolex has truly catered to the trends and added features just for the sake of driving sales. Even the 6 digit Subs everyone loves to complain about are inspired by 6204’s rectangular design and relatively wider lug proportions. The SD43 added size, cyclops and red text simply for sales. Doesn’t mean it’s a bad watch but it most certainly didn’t have any features added to increase its function (unless you’re of the camp that a cyclops helps read dates underwater).

If you want technical innovation you get a DSSD. If you want classic elegance you get a Sub. The SD43 while a great watch was meant to cater to those that refuse to wear a 40mm and still want a cyclops. I get why Rolex would release it as is but we shouldn’t pretend the new design is anything but aesthetics. There wasn’t one new technical feature outside the same movement that you find in other Rolex. Function follows form here.

Still a great watch though of course, but I can certainly see Dufour’s influence.

[gttime]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Quite honestly if we want to talk design, the SD43 is the first watch where Rolex has truly catered to the trends and added features just for the sake of driving sales. Even the 6 digit Subs everyone loves to complain about are inspired by 6204’s rectangular design and relatively wider lug proportions. The SD43 added size, cyclops and red text simply for sales. Doesn’t mean it’s a bad watch but it most certainly didn’t have any features added to increase its function (unless you’re of the camp that a cyclops helps read dates underwater).



If you want technical innovation you get a DSSD. If you want classic elegance you get a Sub. The SD43 while a great watch was meant to cater to those that refuse to wear a 40mm and still want a cyclops. I get why Rolex would release it as is but we shouldn’t pretend the new design is anything but aesthetics. There wasn’t one new technical feature outside the same movement that you find in other Rolex. Function follows form here.



Still a great watch though of course, but I can certainly see Dufour’s influence.

Agreed and so glad they catered. It’s the watch that finally brought me to the brand as I can’t wear a 40mm diver. Then they followed up with a better proportioned DSSD. I would have never imagined picking up two Rolexes in just one year.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Quite honestly if we want to talk design, the SD43 is the first watch where Rolex has truly catered to the trends and added features just for the sake of driving sales. Even the 6 digit Subs everyone loves to complain about are inspired by 6204’s rectangular design and relatively wider lug proportions. The SD43 added size, cyclops and red text simply for sales. Doesn’t mean it’s a bad watch but it most certainly didn’t have any features added to increase its function (unless you’re of the camp that a cyclops helps read dates underwater).

If you want technical innovation you get a DSSD. If you want classic elegance you get a Sub. The SD43 while a great watch was meant to cater to those that refuse to wear a 40mm and still want a cyclops. I get why Rolex would release it as is but we shouldn’t pretend the new design is anything but aesthetics. There wasn’t one new technical feature outside the same movement that you find in other Rolex. Function follows form here.

Still a great watch though of course, but I can certainly see Dufour’s influence.

Thank you! Exactly my point.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by gttime

Agreed and so glad they catered. It’s the watch that finally brought me to the brand as I can’t wear a 40mm diver. Then they followed up with a better proportioned DSSD. I would have never imagined picking up two Rolexes in just one year.

The new DSSD is a sleeper. It also has a superior version of the Glidelock that Rolex should have taken the time to add to the SD43. Just my opinion but it wears same on the wrist as the 6 digit Sub outside height. I almost picked one up earlier this year myself but decided to save a little longer for this guy ...

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Thank you! Exactly my point.

Knew exactly what you meant

[djgallo]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Quite honestly if we want to talk design, the SD43 is the first watch where Rolex has truly catered to the trends and added features just for the sake of driving sales. Even the 6 digit Subs everyone loves to complain about are inspired by 6204’s rectangular design and relatively wider lug proportions. The SD43 added size, cyclops and red text simply for sales. Doesn’t mean it’s a bad watch but it most certainly didn’t have any features added to increase its function (unless you’re of the camp that a cyclops helps read dates underwater).

If you want technical innovation you get a DSSD. If you want classic elegance you get a Sub. The SD43 while a great watch was meant to cater to those that refuse to wear a 40mm and still want a cyclops. I get why Rolex would release it as is but we shouldn’t pretend the new design is anything but aesthetics. There wasn’t one new technical feature outside the same movement that you find in other Rolex. Function follows form here.

Still a great watch though of course, but I can certainly see Dufour’s influence.

As for all your comments, you certainly have a right to your opinions, but it doesn’t make them facts, far from it. When Rolex releases most new watches they will normally combine technical improvements and aesthetics. So thats exactly what the SD43 is about...no more no less. The cyclops does make reading the date easier....it wasn’t just for reading underwater, and that was an important feature - and technical improvement. The watch was designed to be the Anniversary SD, so the presentation was important and paramount. It will make sense when you put it in context.

Finally, I’m glad that we can agree that the SD43 is a great watch!

[904VT]

Originally Posted by djgallo

As for all your comments, you certainly have a right to your opinions, but it doesn’t make them facts, far from it. When Rolex releases most new watches they will normally combine technical improvements and aesthetics. So thats exactly what the SD43 is about...no more no less. The cyclops does make reading the date easier....it wasn’t just for reading underwater, and that was an important feature - and technical improvement. The watch was designed to be the Anniversary SD, so the presentation was important and paramount. It will make sense when you put it in context.

Finally, I’m glad that we can agree that the SD43 is a great watch!

I agree the SD43 is a great watch. But the cyclops is not a technical improvement. If you’re a professional saturation diver you are better off with a DSSD (still includes a date without the distraction of a cyclops) and it’s superior version of the Glidelock. I love the SD43 for what it is but everything I laid out is fact regarding its technical features. There are no technical improvements gained from making a watch larger. The depth rating has remained at 4K and the 3235 you can make the argument it is less proven than the 3135. An opinion would be if I said I thought the Sub is a better looking watch. There was no technical reason to make the SD43 larger unless Rolex was just looking for an easier way to fit the 3235. The SD4k didn’t sell well smaller sized. The fact of the matter is the SD43 is priced nearly the same as the DSSD which is a far superior dive watch technically speaking. But if you’re not buying a SD43 as a professional I guess it really doesn’t matter anyway. Dufour is trying his best to make Rolex look like Zenith. Case in point the messy YM line. That though is my opinion the design aspect

[djgallo]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Thank you! Exactly my point.

If you would have posted your original comments in a clear, concise, and mature manner, you wouldn’t need others to “clean up after you” and try to explain what you think you wanted to say.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by djgallo

If you would have posted your original comments in a clear, concise, and mature manner, you wouldn’t need others to “clean up after you” and try to explain what you think you wanted to say.

Still haven’t answered my questions....I’m very clear and concise.

[djgallo]

Originally Posted by 904VT

I agree the SD43 is a great watch. But the cyclops is not a technical improvement. If you’re a professional saturation diver you are better off with a DSSD (still includes a date without the distraction of a cyclops) and it’s superior version of the Glidelock. I love the SD43 for what it is but everything I laid out is fact regarding its technical features. There are no technical improvements gained from making a watch larger. The depth rating has remained at 4K and the 3235 you can make the argument it is less proven than the 3135. An opinion would be if I said I thought the Sub is a better looking watch. There was no technical reason to make the SD43 larger unless Rolex was just looking for an easier way to fit the 3235. The SD4k didn’t sell well smaller sized. The fact of the matter is the SD43 is priced nearly the same as the DSSD which is a far superior dive watch technically speaking. But if you’re not buying a SD43 as a professional I guess it really doesn’t matter anyway. Dufour is trying his best to make Rolex look like Zenith. Case in point the messy YM line. That though is my opinion the design aspect

I respect your viewpoints. Have a great weekend!

[crazycarlitos]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

You are like the annoying kid at school that couldn’t mind his own business (or spell).

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Maybe you and crazy Carla should get together and discuss the technological marvel that is the SD43 ultra rare, red writing, commemorative masterpiece!

Grow up and learn how to express ur opinion properly like 904vt

I am done with u.