Submariner or Seadweller?

[NickTruswell]

Thinking of adding stainless steel diver to my collection and can't make up my mind. A submariner or a seadwller? Then which version the new cermamic Sub C & DSSD or the older classic style of the 16610 and 16600?

Let me know what you think and post pics.

thanks

[DWBOD]

Considering you already have the GMT IIC, I would probably go for the DSSD or a classic Sub.

Best,

Doug

[HL65]

I would go with a DSSD if it were me.

[dalip]

Seadweller....or Deep Sea..

If you feel comfortable in the DSSD then to for it....no doubt for me.

If not...then the 16600 is a perfect option.

I wouldn't go classic or ceramic sub.

[Clay]

If you want a real classic, then how about a 1665????

[youngr]

I would go for an old sub or sea dweller

Rich

[clum19]

I was in a similar position last month. I was between the 116610 Ceramic Sub and the 16600 Sea Dweller, and I went with the new sub because the new clasp and all the other new upgrades were to too nice to pass up (it was also only $500 more if that matters to you)

I found the DSSD just way too big for my 6.5 inch wrist, but either the sub or SD fit perfect

[BH13GMT]

Seadweller for sure, question is which one

Try the SDDS, if it sits too high, then go for the original Seadweller.

[z32turbo]

Unless you are truly testing the dive depth I would go Sub all the way. Ceramic is my choice b/c of the new upgrades. I think it looks better as a bonus.

[SaddleSC]

I have Submariners, a new GMTIIC and a Sea Dweller 16600. I would highly recommend the 16600 Sea Dweller. It is my absolute favorite watch and it is the only one I would keep if I had to choose just one. The case proportions are absolutely fantastic. It has a ton of unique history and a unique feature set (case back engraving, HEV, non-cyclops date). It is really a special watch and IMO the most comfortable watch in my collection.

[moby33]

I have owned (or currently own) all 4...so I can give you my thoughts on each (you decide if they apply to your tastes as only you can truly decide which is best for you).

First Rolex I ever bought was the SD4000. Loved the watch, but ended up selling because the non-maxi dial just didn't put out enough lume/light when viewing at night...and I wasn't really thrilled w/ the clasp.

Then bought the SubLV because I loved the look of the Sub & also got the larger lume. Almost perfect for me, but the green was a little too much for my tastes as an every day watch & I still wasn't sold w/ the clasp (I was an Omega man thru-n-thru prior & still getting use to the much cheaper feel of the Rolex clasps compared to Omega's).

When the DSSD came out I was thrilled! Larger case, ceramic bezel (w/ ball bearing mechanics instead of simple pin) & that AMAZING Glidelock. The watch is awesome & I wore it every day for over 2 yrs. If it fits your wrist, there is absolutely no complaint about size/weight/feel IMO...the watch is extremely comfortable (I wouldn't have worn it every day if it wasn't). The Glidelock is sweet...you can adjust on the fly without even taking it off your wrist.

Then the new SubC came out. I was torn because I love the DSSD, but there were a few things the SubC could do over the DSSD IMO. The smaller case was a plus for everyday functionality...it really can do everything in any setting (casual, sports, formal)...you name it, the Sub looks great. The cyclops was a plus for me...while I LOVE the look of the domed crystal on the DSSD, the fact of the matter is Rolex has pretty small date windows...something that is not an issue w/ the Sub-Dates & cyclops. But on the cyclops-less SeaDwellers, the date looks pretty small. Some prefer that look (more subtle/subdued I guess), but I'm not one of them. I buy a watch w/ a date because I want to actually see the date.

I'm the type of guy that looks to his watch multiple times a day to remember the date (yes, I know I should remember after the first viewing...but I ALWAYS double check when writing the date on business papers)...so the fact that the SubC had an easier viewed date was a plus.

While the SubC has a Glidelock, it's a little less convenient than the DSSD IMO because it must be removed from the wrist to adjust. Not a huge deal, but something worth noting.

In the end, if I had to keep only one watch, I think it would be the SubC. I personally like the blockier cases of the new Subs (gives the watch a more sporty feel IMO and I buy these watches more for sport than dress). The DSSD is awesome, but not as versatile as the SubC as the few times I wore it will a suit it did look a little out of place. Not a huge deal as I've got a pretty big wrist, but ultimately I think a Sub would have looked better in the same setting.

The SubC is a truly comfortable watch, but unlike the previous Sub, the updated clasp & bezel (not to mention larger lume due to the maxi-dial) puts it in 1st place in my book over the previous Sub/SD.

Hope this helps...good luck w/ your decision.

[ersnyder]

IMO, you get classic Rolex design as well as "uniqueness" with the SD. So, for me, SD all the way!

[gettocard]

Sub C ? The novelty thing is wearing off aready and it's not a tool Rolex anymore.
Sub 16610 ? The classic and "popular" excellent Rolex already seen everywhere.
DSSD ? Do you really need a chunky piece of metal that will take ages before becoming an iconic Rolex ?

Get the SD 16600 then,not too many around,low profile and no messy bubble.

[IMG]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

[Numismatist]

Classic: no cyclops, never made in TT or gold, HEV, diving suit links, toolkit, caseback stamping, stayed true to its tool-watch roots! I like!

[The GMT Master]

I would personally choose the ceramic Sub out of those - never been a massive fan of the 16610, 16600 is pretty nice, but the bracelet feels old fashioned, and I couldn't have the DSSD as a daily wearer myself. The 116610 looks great, feels better, and has redefined the benchmark for luxury diver's watches as far as I'm concerned

[moby33]

Originally Posted by gettocard

Sub C ? The novelty thing is wearing off aready and it's not a tool Rolex anymore.

"Novelty thing"??? I have no idea what that is suppose to mean. I guess if you consider:

1. Improved low-light visibility (maxi-dial...which btw is now the same size as the vintage Subs...so really just an 'upgrade' to the way the Sub use to be decades ago).

2. Improved clasp (while the old version definitely 'got the job done'...anyone that thinks the stamped steel design was on par w/ the rest of the watch's caliber is putting their head in the sand IMO).

3. Improved bezel (both in material and mechanics). People can argue all day long that the metal inserts & cheap tiny pin used w/ the unidirectional mechanics 'worked' (as they did in fact do), but the argument is on par w/ defending the previous generation clasps. A '65 Mustang 'worked'...but there's no doubt the '10 version is much improved...same applies for the Sub clasp & bezel IMO.

All that said, I guess you're right...those are just some 'novelty' items.

[PHDX2]

My choice? Ceramic Sub!

[nauticajoe]

There's plenty of 16610's out in the wild in different variations.....but there's only one SD.

The 16600's got my vote!

[Len]

I would go for an SD 16600 and personally I took an tritium model .

[mjrennie]

Originally Posted by z32turbo

Unless you are truly testing the dive depth I would go Sub all the way. Ceramic is my choice b/c of the new upgrades. I think it looks better as a bonus.

x2.

[vukotab]

I always liked more Sub than SD, but now, with Deep Sea released, I think that I would choose classic Sea Dweller!

[GEO_79]

Originally Posted by PHDX2

My choice? Ceramic Sub!

[GoldenBear]

I chose the Sub as I absolutely wanted the date bubble. It is an iconic part of a Rolex.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

I chose the Sub as I absolutely wanted the date bubble. It is an iconic part of a Rolex.

[Dr.Brian]

16600

[rfknauss]

I would go with either the new cermamic Sub C or the DSSD. Suggest you try them both on at your local Rolex AD and see which one appeals to you more.

[tulsaokusa]

SubC.

[sakuraba]

I love my 16600, but have to admit, it's not for everyone.

I would go out and try a 16610, 16600, Sub-C and DSSD (and a 1665 as per Clay, if you're willing to drop that much coin ) and see which your wrist likes best.

Can't go wrong with any of these choices.