ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Sylvester · 25 July 2013, 01:30 PM

If Rolex came out with a 40mm Sea-Dweller C would you buy it?

sleddog · 25 July 2013, 01:54 PM

I hate to admit it, but yes, as i have a small fetish for Rolex Divers..!

kilyung · 25 July 2013, 01:56 PM

No. IMO the SubC or DSSD are the spiritual successors to the SD.

GlideLockHeadLock · 25 July 2013, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilyung

No. IMO the SubC or DSSD are the spiritual successors to the SD.

duh

Baco Noir · 25 July 2013, 02:09 PM

No. The SD was meant to be a tool watch, not jewelry.

samsmart · 25 July 2013, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

No. The SD was meant to be a tool watch, not jewelry.

Great answer, I agree. Although I would probably try one on at the local AD.

Thebiglagu · 25 July 2013, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samsmart

great answer, i agree. Although i would probably try one on at the local ad.

+1

Betelc · 25 July 2013, 02:49 PM

+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by baco noir

no. The sd was meant to be a tool watch, not jewelry.

DCgator · 25 July 2013, 02:51 PM

No, I have the Deepsea.

improviz · 25 July 2013, 02:53 PM

My, but you are an inquisitive one...

KBM · 25 July 2013, 02:56 PM

I would, in about 2 seconds.

PunkJr · 25 July 2013, 03:03 PM

No.

Bangel · 25 July 2013, 03:10 PM

Possibly? I'd have to see it and try it on first.

Could be a good alternative for those wanting a date without the cyclops and without the heft and height of the DSSD.

Can't really see it happening though and would probably be considered blasphemous to a lot of traditionalists.

landroverking · 25 July 2013, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

No. The SD was meant to be a tool watch, not jewelry.

Spot on!!!!

nickng · 25 July 2013, 11:04 PM

I hope Rolex will not. Should not. Better not.
I am already very broke collecting them

mike · 25 July 2013, 11:09 PM

In a New York second. Make it 42mm with a thinner case to 500 meters and it'd be a New York 1/2 second.

GradyPhilpott · 25 July 2013, 11:13 PM

Personally, I think a beefier, 40mm SD with a ceramic bezel is the route that Rolex should have taken, rather than building the DSSD.

As it is, my 14060M is the only diver I need.

mpaone · 25 July 2013, 11:22 PM

Yes it would probably be the only watch I would trade my current 16600 in for. OR maybe not.

-Mike.

Rashid.bk · 25 July 2013, 11:41 PM

Hell yes, perhaps a tad thinner for those that don't want to go so deep, 8k ft.

akira23 · 25 July 2013, 11:43 PM

I may try one on at a local AD, but no I would not buy one....

polarinda · 26 July 2013, 12:02 AM

Don't mess with perfection.

Knappo 1307 · 26 July 2013, 12:05 AM

yes

Chainring · 26 July 2013, 12:08 AM

No. Would seem redundant to me.

Knappo 1307 · 26 July 2013, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

No. The SD was meant to be a tool watch, not jewelry.

Why wouldn't a 40mm be a tool watch ?

Baco Noir · 26 July 2013, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

Why wouldn't a 40mm be a tool watch ?

It has nothing to do with size. It's about adding the ceramic bezel, which if damaged costs thousands to replace versus less than $100 for a metal insert.

Knappo 1307 · 26 July 2013, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

It has nothing to do with size. It's about adding the ceramic bezel, which if damaged costs thousands to replace versus less than $100 for a metal insert.

So what do you think of the current DSSD ? Is it tool or jewelry? Last I checked it's ceramic....

Baco Noir · 26 July 2013, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

So what do you think of the current DSSD ? Is it tool or jewelry? Last I checked it's ceramic....

Too big and chunky for my tastes, so I never even got to the ceramic part. The only reason I got a SD over a sub is that I don't like the cyclops. I sure don't need the depth rating of the SD, heck not even the sub for that matter, and surely not the DSSD!

Knappo 1307 · 26 July 2013, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

Too big and chunky for my tastes, so I never even got to the ceramic part. The only reason I got a SD over a sub is that I don't like the cyclops. I sure don't need the depth rating of the SD, heck not even the sub for that matter, and surely not the DSSD!

x2...

Armyguy03 · 26 July 2013, 02:16 AM

nope

improviz · 26 July 2013, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

Too big and chunky for my tastes, so I never even got to the ceramic part. The only reason I got a SD over a sub is that I don't like the cyclops. I sure don't need the depth rating of the SD, heck not even the sub for that matter, and surely not the DSSD!

I don't mind the diameter so much as the height and weight...and not a fan of the "gas escape valve" ring either, preferred the engraving on the bottom of the 16600...

If they'd have made it with this diameter, minus the ridiculous depth rating (I mean, hell, even the old SD's rating was ridiculous for 99.9999999999999% of the people on this planet) to give it a more reasonable top-to-bottom case dimension, I'd have seriously considered one.

But judging by huge price increase and laws of supply/demand, I'd say we may be in the minority here.

25 July 2013, 01:30 PM	#1
Sylvester Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: New Jersey Posts: 110	40mm Ceramic Sea-Dweller? If Rolex came out with a 40mm Sea-Dweller C would you buy it?

25 July 2013, 01:54 PM	#2
sleddog TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Rob Location: Nearby. Posts: 24,931	I hate to admit it, but yes, as i have a small fetish for Rolex Divers..! __________________ He who wears a Rolex is always on time, even when late!! TRF's "After Dark" Bar & Nightclub Patron-Founding Member..

25 July 2013, 02:09 PM	#5
Baco Noir "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Roger Location: Colorado Watch: this ya'll Posts: 4,970	No. The SD was meant to be a tool watch, not jewelry. __________________ Current Collection: Rolex 126619LB, 116710BLNR, and 216570 polar Explorer II; Omega Apollo 8 Speedmaster and Planet Ocean 42; Tudor BB Bronze Bucherer Blue Edition; Nomos Neomatik 42; Breitling Aerospace, Avenger Blackbird, & SuperOcean 44; Doxa 300 Pro Carbon; Stowa Limette; Laco Napa Flieger; Mickey Mouse Timex Electric; and dare I say it...an Apple Watch too

25 July 2013, 02:53 PM	#10
improviz "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Tejas Watch: your step Posts: 2,806	My, but you are an inquisitive one... __________________ 116520 white; 16613 black; 116710; 16570 polar; 16600. AP 15400; 15703. Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. Glashutte Sport Evo GMT. Omega Planet Ocean 2907.50.91; Planet Ocean Liquidmetal LE 222.30.42.20.01.001; Seamaster 2255.80.00. Breitling Crosswind, white. Panerai PAM 005. VC Overseas Chrono, black.

25 July 2013, 11:04 PM	#15
nickng "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Real Name: NickN Location: Singapore Watch: Rolex Posts: 524	I hope Rolex will not. Should not. Better not. I am already very broke collecting them __________________ NickN

25 July 2013, 01:56 PM	#3
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	No. IMO the SubC or DSSD are the spiritual successors to the SD.

25 July 2013, 02:51 PM	#9
DCgator "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: PNW Watch: DS,BLNR,SubLV,DJ2 Posts: 8,123	No, I have the Deepsea.

25 July 2013, 02:56 PM	#11
KBM 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: K. Location: 780 Posts: 10,460	I would, in about 2 seconds.

25 July 2013, 03:03 PM	#12
PunkJr "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Adelaide Watch: 14060 Sub Posts: 332	No.

25 July 2013, 03:10 PM	#13
Bangel "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Australia Watch: 116610LN Posts: 15,802	Possibly? I'd have to see it and try it on first. Could be a good alternative for those wanting a date without the cyclops and without the heft and height of the DSSD. Can't really see it happening though and would probably be considered blasphemous to a lot of traditionalists.

25 July 2013, 11:09 PM	#16
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	In a New York second. Make it 42mm with a thinner case to 500 meters and it'd be a New York 1/2 second.

25 July 2013, 11:13 PM	#17
GradyPhilpott 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Mexico Watch: Seiko #SRK050 Posts: 34,460	Personally, I think a beefier, 40mm SD with a ceramic bezel is the route that Rolex should have taken, rather than building the DSSD. As it is, my 14060M is the only diver I need. __________________ JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner

25 July 2013, 11:22 PM	#18
mpaone "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Mike Location: Pinehurst, NC Watch: Tudor Black Bay Posts: 147	Yes it would probably be the only watch I would trade my current 16600 in for. OR maybe not. -Mike.

25 July 2013, 11:41 PM	#19
Rashid.bk "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Dallas Watch: 12800ft = 3900m Posts: 11,173	Hell yes, perhaps a tad thinner for those that don't want to go so deep, 8k ft.

25 July 2013, 11:43 PM	#20
akira23 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: Marty Location: Florida Watch: Pam 1313 Posts: 456	I may try one on at a local AD, but no I would not buy one....

26 July 2013, 12:02 AM	#21
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	Don't mess with perfection.

26 July 2013, 12:05 AM	#22
Knappo 1307 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: Jason Location: USA Watch: Sea Dweller Posts: 8,561	yes

26 July 2013, 12:08 AM	#23
Chainring "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Real Name: Steve Location: Grand Junction CO Watch: A few, not enough. Posts: 1,725	No. Would seem redundant to me.

26 July 2013, 02:16 AM	#29
Armyguy03 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: DM[V] Watch: 16710 \| 16600 Posts: 3,546	nope __________________ Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)