Reply With QuoteJust wait until Rolex makes an updated sub without the horrible lugs. No need to make a 40mm watch that wears fat, when you have a new 43mm option with normal lugs.Originally Posted by VicLeChic
I have asked to be put on the list at my AD. Just have to find £8k now!
Just wait until Rolex makes an updated sub without the horrible lugs. No need to make a 40mm watch that wears fat, when you have a new 43mm option with normal lugs.
Did they not get you to complete the paperwork from rolex?
No, but I know the AD, so maybe they will next time I go in.
Bargain!! Where do I sign....?
Yep, that would be a different story, I doubt they'll increase the Sub to 43mm though.
Fat lugs, lol on the Sub:
Tapered lugs on the New SD:
Now that Sub would be a seriously great looking watch!
Joke of it is that with Rolex new policy, it is going to kick values even higher as it will take longer for them to filter through.
I quite like it and have also put my name down at the local AD.... time to start saving
What strikes me is the new larger bracelet. The has to be more watches on the way that it will fit.
It seems to me that, due to its increased bulk, the lugs on the new SD rather HAVE to taper.
Deliberating between this and the sky dweller, but eventually got my name 3rd on the list for this one at local AD. Hope it won't be a long wait!
I rather like it, will reserve full judgment untill it's on my wrist! Can't imagine it too hard to come across , the SD4000 was in AD's quickly enough with only afew weeks wait..
Through a mate I have jumped the queue so will not reveal the AD but I should be first. It has nothing to do with what you buy it's who you know.
When did he say they will be shipping. I really like it now. Little smaller would be preferable mind but going to get one
I think the bulky lugs were a way for Rolex to make a bigger watch while keeping it 40mm. Now that they've crossed the rubicon of upsizing an existing watch, why not just drop the fat lug artifice?
For the first time in my life Rolex doesn't offer a singe diver I could (wrist size) or would (fat lug) wear. I can't imagine they are ready to totally abandon the 40mm diver segment.
I have to admit the design has been swirling around in my head this week and the more I think about it, the more I like it, and the more I feel it's actually a very good design. I don't think I will be able to pull it off with my small wrists but overall, it really works.
Last edited by stix; 25th March 2017 at 10:08.
Looks a beaut! Shame I have pencil wrists though
I am no Rolex expert but my first impressions from the youtube video was obviously size and the hands looked quite small/weedy, i assume it was an illussion from the camera
and the bezel looks massive.
+1
Not a fan of the cyclops or the size. 43mm is just too big.
It will be interesting to see how well they sell. Perhaps an initial flurry of purchases by those who must have the latest and those with oversize wrists followed by slow sales?
The new SDR bound to be popular, liking the red writing AND surprisingly like the cyclops too. However to me seems too much like the deepsea sizewise and at 9k id rather go for the D blue deepsea
Chronext offering some lucky person a 6k hike on RRP for jumping the line......I think Ill wait.
There will be plenty available in the first shipment. Paying an extra six grand to get one later than folks buying at the normal dealer does seem a bit unwise. ;)
Can you qualify "plenty" please? Thanks..
I am first on the list at my AD, I look forward to seeing it in the flesh and wearing then will decide.
Over 20:1 compared to the 116500LN on initial release, at least in my area. This won't exactly be a difficult watch to get. :)
Who is your Rolex source please?
Have to agree with you .It would be nice if the new SDR was a success and Rolex then stopped the DSSD.
It also solves the problem of second hand watches not having fat lugs. If anything it may even become more desirable as it's polished over the years and the lugs become thinner, something to look forward to!
Adding today's review from Monochrome (04/04/17).
Lug width confirmed at 22mm. Larger case, bezel, bracelet, clasp, indexes and hands compared to previous SD4000. The technical reason behind the absence of Cyclops on previous Sea-Dweller models is explained (would pop off under pressure), although other sources clam the cyclops would cause the crystal to shatter which is now fixed up to a certain depth.
Availability April.
https://monochrome-watches.com/rolex...-review-price/
Last edited by VicLeChic; 4th April 2017 at 22:25.
I'm warming to this quite a bit and those pictures don't help! Must resist.
Most thoughtful review I've read, that - thanks. Interested to note that the reviewer has smallish wrists [6.7"] and normally likes the 40mm Rolexes, but was surprised by how well it wore, partly because it was less top-heavy than the outgoing.
I'm guessing that is where Rolex are going. The 43mmSD is too close to the DSSD in terms of diameter, thickness and price, and no one 'really' needs the DSSD depth rating. So I wouldn't be surprised if the DSSD goes the way of the 40mmSD.
Has anyone got a measurement of the thickness of the new SD? I haven't seen this in any of the reviews (a pet peeve that watch reviews in general so rarely bother to state this).
I also wonder whether it will actually measure slightly smaller than the stated 43mm, as the Vernier-equipped say other Rolexes do. (I've never understood this.)
That's utter nonsense about the alleged Cyclops-coming-off issue. It's disappointing that Rolex would apparently let someone make a statement revealing such obvious misunderstanding of a basic concept in hydrostatics.
Plus they can't even keep their story consistent, as the last article had an equally-ignorant claim that the crystal itself was failing rather than the magnifier magically falling off.
There's never been any technical barrier to fitting an external magnifier — it's purely an æsthetic decision.
Still a 'no' from me.
Am not sure what part was actually an official Rolex explanation.
Yes sounds bogus as hell. on the plexis the cyclops is part of the mould so what was the reason then...?
Great comparison pic courtesy of the net:
Agreed. What a load of BS. That's also interesting to note that the cyclops was moulded into the plexiglass. I thought that was the reason for not using one on the initial SD, back in the day.
I think they have lost some of the Sea Dweller aesthetic with the cyclops, it really looks more like a Submariner on steroids than a SD now. At a distance the lack of a cyclops was always a easy way to spot a SD over a Sub.
I am sure it will sell like hotcakes though, which will reinforce in the designer's mind they did they right thing :-(
Indeed, it's 100% BS.
If fluid pressure was capable of somehow breaking protrusions in that way, it's rather challenging to explain how other dangling items weren't also detached at the unprecedented depths achieved during the original Sea-Dweller's era of pioneering undersea excursions — such as the divers' gargantuan freaking balls. :P
I dont think the problem is the cyclops falling off, its more to do with the localised increase in pressure on a single point of the crystal due to the increased surface area of the cyclops vs a flat section of crystal.
I've drawn a quick diagram to give an idea of what i mean
^
Although I appreciate the effort and can understand how it would seem intuitive, that's not how hydrostatic forces act. It simply isn't possible to have a localised increase in pressure.
For me it is the aesthetic and ethical reasons rather than the science behind it. Adding the cyclops to the sd is like adding the rear doors to a 911 or smothering a Sunday roast in ketchup. It's just not right.
adding a side by side comparison with the Deepsea : dial looks slightly bigger, but to be confirmed.
That's as I always understood it. No idea whether its a load of cobblers or not.I dont think the problem is the cyclops falling off, its more to do with the localised increase in pressure on a single point of the crystal due to the increased surface area of the cyclops vs a flat section of crystal.
I've drawn a quick diagram to give an idea of what i mean
Posting Permissions
