Reply With Quote
You want one, you have the ready, you buy one.
No one round here is going to try to dissuade someone else from buying a watch.
I'm certainly not, it's not my money you're spending
I already have two Rolex watches, Daytona and non date Sub, but I just have this obsession with getting a Sea Dweller, the nice one before they made the Deep Sea and ruined it
They seem to go for about 4-5k for a good one, there is one at Chronomasters that looks good, maybe I should sell the non date Sub to part fund it
Any Sea Dwellers owners on here want to comment on ownership, you don't find it too thick to wear with a shirt. I'm quite a serious diver which is why I have an obsession with this iconic time piece
You want one, you have the ready, you buy one.
No one round here is going to try to dissuade someone else from buying a watch.
I'm certainly not, it's not my money you're spending
Ha ! good reply, I have come to the wrong place for anyone to talk me out of it haven't I ?
It's a beautiful watch. I alternate mine with my SubC and its just so classy even though its a diver. Pretty much suitable for any and every occasion.
I'm not a diver so can't comment on functionality under water but it excels on dry land at the very least :-) Some people say it's top heavy but I find it sits nicely and don't have this issue.
I prefer the later models as they have a much more solid feel.
I had a 16600 and now have a 1665...
I think you should keep your ND Sub --> clearer dial and get a SD as well...It's going to feel like a beefed up 14060 but with a date and extra writing....Give it a go and chuck it on SC if you get bored of it... :)
It's not even that big...and definitively fits under a shirt :)
I know the SD is a classic (and infinitely nicer than the DSSD IMHO) but I never bonded with mine. I wear an LV sub, but I've had a 14060M, a 5513 and 16610 and various GMT's etc - and the one I liked least was the Seadwelller. It's not too thick to wear with a shirt, but the caseback is thicker which made it less comfortable than a sub for me - but what really killed it for me was how small it wore - the dial is noticeably smaller than a Submariner (probably by mm but I could see it) which when combined with the extra thickness just made it unbalanced somehow. That said, I'm not a diver so the extra depth rating and helium valve made no difference to me. They only cost a little more than a sub date when new, I think the reason they sold less well was down to the comfort factor as much as anything else. I don't mind the cyclops on a sub either so that made no difference, and in daily wear as it has the generic Rolex movement I can't imagine it's any tougher. The prices will only head north so if you must have one I'd go for it soon - I just found mine a bit disappointing.
Not sure I would call it an icon (I think the standard Sub owns that crown), but it surely represents the engineering prowess of Rolex before they turned to 21st century fashionistas craving ceramachrome ahead of the understated simplicity of a divers utility/tool watch.
Compared to a ND Sub, it sits taller on the wrist because of the raised caseback that prevents the lugs fitting flush against the wrist. Its diameter is fractionally smaller, and overall it is not as comfortable to wear in comparison. It does fit under a shirt, but it catches against the cuff edge fractionally more. I love mine for what it represents, and it has an air of indestructability about it. The discrete date and non-cyclops crystal is its signature, and it is all the better for it imho. Whilst I do like some of the more recent ceramachrome Rolexes (ND Sub 114060 in particular), I think the SD 16600 will always remain in the collection. They won't make another like it.
Fantastic watches.
The 16600 is an excellent daily driver which fits fine under shirt cuffs.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
i had a 16600, great wach, one f my all time favorites, i found the dial a little too small, then replaced it with the 1680 thats in SC, that i cant go in the sea with though!
i would suggest everyone own one, just to try it as it really is the zenith of rolex design!
Hmmmmm, obsessed are we..... And so you should be! I have had mine since 1997 and I love it's extra height and the lack of cyclops and the drilled lug holes. It only weighs in at 136g and the Sub was 120g or a tad more.
It won't fit under a double cuff shirt but then it depends on the shape of your wrist as well as thickness. As my wrist is very flat on top the watch does not wobble about and my wrist is a mere 6 inches. The flat bottom of the SD's case is a little smaller and hence a number of past owners found it wobbled on their wrists, but it does depend on how you size the bracelet in conjunction with the micro adjustments at the clasp.
I have dived with my SD both on the bracelet and on a NATO. It is not an obvious Rolex to the general public because it has no cyclops which helps. Wearing my 6694 many people notice I am wearing a Rolex thanks to the cyclops.
Having tried on a DSSD, I love my SD more but that's because I found it too big and heavy in SS for me and the tapering bracelet given the increased size meant sizing would be an issue for me.
Perhaps you could try posting your Sub for trade plus cash and an SD owner may be tempted, you never know :-)
Thanks for the feedback chaps, I need to get this watch out of my system for sure
Eh? - Was OK for me. I have pretty average sized wrists @ 7.25"Originally Posted by Stala
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Well, being a woman and the width of double cuffs on my fitted shirts, it didn't fit under mine and I even had a guy I worked with try to fit it under his double cuff, after it was resized for his manly wrist and it was snug.
But that was just my experience ;-)
Personally, I wouldn`t do it because.....and I know the Rolex fanatics will disagree strongly......it's basically the same watch as the one you own.
The SD is thicker and less well-proportioned. I have a smallish wrist and I find it sits too high compared to the Sub; that's one reason why it isn`t for me. It never looks as neat on the wrist.
Sub Date, Sub non-date, SD,.........there isn`t a lot of difference between them and certainly not enough to justify swapping IMO. At a glance they all look the same, and there's a very good reason for that.
Paul
I say go for it. The best Rolex by a country mile.
I'm sort of in the same boat.
The guy I bought my speedy co-axial off wants it back Ill be putting the cash towards an SD.
They are the ultimate rolex IMO and the best looking behind the MGLV.
What he said.^
Just go for it and enjoy!
Get one, absolutely brilliant. I have the GMTc and a Sub 114060 and the Dweller is in a different class, the dial oozes quality and the serrated edge of the bezel appears just a little wider than the Sub which catches the light better and the insert is inky black. Very comfortable on the wrist, can't really fault it, it would definitely be the last watch I would want to part with. Get an immaculate example, which may cost you, but I guarantee you wont stop grinning!
It's funny - I have large wrists (don't know inches but my sub fits perfectly with all the links and just 1 micro adjustment on the clasp less than maxed out) and I found the seadweller very odd to wear. At the time I was alternating between a 44mm Panerai, a Pepsi GMT and the Seadweller, and my wife used to say 'why are you wearing that ladies watch' when I wore the SD. It really isn't a large watch at all, and frankly at the time it was easier to get in London than a regular sub for £150 more which is the reason I bought it over a submariner really. At that time (2004-5?) nobody seemed that keen on the SD on this forum. anyhow, after a few months I noticed the date was misaligned so took it into Rolex st James who told me it couldn't be fixed (!?) and sent me back to Mappin and Webb who gave me a refund. A couple of my (non wis) friends still own Seadwellers and whenever I meet them for a beer the extra height and smaller dial are really apparent to me.
Now it's been discontinued it has become a forum darling. I'm not sure if this is because it's a great watch, or because it's so much nicer than it's replacement (but put a new Datejust next to the last model and it's obvious Rolex are now aiming for maximum bling)
It's just another sub variant really - another poster talks about the 'inky black' bezel insert but it's no blacker than any other insert on a sub.
Lucky we don't all like the same thing, but I wouldn't pay over the odds for one. As I say, 2 of my friends wear them and don't really have any interest in watches - and I see quite a few when I'm out and about in London. They aren't really that rare.
Nuff said?
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Wearing one right now (16660) with a suit and it's perfect. Had two until last week but one had to go.
If I had to have just one watch it would be a Sea Dweller.
If I had to have just one watch it would be a Sea Dweller
I echo the above just a great watch ,i always looked in the shop windows thinking and dreaming of owning one and when it happened i was well chuffed .
Then the WIS got hold of me ,still back on track all mine would go if need be but never the 16600 its a keeper for sure .
I know it was never as popular as the Sub and that's what I like about it, it is made as a proper commercial divers instrument, I have met several STA divers who wear them and use them at obscene depths. I don't have huge wrists only 6.5" so the smaller dial doesn't bother me. I just think its the ultimate Rolex sports watch as has already been said as its designed for such extreme use. I have had a love affair with this watch for years, I would have bought one when I bought my sub if I could have found one in a shop window. I just saw my ND Sub in a shop window in Farnham and it was an impulse purchase, that's where the madness began. I think I'm going to buy one and sell my ND Sub to part fund it
Contrary to much of the above comments re the relative comfort of the SD v the Sub, I actually find the SD more comfortable than my Subs (old case versions, not ceramic). It's not a big difference, I just find that due to the extra height, the crown digs in to my wrist slightly less. This is the same when on the bracelet or a NATO.
Not sure if the case back design changed on later 16600's (mine is a relatively early '94 example), but I doubt you'll be disappointed with the overall comfort of the watch.
I love my tritium / lug hole example, and while others are due to be culled over the coming weeks, I envisage the SD remaining as a core part of my collection.
The 16600 was the second Rolex I bought, already owning a 16710 and various other (non Rolex) watches. I absolutely love mine.
I can't quite put a finger on why, but when I take it off and put on any of the others they just somehow feel flimsy next to the sea dweller.
I would say go for it, but then I would wouldn't I??
I still recon in terms of overall daily wearability and useability, the GMT II is the finest all round daily wearer, perhaps ever, but I am unashamedly biased, and since it's not a diver it's not relevant to this thread anyway!
It was always a good watch but no better or worse than the other classic sports, then the hype started and a game of pass the parcel started everyone paying £100 more than the last bloke desperate to buy the last one in the shop because it would rocket in value.
all the steel sports are bloody brilliant and the current crop of ceramics is the best to date, people just don't realise it yet,,!!!
Last edited by 100thmonkey; 23rd April 2013 at 19:24.
RIAC
I've been enjoying mine on a NATO for the past few months which I think works quite nicely and gives it a different look..
For some reason, the 16600 leaves me cold. Dial is too glossy and it's not the most comfortable wearer with the slightly protruding case back.
I did own a 1665 'Great White' at the same time which might have had something to do with it though.
I agree with you on the Ceramics Kerry as they are great watches ,but i m not so sure on anybody buying the last V serials at list or a touch over as last was roughly £4k ,a brand new untouched would fetch £5.5k i reckon or £5k easily and i for one am happy to sit on mine .
A second hand M/V Serial 16600 would be £4250/4500 its the people who bought into the Milgauss GV crazy days £6/8k who at this moment in time are sitting with negative equity as tons of people were going crazy to get one and ended up paying mad money .
Ive paid £1800 for one and Ive paid £3600 for one. You probably arent the only one sitting with a brand new one in a safe there are a few hundred out there all waiting to make a life changing sum from them, its such a fantastic, timeless, and amazing watch then it should be worn for life shouldnt it
Last edited by 100thmonkey; 23rd April 2013 at 19:26.
RIAC
I don t think it will ever be a life changing amount Kerry but i still think its better than money in the bank nowadays ,yes like you say plenty will have new ones but i don t think there was loads of V Serials produced (but hey who knows .
I totally agree on wearing a watch for life and enjoying them though (even though i m guilty of sometimes not wearing one) better off buying what makes you smile and enjoying it to be honest .
I do struggle to see what difference the serial makes really its the identical watch to the previous million made but if you buy that hype then enjoy, along with flat 4's and open 6's & 9's those who buy into it clearly value it but the majority dont, looking at a red sub a few years back it was £6k for average no papers and £12k for a half tidy one with papers, those papers arent worth £6k to me but someone will pay it
RIAC
You really can't go wrong with a Sea-Dweller
Think I've owned 5 or 6 of them over the years. Have one currently and it's going nowhere !!
Best Sports Rolex by far.
maseman
The main problem with the Seadweller is when you are down at 4000ft everybody keeps asking you the time because their watches have imploded, it tends to get a trifle tedious.
The Seadweller is the best Submariner you can buy (ceramics excluded). It really is as simple as that.
Looks like Im in the minority, but I prefer the proportions of the Sub. The slightly bigger dial makes it wear a lot bigger IMO.
The smaller dialled, thicker SD makes it look a little out of proportion to me.
I much prefer a 1680 or a 16610
Best modern piece out there.
Was up for letting mine go and get something else,but at the weekend i put it on (hadn't worn/looked at it for a while )and it just has something about it,can't quite put my finger on it
......
Nice watches. Wear differently to the subs on account of the thickness. I've got an SD and an LV and between the two, I reckon they cover all the bases.
The best watch IMO.
It's just a matter of time...
Mine is worn every day under either a button or double cuff with no probs. No photos to prove that but i can prove it functions perfectly well under water...
Very lucky to have a choice between a 1680 and a Seadweller, I split the time I would say 70/30 with the bias to the 1680 not because of any issues with comfort, just because the Seadweller is a little more "special" and save it for weekends.
It's buddy on the left.
One of my favourites. I have the 16660 with silver surround on the dial but with lovely open 6 and 9 on the date wheel. It has a certain "bomb- proof" quality and along with the recently acquired 114060 will probably stay as permanent residence in my small collection.
If you want a serious dive watch, get one - life's too short for regrets - and sounds like you're ready smitten?
Martyn.
“ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG
Never been keen on Rolexes, but I also keep returning to the Sea Dweller. Currently considering the Pelagos (which avoids all the Rolex connotations) and thinking "what the hell" and just getting a Sea Dweller.
The Sea-Dwellers, in all incarnations, are simply superb. The 16600 and the 114060 are the best modern Rolex divers IMO.
Very nice pair indeed.
"A man of little significance"
The best of the Rolex sports models.
For some reason they are much cheaper out here in Singapore. I picked up mine last year (without papers but from a trusted second-hand guy) for 3k sterling. My cousin got his for even cheaper than that. With papers you're looking at under 4 easily. Might be worth a look, www.swx.com.sg is the best place for Singapore second-hand (I have no affiliation).
Posting Permissions
