So I have a Rolex Submariner 116610LN and I’ve had it six or so years. Lovely watch, really happy with it.
However, I’ve had a bit of an itch, for many, many years, for a Sea Dweller. I’m tempted at the moment to pick up the SD4K, while prices seem sensible (ish) but wondered if anyone had gone from a Submariner to a Sea Dweller and would be willing to share their thoughts on the differences between the two in real-world use?
How do the sizes compare, the thickness, the heft. Are there any drawbacks to the SD versus the Sub? Is it as comfortable?
If any of you actually dive with it, as I do with mine, is the SD any easier or harder to use underwater?
Many thanks
Just my opinion as always, but I prefer the traditional 16600 as "The Sea Dweller", I know there were many before and will be many after but it just feels so right on the wrist.
I love my SD50, but I'm only keeping it with one eye on investment, something I could do the same with on a SD4K. If I could afford to keep both I would and I guarantee the 16600 would be worn much, much more than the new model.
As a diver, the old watch feels like it was designed to be used, the new ones as jewellery.
The SD4K looks smaller on the wrist than the ceramic Sub. It also doesn't have a Cyclops.
Make sure to accept the bulk of the newer sd’s and the fact that if used for diving will get hit here and there quite often
Get a 16600
I have a 116600 and a 16610LV, and I've had the 116610.
I wear the Sub far more often, as I prefer the way that it sits on the wrist and I much prefer the look of a date display with Cyclops; that little window seems a bit boring and sterile without the magnifier.
The Sea-Dweller, though nice, wouldn't be worth the current premium to me, and I think the 116610 is the better watch for wearing every day. There's no difference between them for non-saturation-environment diving use, either.
Having just bought a SD4K, I don’t really understand why these didn’t sell in more numbers, and kicking myself for not buying before they were discontinued when you could get one under £6k.
It wears well and has all the benefits of the ceramic watches with newer bracelet / clasp etc
I think the SD4k, if you can find one at a reasonable enough price, is a much better proposition in terms of aesthetics and investment than a sub.
The only drawback for me is that if your eyesight isn't what it once was the date is difficult to read however the aesthetics of not having cyclops would win over that drawback.Originally Posted by PSTW
Both great watches but I think once you have a Sea Dweller you tend to stick with them.
I have an SD4K but did have your model of sub. I think the SD4K wears nicer.
The main difference is the cyclops as mentioned , there’s a lot of love for the seadweller and the fact it has been discontinued , it’s selling at a premium . Still think the sub sits better on the wrist ( in my opinion )
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Thanks for the responses so far.
For my part, it would have to be the SD4K. A few people I’ve spoken to have suggested I buy a pre-ceramic watch, but the truth is, while I really liked the heads of the older Rolex sport models, I never liked the bracelets and the clasps. That’s why it was easy to buy a Sub when the SubC came out, the bracelet was/is particularly nice and, in my opinion of course, a marked improvement.
I’ve been looking on a load of watch selling sites, Blowers, Watchfinder and the usual suspects and the prices vary hugely.
The keenest price I’ve seen is not much shy of nine grand, the more extravagant can be north of eleven. That seems like a very big difference for a watch with such a short production run. All had box and papers and were in ‘mint’ condition. Age seemed to be the only driver for price.
I downloaded the Chrono24 app last night and got to searching - that thing is going to be dangerous for my bank balance. The prices there seemed to reflect the above from both private and trade sellers. I’ve read, though, that Chrono24’s prices, on the whole, can be high.
I’ve never bought a Sea Dweller before and so don’t have any experience to go on. My Sub is the only Rolex I’ve ever bought or, until today, considered buying.
I don’t think there’s much chance of getting one as NOS from a dealer at RRP so the grey/pre-owned market seems the next best option.
Are those prices above what I can expect to pay, or are there more keenly priced examples to be had if I wait or look elsewhere, in the opinion of the forum?
SD4K's have sold here recently for between £7.5 & 8k.
To be honest, that sounds a bit more like it. Eight thousand plus sounds a bit on the high side, those going for more just seem silly. Like the money the 126600 is going for (I’ve seen some for as much as twelve thousand - you’d really have to want it to pay that).
Appreciated.
Funnily enough, out of three watches - a BLNR, a 16600 and a 116600, I rarely wear the SDc. I prefer the way the BLNR and the older SD wear.
However....
If I had to sell two of the three, I'd keep the SDc! It covers all bases very well and makes a brilliant day to day watch.
To my mind, those three watches are quite similar in their form, what draws you to the SDc specifically over the other two in a ‘one watch’ situation?
Myself I have a modest collection. I’ve got an Omega diver, an older Tag and a vintage Tissot, but since I bought the Rolex, I just haven’t worn anything else. So for me, really, the SD is likely to become my one watch.
It does everything well. The older SD has the classic look but is a bit rattly, the BLNR is a modern great but a little blingy.
Sometimes, I like those things but th SDc sits perfectly in the middle ground.
Hope that makes sense!
If you like the look of and design the 116600, then you'll probably love actually having one. It really is a fantastic watch; aside from my personal preference for the Cyclops, it's a no-excuses watch... and pretty rare for a modern steel Rolex.
Chrono24 is a dealer service. Try watchrecon to see private listings aggregated from several forums. :)
Great resource! Much appreciated.
£7.5k would be the sweet spot for the SDc but anything over £8k, you would start to second think. The only fault the SDc had in my eyes was the poor fitting end link, which for a watch of its RRP at the time, i thought was pretty inexcusable from Rolex.
Agree on the 126600 current asking prices, i sometimes forget when all you see is the £11250-£11950 prices etc on the usual suspect dealer sites that the actual RRP on the Red dweller is just over £8k.
That plus I couldn’t “unsee” the date being too far towards the centre of the dial, or at least compared to the 16600.
Still a nice watch in its own right.
Can't say I've ever noticed that. I would have thought being roughly the same size, it would be similar. Are they different movements?
Edit:
Jesus, you're right!
I'd never noticed before now I will every time I look at it.
Last edited by Dave O'Sullivan; 10th April 2018 at 18:17.
You absolute rotter! I hadn’t noticed that before!!
I went and had a look for some photos of it, completely see what you mean. I think the maxi dial makes it a lot more obvious than it really otherwise might be. There isn’t a lot of room between the markers for it to get away with it.
I had a look at some 16600 photos too and it isn’t way off to the right, like, say, in an Omega Seamaster, but I think because there’s more room between the indices, it isn’t as obvious.
Looking down at my Submariner now, that’s similarly not as far to the right as I had thought it was. The SDc and the SubC share the 3135 movement and, as both are 40mm, makes sense I suppose. The magnifier hides it well on the Sub.
How strange.
Last edited by PSTW; 10th April 2018 at 18:11. Reason: I have more knowledge!
I had the sd50 and didn’t get on with it, but I do have quite small wrists. I have been wearing a 16610lv daily for past 10 years. The size and thickness just never felt right on the sea dweller for me. An sd4k might be better for future value but I think you will end up missing the sub. If I could only have one watch it would be a ceramic sub.
There’s not a lot in it, but the 16600 just looks perfect for a non-maxi dial. Out of the more recent ceramics, I’d probably choose the non-date, or the SD50.
It's just a matter of time...
I worry about that. But like many people I don’t want to have that much money tied up in two watches if one is going to live in the box. I started thinking I’d flog or trade the Sub to fund the SD. I sent off some cheeky valuations to places like Watchfinder and that lot, which felt a lot like We Buy Any Car for watches. The offers that came back were pretty laughable to be honest (I think the best was £5500). I thought I’d be a mug to sell a steel sports Rolex for less than list, at a loss to me versus list when I bought it, at a time when I keep reading how difficult they are to get hold of from an AD.
So the allure of trading it diminished a bit - I’m thinking I’ll buy an SD, wear it while holding on to the Sub and then, when/if the SD gets the nod, sell the Sub, or of course the SD if it doesn’t.
I know there are people who can pull the trigger on a new watch as the mood fancies them without being overly concerned that it naturally amasses a collection. Alas, I’m not one of those guys, yet!
I looked at photos of the SD50 after reading the above, I think it gets away with it similarly to the 16600, because the slightly larger dial hides the placement of the date window and makes it look more in proportion. But looking closer, even on that watch, it looks a bit nearer to the middle than I’d expected.
It’s not a deal breaker for either watch, I’m just surprised I hadn’t noticed.
Sorry mate
It’s one of those thing I suppose, just like the asymmetric lugs on the steel Daytona :(
Last edited by -Ally-; 10th April 2018 at 19:59.
It's less of a case of hiding things, and more that the date feature was explicitly designed to be used with a magnifier; the window is in perfect alignment when it's present. (Similarly, the Daytona's lugs were intentionally made slimmer on the right side of the case to visually counterbalance the crown and pushers.)
Likewise, on the 216570 Explorer II and other larger-dialled models, the date wheel has been enlarged proportionally to line up exactly when magnified.
The reason the inboard placement is a bit more obvious on the 116600 than the earlier 16600 version is that it has a larger dial; the previous model was 1 mm smaller in visible diameter than the equivalent 16610 Submariner, whereas both ceramic diver's watches share the same dial size. The resulting 1/2 mm difference in placement isn't massive, but it's enough to be noticed if you look.
It's quickly forgotten on the wrist, of course. For me, the Sea-Dweller's old-school-style raised crystal profile offsets the date positioning when compared to the flatter Submariner:
Last edited by Belligero; 10th April 2018 at 20:13.
I honestly don’t think there is a bad choice amongst them, but the 16600 is my all time favourite watch.
It's just a matter of time...
In many ways, right now I wish I could make peace with the bracelet and clasp. There are some fantastic good value 16600s about.
I wonder if anyone has ever shoehorned a 116610 bracelet into one?! #sacrilege
Yes, I’ve tried the newer bracelet on one of mine and a member has advertised theirs with one on for sale.
I quite like the older bracelets - all my favourite Rolex watches come on the older bracelets.
It's just a matter of time...
Ditto. Cast iron modern classic. I wouldn't get too hung up on the bracelet. Yes the newer references are a step up but there wasn't much wrong with the older rattlers IMO.
Yep, for me the 16600 is the best sports/tool watch ever made. That the bracelet can be fixed with a £2.50 pair of pliers makes it even better in my eyes!
Values appear to have ‘skyrocketed’ ‘here’ since your post...
Some might say holding ‘firm’.
At the risk of looking left out of the in-reference, what does that mean?
There's one on SC now for £8,600. However, I bought a stickered 126600 on here last month for less than £10k so I think £8.6k is 'toppy'...and I have/love my SD4K too.
Gotcha. I think you’re right. In a casual chat with a jeweller a couple of days ago we talked numbers and £8600 was the ‘real’ price.
Well done on getting an SD50 under ten grand. There are a few out there, but not many.
Just to add my own opinion, I’ve been through pretty much all modern steel sports Rolex and a few 16610lvs and for me the Rolex sd4000 is my all time favourite. The watch has a little bit more going on with the bezel, engraved case back, non magnifier over the date, small production run etc. I’ve said it before and il say it again, walk into many a pub/restaurant in London where I live and every one has a sub on. How many sd4000 do you see in the wild? I’ve not seen any yet. I like to be a bit different then everyone else. I’m lucky enough to own a hulk as well so I have a black SeaDweller 4000 and a green sub but in all honesty the sub feels pretty.....regular? The sd4000 feels special. I appreciate the older references may appeal to people more but I love the fact the sd4000 was a 40mm ceramic with new style case and bracelet. A modern tool watch you know is very capable. Yes there are plenty around to buy from £8k upwards and there are many people saying they won’t be a collectors item etc but I remember many a watch dealer saying about 6 years ago the 16610lv will never be a collectors watch as it was too modern, too many made etc etc. Now the same dealers can’t get enough of them and charge sky high prices. My bet is in ten years the Sd4000 will be a good investment on your money if you bought one now. Put it this way, you could buy one today at £8.5k, wear it for 10 years and I reckon you’d go and sell it for a few grand more than what you paid for it..
Just checked watchfinder and it appears they don’t have a single sd4000 for sale. Plenty of hulks, kermits and Daytona’s...
Last edited by Yeti; 11th April 2018 at 07:27.
How long is a piece of string? Some questions have no answer, other than personal choice. I've owned the Sub, SD4000 and 43mm.
My 'theoretical' view was that the 43mm was driven by marketing. But having lived with one, I have changed my mind. For me, the 43mm is a great dive watch, so comfortable and not obtrusive I couldn't go back to a 4000. Not now.
And finally, the 'everyone's got a Sub' thing. For none-watch people, 99% of the population, there's no difference between any of these watches. They all look exactly the same. Big, black, chunky silver bracelet.
If you want to escape that, buy an elegant dress watch. They depreciate so quickly that a nice one on SC could be an interesting alternative to 'macho'.
Last edited by paskinner; 11th April 2018 at 09:14.
Pretty sure the dude's not looking for an "elegant dress watch", given that he explicitly mentioned wanting this specific diver's watch for actual diving use.
True; but I was responding to the suggestion that the Sub was too common. You could have a Sub and a dress watch for the price of (say) a SD4000. Go diving and dancing.....Pretty sure the dude's not looking for an "elegant dress watch", given that he explicitly mentioned wanting this specific diver's watch for actual diving use.
He’s right, but I totally get your point. I tried my hand with dress watches years ago, nothing wrong with them but they just don’t suit my gorilla-like wrists.
There is a part of me that does think the Sub is quite common. I do see a lot in the wild (love that expression). However, I think I can count one one hand, over the years, the number of Sea Dwellers I’ve seen anywhere but in a jeweller or in forum photographs. There is something a bit more, I want to say romantic, about them. The history, the cachet they seem to have and I do think the SD4K is probably the last of the ‘true Sea Dwellers’.
I’m convincing myself to buy one now. They were just shy of seven grand new the last time I looked, before they went out of production. It’s amazing how the values have gone up.
I agree that the short production run will hall value in the future - in all honesty, though that’s nice, it isn’t that important to me. I want to wear it and use it, I don’t see it as an investment. That bit is a convenient bonus should I ever need to sell it.
I’m off to London on Friday, I want some new suits or work. But one thing London has a lot of is watch shops! It’d be rude not to go and have a watch-peep while there.
I think the same way about the 16600 and 116600 vs. the Submariner. However if you want to wear the watch on a daily basis the extra weight and wobbliness of the SD's might become tiresome. I still think that despite the SD's exclusiveness the 116610LN is the best watch for daily wear/dive/recreation etc. because you don't feel it on your wrist all the time.
Same here.
I think the current Submariner is perfect, and — while certainly quite popular considering how a high-grade of a watch it is — it's far from actually being common. However, I understand wanting to have something a bit rarer.
My wrists are lean but 200 mm around, so despite my appreciation for more-refined-looking watches, they don't really suit my build, my style, or my activities. And I've had fancier stuff, but my Datejust is as dressy of a watch as I'd ever want these days.
So my reasons for wanting a 116600 were probably pretty similar to yours. But it might be worth reconsidering the new 126600, as it's no less of a "true" Sea-Dweller than its predecessors; if anything, it's probably the best diver's watch Rolex has ever made.
I prefer its size and proportions on my wrist, the movement is the best in the business, the larger dial makes its legibility even better, and the Cyclops fixes my one minor gripe with the earlier model. Even the little bit of red text is an improvement as a welcome splash of colour on an otherwise-monochrome watch.
Given that a used 116600 and a new 126600 cost roughly the same, I'd personally just hold onto the Submariner until a new Sea-Dweller becomes available from a dealer at MSRP. The new model will still be an uncommon watch even if it's in production for the next twenty years, and I can't think of single downside if you have the wrist for it.
Last edited by Belligero; 11th April 2018 at 15:40.
^ I agree with that.
Me too. Good post!
You make a good point. I suppose the difference is I’ve tried a 116600, years ago and liked it. Never seen a 126600 in the flesh but have this fear that it might be a lot like the DSSD, which isn’t to my taste.
I’m going to see if I can try one on when I’m in London on Friday. Watchfinder have loads of them, I ought to be able to see one.
I’ll let you know how it goes.
Godspeed.
I wear my sd4k every day and I never feel any “wobbliness”.
Interestingly I was chatting with a guy who had a ceramic sub on that he had gotten as a significant year birthday present. He asked me what I was wearing and when I showed him, his reaction was “ that’s my watch’s big brother”.
The 43mm doesn't 'wear' anything like a Deepsea. Not to me anyway. You have to try these on your wrist, which isn't always easy.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote