ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

President Rolex · 11 February 2006, 08:12 PM

Do you feel it too much to have both a Black 16610 Sub and a Sea Dweller?

My Sub department has a Black, Blue and Green, however, I have always thought that someday I would add a Dweller.

They look the same for the most part, is it worth it or more of a duplication.

Thanks,

PR

JJ Irani · 11 February 2006, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by President Rolex

Do you feel it too much to have both a Black 16610 Sub and a Sea Dweller?

My Sub department has a Black, Blue and Green, however, I have always thought that someday I would add a Dweller.

They look the same for the most part, is it worth it or more of a duplication.

Thanks,

PR

Good point, PR. A lot of guys do own the 16610 as well as the SD. Personally, I would choose ONE of the two. Both are excellent buys and superb watches, but I still say the 16610 is the ICON in the entire Rolex Oyster line-up!!

President Rolex · 11 February 2006, 08:19 PM

I agree. The 16610 it the one that you think of when you think of Rolex.

JJ Irani · 11 February 2006, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by President Rolex

I agree. The 16610 it the one that you think of when you think of Rolex.

Agreed! Need another reminder? LOL!

Shhhh.....just an excuse to post a pic!

President Rolex · 11 February 2006, 08:41 PM

Post away, I love looking at them.

mailman · 11 February 2006, 08:57 PM

Some say yes, some say no. I guess it all depends on what makes you happy

JJ Irani · 11 February 2006, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mailman

Some say yes, some say no. I guess it all depends on what makes you happy

I'll say yes to Angelina Jolie...she makes me very happy!

padi56 · 11 February 2006, 09:04 PM

I have both must admit the SD get most wrist, time not a huge fan of cyclops.

betrezra · 11 February 2006, 09:39 PM

I started with a SD and just got a Sub and I love them both.

IMHO - Seadweller is much more substantial weight/bulk..... and the Sub is more refined dressy.

I don't consider it duplication at all. The differences between the two have to be felt/seen in person to appreciate.

I love the feel of the SD on my wrist.

The sub is more like a fashion watch..... where the SD is like an industrial instrument :)

My .000002 cents ;)

I also plan to add the following to my arm soon:
18K SUB
Pepsi GMT
1960's Old School Bond Sub.....
Claudia Schiffer... (uh hem.... ...) sorry got carried away :)

Rackness · 12 February 2006, 12:13 AM

i prefer the SD i like the clean look of the no cyclops crystal. i also love the fact that it is a go anywhere do anything time piece. i have done things that would make folks cringe and leave their watches at home and the dweller takes it in stride. imho it is a must have.

all the best,
Jason

Goodwatch · 12 February 2006, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

I'll say yes to Angelina Jolie...she makes me very happy!

Want more? I'll post 'em in another section or e-mail them.

Rockrolex · 12 February 2006, 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

I'll say yes to Angelina Jolie...she makes me very happy!

Everyone, please note the point at which this otherwise sensible thread got mercilously hijacked by a bald Kiwi.

Subfiend · 12 February 2006, 09:29 AM

If you can afford it, go for it. I have three SS Subs and a TT Sub, but I still added a new Sea-Dweller last spring.

However, I had a good reason (at least I thought it was good). I have worn my original Sub since 1991 and I wanted to retire it so I could give it to my son. I don't like to dive with my TT Sub, or either of the vintage Subs, so I bought the SD as my replacement dive/tool watch. It's my new beater.

I like the SD. I wear it more than any other Rolex. But I don't wear it for more than two or three days, then I switch to something lighter.

RogerF · 12 February 2006, 09:50 AM

Do what makes you happy. Right now my collection consists of a SD, GMT2, Exp1 and TT DJ and I am considering a 14060M simply for its gorgeous clean look (the only Sub without an essay written on the dial) But from a distance it looks exactly like my SD...... oh well as long as I like it right?

With that being said I say get the SD and you wont regret it, it is a different beast compared to the Sub-date or Sub.

mike · 12 February 2006, 11:06 AM

You can't have to many!!

Clifton · 12 February 2006, 01:18 PM

[QUOTE=President Rolex]Do you feel it too much to have both a Black 16610 Sub and a Sea Dweller?[QUOTE]

Hey PR,

Ask any man on the street and the simple answer is why in the phook would you need both. Fair one.

However, to me, it is all about the details. Both quickly appear the same, but each has little things that make you appreciate them separately.

If you find that you value the details that make each different, owning both is easily justified.

mailman · 12 February 2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Want more? I'll post 'em in another section or e-mail them.

PM them to everyone

President Rolex · 12 February 2006, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Subfiend

If you can afford it, go for it. I have three SS Subs and a TT Sub, but I still added a new Sea-Dweller last spring.

However, I had a good reason (at least I thought it was good). I have worn my original Sub since 1991 and I wanted to retire it so I could give it to my son. I don't like to dive with my TT Sub, or either of the vintage Subs, so I bought the SD as my replacement dive/tool watch. It's my new beater.

I like the SD. I wear it more than any other Rolex. But I don't wear it for more than two or three days, then I switch to something lighter.

Sounds like the way I would do it. Nice rotation.

PR

President Rolex · 12 February 2006, 06:52 PM

[QUOTE=Clifton][QUOTE=President Rolex]Do you feel it too much to have both a Black 16610 Sub and a Sea Dweller?

Quote:

Hey PR,

Ask any man on the street and the simple answer is why in the phook would you need both. Fair one.

However, to me, it is all about the details. Both quickly appear the same, but each has little things that make you appreciate them separately.

If you find that you value the details that make each different, owning both is easily justified.

That is what I think as well. The differences are small and practical.

PR

President Rolex · 12 February 2006, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betrezra

I started with a SD and just got a Sub and I love them both.

IMHO - Seadweller is much more substantial weight/bulk..... and the Sub is more refined dressy.

I don't consider it duplication at all. The differences between the two have to be felt/seen in person to appreciate.

I love the feel of the SD on my wrist.

The sub is more like a fashion watch..... where the SD is like an industrial instrument :)

My .000002 cents ;)

I also plan to add the following to my arm soon:
18K SUB
Pepsi GMT
1960's Old School Bond Sub.....
Claudia Schiffer... (uh hem.... ...) sorry got carried away :)

I think that if you did not know anything about these watches, you would say it is the same thing, however, the SD has a very professional assignment, and the technical details are not visible.

I am also looking at the YG Sub to go with my sub collection. Man this is getting expensive.

Best,

The President

RobDad · 13 February 2006, 06:56 AM

I owned a SeaDweller, sold it and now own a 16610.

In a nutshell, the 16610 is a little slimmer, less chunky and more comfortable to wear.

When I had the SD I also had a 44mm PAM, and the Panerai felt less top-heavy than the SeaDweller.

OK, the SD is 'the ultimate diver' but, really, isn't it a little OTT? - you'll never need the helium valve, and the only reason they left off the cyclops is because the uneven pressure across the crystal at ludicrous depth would crack the glass!

Both great watches though, but to my mind the Sub can be worn smart or casual, whereas the SD is really a chunky 'tool' watch

If I owned both, I'm sure the sub would get most wrist time, as it really does wear more comfortably

betrezra · 13 February 2006, 08:18 AM

Robdad - your sentiment is widely held.... hence the greater popularity of the Sub VS the SD.

Funny.... people actually ask if my SD is a real rolex........ since it doesn't have the cyclopse ;).....

I like the SD best as it's more of an industrial tool...... but hey.... I've been called a tool a time or two

maybe that's the attraction :)

Funny thing about these watches..... I never paid much attention to them until I actually put one on my wrist.... and MAN!!!! are these nice!!!

Now I want (uh hem...) NEED a pepsi GMT and a YG SUB !!!!! ARGH!

To debate if one is 'better' is kind of like debating between Pamela Anderson and Britany Spears ;)...... They'd both do the job nicely :)

Rackness · 13 February 2006, 02:30 PM

just think of it this way Sub "girly" wrist SD manly wrist it is all relative LOL!!

*hides under desk*

they are both great time pieces it all comes down to personal preference you really can't go wrong with either.

Subfiend · 14 February 2006, 04:44 AM

Why do you think I own four Subs and only one SD? Because the Sub is more comfortable on my wrist, and it's the icon.

However, one nice thing about the SD is it is uncommon. If you don't want to own the same thing everybody else seems to have, the SD is a better choice.

Launch Mini · 14 February 2006, 05:40 AM

You can also go Sub without the date for the Non-Cyclops look.
For me, I went the 16610 and with a Pan for a different look.
Just my opinion.
I was looking at the Sub No Date, but I wanted the cyclops to complete the look.

Subfiend · 14 February 2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Launch Mini

You can also go Sub without the date for the Non-Cyclops look.

I did that, twice.

Launch Mini · 14 February 2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Subfiend

I did that, twice.

Are starting to sound like JJ???

Earl · 14 February 2006, 10:42 AM

PR my 2 cnts: It's duplication having a SD and a Date Sub, the only difference in them is the SD is on steroids and you don't have the traditional cyclops on the date.. if it was there looks wise you have a SS Sub.

I went for vintage and got and 5513 love the watch and give it equal wear time the SD is for the week I need to know what date it is!!! And again it's all personal preference Right?

RobDad · 15 February 2006, 10:17 PM

1 modern, 1 vintage - a cool combination, and they look surprisingly different

mailman · 16 February 2006, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl

PR my 2 cnts: It's duplication having a SD and a Date Sub, the only difference in them is the SD is on steroids and you don't have the traditional cyclops on the date.. if it was there looks wise you have a SS Sub.

I went for vintage and got and 5513 love the watch and give it equal wear time the SD is for the week I need to know what date it is!!! And again it's all personal preference Right?

Right on Earl

How about some pics of the 5513

11 February 2006, 08:12 PM	#1
President Rolex Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Palm Springs, CA, Posts: 119	Question about Sub's & Sea Dwellers Do you feel it too much to have both a Black 16610 Sub and a Sea Dweller? My Sub department has a Black, Blue and Green, however, I have always thought that someday I would add a Dweller. They look the same for the most part, is it worth it or more of a duplication. Thanks, PR

11 February 2006, 08:57 PM	#6
mailman TRF Moderator & DATE-JUST41 2024 Patron Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: . Watch: 126610LN Posts: 35,388	Some say yes, some say no. I guess it all depends on what makes you happy __________________ JJ

11 February 2006, 09:04 PM	#8
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 52,426	I have both must admit the SD get most wrist, time not a huge fan of cyclops. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

11 February 2006, 09:39 PM	#9
betrezra "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 477	Both ;) I started with a SD and just got a Sub and I love them both. IMHO - Seadweller is much more substantial weight/bulk..... and the Sub is more refined dressy. I don't consider it duplication at all. The differences between the two have to be felt/seen in person to appreciate. I love the feel of the SD on my wrist. The sub is more like a fashion watch..... where the SD is like an industrial instrument :) My .000002 cents ;) I also plan to add the following to my arm soon: 18K SUB Pepsi GMT 1960's Old School Bond Sub..... Claudia Schiffer... (uh hem.... ...) sorry got carried away :)

12 February 2006, 09:29 AM	#13
Subfiend "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Outside Watch: Isn't it obvious? Posts: 1,926	If you can afford it, go for it. I have three SS Subs and a TT Sub, but I still added a new Sea-Dweller last spring. However, I had a good reason (at least I thought it was good). I have worn my original Sub since 1991 and I wanted to retire it so I could give it to my son. I don't like to dive with my TT Sub, or either of the vintage Subs, so I bought the SD as my replacement dive/tool watch. It's my new beater. I like the SD. I wear it more than any other Rolex. But I don't wear it for more than two or three days, then I switch to something lighter. __________________ Subfiend Last edited by Subfiend; 12 February 2006 at 09:31 AM..

11 February 2006, 08:19 PM	#3
President Rolex Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Palm Springs, CA, Posts: 119	I agree. The 16610 it the one that you think of when you think of Rolex.

11 February 2006, 08:41 PM	#5
President Rolex Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Palm Springs, CA, Posts: 119	Post away, I love looking at them.

12 February 2006, 12:13 AM	#10
Rackness "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Harford County MD Posts: 393	i prefer the SD i like the clean look of the no cyclops crystal. i also love the fact that it is a go anywhere do anything time piece. i have done things that would make folks cringe and leave their watches at home and the dweller takes it in stride. imho it is a must have. all the best, Jason

12 February 2006, 09:50 AM	#14
RogerF "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Duh! Location: Toronto Canada Watch: a gonna do? Posts: 2,573	Do what makes you happy. Right now my collection consists of a SD, GMT2, Exp1 and TT DJ and I am considering a 14060M simply for its gorgeous clean look (the only Sub without an essay written on the dial) But from a distance it looks exactly like my SD...... oh well as long as I like it right? With that being said I say get the SD and you wont regret it, it is a different beast compared to the Sub-date or Sub.

12 February 2006, 11:06 AM	#15
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	You can't have to many!!

12 February 2006, 01:18 PM	#16
Clifton Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Earth Posts: 148	[QUOTE=President Rolex]Do you feel it too much to have both a Black 16610 Sub and a Sea Dweller?[QUOTE] Hey PR, Ask any man on the street and the simple answer is why in the phook would you need both. Fair one. However, to me, it is all about the details. Both quickly appear the same, but each has little things that make you appreciate them separately. If you find that you value the details that make each different, owning both is easily justified.

13 February 2006, 06:56 AM	#21
RobDad Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Real Name: Rob Dadd Location: London Posts: 134	I owned a SeaDweller, sold it and now own a 16610. In a nutshell, the 16610 is a little slimmer, less chunky and more comfortable to wear. When I had the SD I also had a 44mm PAM, and the Panerai felt less top-heavy than the SeaDweller. OK, the SD is 'the ultimate diver' but, really, isn't it a little OTT? - you'll never need the helium valve, and the only reason they left off the cyclops is because the uneven pressure across the crystal at ludicrous depth would crack the glass! Both great watches though, but to my mind the Sub can be worn smart or casual, whereas the SD is really a chunky 'tool' watch If I owned both, I'm sure the sub would get most wrist time, as it really does wear more comfortably

13 February 2006, 08:18 AM	#22
betrezra "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 477	Rr Robdad - your sentiment is widely held.... hence the greater popularity of the Sub VS the SD. Funny.... people actually ask if my SD is a real rolex........ since it doesn't have the cyclopse ;)..... I like the SD best as it's more of an industrial tool...... but hey.... I've been called a tool a time or two maybe that's the attraction :) Funny thing about these watches..... I never paid much attention to them until I actually put one on my wrist.... and MAN!!!! are these nice!!! Now I want (uh hem...) NEED a pepsi GMT and a YG SUB !!!!! ARGH! To debate if one is 'better' is kind of like debating between Pamela Anderson and Britany Spears ;)...... They'd both do the job nicely :)

13 February 2006, 02:30 PM	#23
Rackness "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Harford County MD Posts: 393	just think of it this way Sub "girly" wrist SD manly wrist it is all relative LOL!! hides under desk they are both great time pieces it all comes down to personal preference you really can't go wrong with either.

14 February 2006, 04:44 AM	#24
Subfiend "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Outside Watch: Isn't it obvious? Posts: 1,926	Why do you think I own four Subs and only one SD? Because the Sub is more comfortable on my wrist, and it's the icon. However, one nice thing about the SD is it is uncommon. If you don't want to own the same thing everybody else seems to have, the SD is a better choice. __________________ Subfiend Last edited by Subfiend; 14 February 2006 at 04:46 AM..

14 February 2006, 05:40 AM	#25
Launch Mini "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Real Name: John Location: Canada, eh Watch: can I? Posts: 6,241	You can also go Sub without the date for the Non-Cyclops look. For me, I went the 16610 and with a Pan for a different look. Just my opinion. I was looking at the Sub No Date, but I wanted the cyclops to complete the look. __________________ Something witty to go here. Member # 293

14 February 2006, 10:42 AM	#28
Earl "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Who Me? Location: Northern Virginia Watch: out Posts: 4,616	PR my 2 cnts: It's duplication having a SD and a Date Sub, the only difference in them is the SD is on steroids and you don't have the traditional cyclops on the date.. if it was there looks wise you have a SS Sub. I went for vintage and got and 5513 love the watch and give it equal wear time the SD is for the week I need to know what date it is!!! And again it's all personal preference Right?

15 February 2006, 10:17 PM	#29
RobDad Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Real Name: Rob Dadd Location: London Posts: 134	1 modern, 1 vintage - a cool combination, and they look surprisingly different

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