[schitarella]

Hi sorry if this is a basic question but-

today i was at the Rolex store and from looking at them the Submariner and the Sea-Dweller are much the same with abt the same price, with the exception the Sub can only go 300m deep and the Sea-Dweller 1200m (plus the cyclops on the sub)... While I understand virtually nobody will ever go as deep as either of these depths why wouldn't you just choose the watch that is rated for more depth?

Is service costs more or the movement sacrificed in the Sea-Dweller? Would people choose the Sub of the SeaD as it's more of an iconic model, does it have better re-sale?

What are the other differences?

thanks

 

[DarkHeart]

A few differences are their weight (SD weighs more), their size (SD is thicker), the date feature (SD has no cyclops), and of course their depth rating (SD can go deeper).
It's really a matter of personal choice. Which one looks and feels better on your wrist? Are you ever going to need the depth rating of the SD? Most people use their divers in 12 feet of water or less. Professional and avid amatuer divers want/need greater depth rating. I believe both watches use the 3531 movement.
Both are excellent watches and are built like tanks.
Good luck in your choice.

 

[haakon59]

I don't think there is much price difference in the resale market as these models are close, but I am not an expert so you will have to check further. The Sea Dweller is a little taller and the face is smaller given the higher depth rating and as noted there is no cyclops either. Also, the SD includes a helium valve for those professionals who need it. My understanding is the movements are identical. If you want to buy the model which is rarer, the SD is less common than the Submariner.

Are you a diver? Around the water a lot? Either model will be highly functional almost no matter what kind of diving you do. Any dive below 100 ft or 33 meters will require you to shift the gas mixture, so if you are going below this level routinely, many will recommend the Sea Dweller. The reason I often hear for picking one over the other has to do with the presence or absence of the cyclops, which some people prefer not to have. It's really a matter of preference except in those few cases where you might feel the need to have the higher depth rating as a professional diver.

 

[LarryD]

The Sub is just better looking.......

 

[schitarella]

thanks for the info,,, I don't really venture anywhere near even 100m so that's not too much of an influence was just getting a general consensus as to why choose one over the other (if your not a deep diver). The Sub to me is the most handsome rolex there is even the name submariner is perfect. thanks again guys... :]

 

[Nate]

I just got a Sub in Feb. I liked the Sub better because:
1.) The Sub's face is a little bigger;
2) $$$ The Sub costs a little less;
3.) You'll never find me at those deeper depths.

I remember reading somewhere that it's a little bigger, so I think it looks better.

 

[timefinder]

IMHO, this all comes down to personal taste. Let us know which one you select and why.

 

[Kevin]

Subs are better looking of course.
Waiting for incomming:w00t:

 

[boscoe]

Split the difference and buy an Invicta 500M-rated Pro Diver!

J/k!

 

[schu]

I chose the Sea Dweller for cosmetic reasons I did not like the cyclops. As for depth ratings I do not even dive:lol:

 

[MINIAC]

I always thought it came down to...

Some like to lead, while others like to follow.

I prefer the SD because you don't see as many in the wild :biggrin:

 

[Watchdog]

I would venture to say that the cyclops is the major factor in deciding for most people. As Miniac said, you also don't see as many SD's so that will draw some people to it as well.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe with the new pricing the SD cost more now than the Sub (except for the Sub LV).

 

[bullandvodka]

There are differences that others have pointed out. However, IMHO the biggest argument for the SD is that (outside of WIS circles) you'll be hard pressed to find someone else with one. I bet Rolex sells 15 or 20 Subs for every SD sold. Some of us just like to be a little different and the SD allows you to have the qualities of a Sub while still being a bit different.

With an SD, it would be rare to bump into someone with the same watch as you.

 

[knoffie]

Boscoe you are joking aren't you?? How could you even mention Invicta and Rolex in the same sentence! Shame on you! The best thing about Invicta is that yellow box it comes in....and we all know how terrible that is!
Knoffie

 

[Watchdog]

There are differences that others have pointed out. However, IMHO the biggest argument for the SD is that (outside of WIS circles) you'll be hard pressed to find someone else with one. I bet Rolex sells 15 or 20 Subs for every SD sold. Some of us just like to be a little different and the SD allows you to have the qualities of a Sub while still being a bit different.

With an SD, it would be rare to bump into someone with the same watch as you.

This is one reason I find myself drawn to the Sub without the date recently. I don't think I have ever come across someone wearing a Sub without the date. Also, the replica and homage watches have the cyclops so it sets the SD and N/D Sub apart from them as well.

 

[jas32]

Actually I like the look of the sub no-date the best. Don't mind not having the date feature, but I get a clean balanced, classic and iconic look that is quite comfortable to wear. Also just like somebody else said, most subs you see have the cyclops so you see less of these out there. Plus it costs quite a bit less.

 

[Mcubed68]

Actually I like the look of the sub no-date the best. Don't mind not having the date feature, but I get a clean balanced, classic and iconic look that is quite comfortable to wear. Also just like somebody else said, most subs you see have the cyclops so you see less of these out there. Plus it costs quite a bit less.

I agree, besides mine, I don't think I have ever seen another 14060 in the wild. Plus I like the hollow end links and the "old timey" clasp and divers extension. I agree that the symmetry is worth sacrificing the date..I have a palm pilot with a calendar.......:thumbup1:

And while we are on the subject the 14060m is the actual "Submariner", the 16613 is the "Submariner Date"..No Date Sub is redundant :wink:

 

[Watchdog]

I agree, besides mine, I don't think I have ever seen another 14060 in the wild. Plus I like the hollow end links and the "old timey" clasp and divers extension. I agree that the symmetry is worth sacrificing the date..I have a palm pilot with a calendar.......:thumbup1:

And while we are on the subject the 14060m is the actual "Submariner", the 16613 is the "Submariner Date"..No Date Sub is redundant :wink:

What do you like about the hollow end links? I'm just curious since that seems to be a negative aspect of the watch with so many people.

 

[feudallordcult]

i have completely stopped diving since i got my SD. got it simply bcos when i held the subbie, it just didn't appeal to me as much as the SD. to each his own.

 

[Pete17]

Good question. I have owned several of both models and ended up settling on the LV Sub.

IMHO the Sub is a lot more comfortable, doesn't slide around all the time like the heavier and taller SD.
I also like the ever so slightly larger dial on the Subs. Combine this with the maxi dial markers of the LV and you've got a winner in my book.

The SD is a great watch also but if you're like me and can only afford one Rolex than the Sub is a great choice as an "allrounder" watch.