The Problem with The Rolex Sea-Dweller Design 

Channel Support: www.paypal.me/industrialdesignguy Latest Releases: ru-vid.com/show-UCzf6rqsEBni5G2TSevD6F4Afeatured Community: ru-vid.com/show-UCzf6rqsEBni5G2TSevD6F4Acommunity

I borrowed a Deep Sea for a couple of weeks from a friend and I loved wearing it daily. Such a statement. Picked up a 50th anniversary today. Love it too. Each to their own :)

Turned people away from Rolex???? Just go and try and buy one..

I think you are wrong. In a world where the submariner is very common, it's not unreasonable to go to the next level to have some differentiation. I swapped a sub for the 50th anniversary model and am delighted with the greater accuracy of the latest movement and the hugely superior bracelet. Frankly, it's a quantum leap forward (and I like the cyclops too).

I said it once, i’ll say it a 1000 times the 16600 and the new sea-dweller are the best rolexes of all times

Complaining about the new designs of Rolex at the same time saying that Rolex never changes their designs. Cheers

No big deal that the Rolex Sea Dweller is a little bigger then the Rolex Submariner because some watch lover like big watches and it differenciate it better from the Submariner

One/two generations back, men’s average height was 175cm (check any architectural manual), so 39-40mm might have looked big. Today is another story! For most men over 100kg / 185cm, anything smaller than a 42mm looks like a lady’s watch.

Well I don’t wear my DSSD James Cameron every day but I wear it often and I completely love its fabulous dial and mighty wrist presence. Most Rolex sports watches are victims of their own success, ie commonplace so I chose a great tool watch by Rolex that is also relatively rare, I’ve seen one other person wearing one in the two years I’ve owned mine....can’t say that about a Submariner!

Good presentation and content. I personally love the "Red Sea-Dweller" with cyclops eye date. I do not agree that it's a Rolex attempt to gain customer attention. Try and buy one, there is a waiting list I believe.

usually i don't really believe what people said about watches, the only one that can judge a watch is the one who will buy it and wear it, don't let people personal opinions dictated what you like or wear. big, small, thick or thin, it does not matter if you like it that's what matters

Wasn’t the super-case introduced during to the Panerai craze, where they tried to make the watch look a little more like a cushion-case??

I always enjoy your reviews. Because you are articulate and present a point of view that contains more than one consideration and always from a technical design perspective. Coming from the belief that there are other points of view and personal preferences, and that no single item is agreeable to all, I find your analyses refreshing for consideration. Here I would like to present another point of view. Your review speaks to the developmental history of the SD, within the perspective I gather to be one of continual refinement and overall improvement. That is a very valid utilitarian approach to design. But also one that doesn’t consider other more subjective design influences. As I see it a dive watch is not only a tool, because tools sit in a toolbox when not used for tool purposes. Whereas the vast majority of wearers are not divers and at most appreciate their utility for water resistance when swimming or in the shower. But like wearing them Because there is also a strong fashion element in our watches as they represent an image and feeling we get when wearing them. It’s been maybe ten years since it was first said that the popularity of larger sized watches would go away, but that has not been the case. And despite a lot of talk justifying their need for use with larger wrist sizes, I believe it has little to do with only that, because people are no larger in size than they were say in the 70’s and 80’s. Was their suddenly a realization that there was a population of people not wearing watches due to their large wrists? Was the increase in watch size then an attempt to address this market? I think not. I believe that the reason was initially one of fashion. That unlike fashions that come and go rather quickly the popularity of 40mm+ watches was greater than expected because even those people uninterested in the latest fashion realized that the larger sizes simply looked better to their untrained eyes. I still have all my watches and they are many. The smaller watches I wore in the 70’s thru 90’s are no longer desirable to me as my eye can no longer accept the smaller diameter of smaller watches. Even the women in my life who have smaller wrists now want larger watches than those I used to wear. Now let’s talk about the SD 43. Looking at the three SD watches side by side in your review, here is what I like about the 126600. 1. The marker at 12 and stick markers at 6 and 9 are shorter and to me more proportional than in its fore-bearer. I personally don’t like the long point at 12, perhaps for the same reason I don’t care for dress shirts with long pointed collars, I don’t know. 2. I don’t think a date is needed on a dive watch. But if there is a date that’s ok too . But then there is nothing more iconic than a cyclops on a Rolex date. When I was in my teens in the late 70’s, and I knew little about watches, it was the cyclops that made the Rolex recognizable to the average person. I like the SD 43 cyclops, as it doesn’t matter to me what came before. While I much appreciate and respect the watch history I don’t feel obliged to it. I should note that I also have the 116600 DSSD Blue and I’m glad that doesn’t have the cyclops because I so appreciate the gradient blue-black dial. I wouldn’t want it obscured by a cyclops. But the plain black dial of my SD 43 126600 is not so special for me to care. I like the traditional Rolex cyclops and frankly appreciate seeing the date in more readable fashion. 3. As for the issue of their unwieldy size, I don’t much care for wearing my watch bracelets loose and therefore have no issue with any top-heaviness in my larger watches. Moreover, by doing so I don’t feel the weight of the watch as I would if I wore it loose. Would I still like the SD and DSSD watches if they were 42mm instead of 43 and 44? Perhaps. But I have no issue with, and in fact prefer, their current sizes. And I would not wear them if they were less than 42. Please keep up the good work, as I enjoy your balanced and reasoned perspective. Even when it doesn’t always align with my own personal preference.

Biased opinion from a 12 year 16600 owner: Couldn't agree more with the GT3RS analogy and sleeker design. No offence meant, all you supercase owners. Also, these watches are meant to be worn regularly, if not daily. Also, all tool watches with no blemishes = dress watches. Peace! ^_^

My favourite watch in my collection, is my Sea Dweller 16600 from 1991 and I think it's the best SD ever made with all the good way from new and past ! Maybe the best Rolex ever made

I personally prefer the sea dwellers over any subs because they are much less common in the market. 116600 is the last jewel from this line though.

The D-Blue is one of 3 Rolex watches that ever grabbed my attention because of the gradient dial, the lack of a cyclops and the lugs that don't flare out causing that abrupt transition from the case to the bracelet as is the case with the Super Case watches. The size does bother me a bit, but then again I'm used to big Breitlings and 45mm Planet Oceans that are probably bigger and heavier 😄

I personally love the new SD43 and dive with it, it's a great watch, perfect proportions, and very well built, solid, and super comfy, well balanced.... But I also have a passion for it's predecessor such as the 116600 the last of the 40mm SD without cyclops and very first of the ceramic bezel discontinued in Rolex history, or the 16600, a beautiful watch with genuine SD DNA and vintage feel, or the triple 6, while these 2 "alu bezel" ref. can still be found at relatively reasonable price, but will soon enter the vintage world, been the last of the aluminium bezel models...

I keep the dssd jc in my rotation and wear it regularly. I chose it over a submariner due to the size. The 40mm is just too small for my wrist and body size. Even the sd43 looked small when i wore it. Sorry not all of us men are under 6' tall and weigh 120lbs

IDGuy, I bought the DSSD black dial in 2017 and wear it everyday with no arthritis lol I’m also 6’6 275 with 8.5” wrists so in relative terms, it fits me like a sub would fit most average wrists, but I love how it’s a technological marvel and among the other thoroughbreds in the Rolex dive watch stable, for me, it’s the Secretariat of them all. Like you, I do not baby. I thoroughly enjoying using it as my daily wearer: be it while wearing a 3-piece suit or a wetsuit (yes I go diving with it among other activities that can be harsh). For me some of the nicks & scratches tell stories and bring up memories from the past. I also agree with you in questioning Rolex’s decision to make the SD 43mm. I think keeping it in line with the sub size would be fine and for the 50th, the splash of red text would’ve been perfect and do so in perpetuity as an understated delineation from the sub like some of the subtle clues on an AMG Mercedes... Ps. If the Sub is a 911 Turbo S then the SD should be better performance in all aspects and I think GT2 RS accomplishes that way better than a GT3 RS. Then what if the DSSD? 918?

The poster is right. My 1980s Rolex Date Just has been to 160’ dozens of times. No rubber gaskets. No problem...ever.

I agree,40mm is perfect I’m glad I still have my 90s sea dweller, the 43&44 is ok for the very big man with very large rist

I’ve been wearing a 16600 every day since 2008 and the only thing I wish it had were the lug holes of older 16600s because I use fixed spring bars with a NATO strap. That said I love it for all the reasons you mentioned here. I never make any exceptions for when I wear it, even skating. I’ve taken some hard falls where the watch slapped the pavement and it’s never stopped. I’ve bought a few other watches that I love but I just don’t wear them because the Sea Dweller always wins.

Good piece. I’m on the fence between a 14060M and a 16600... the no date dial is something I like, but I am enticed by the capabilities of the SD. What would you choose?

Coming to your excellent channel and this video late. I have owned the James Cameron, the Double Red SD 1665 and the 116600 SD4K. To me the SD4K is the perfect modern submariner. With a case that is proportional to the bracelet, can actually experience the pool or a snorkel dive and looks brilliant irrespective of ones attire. The SD4K is my daily driver, the best Submariner that Rolex has ever made

That Planet Ocean at 0:30.......Sweet!

I think the new 43mm Sea Dweller is amazing. Buying one as soon as my AD gets one.

I love the 50th anaversy sea dweller

When researching my first Rolex purchase I looked at every Sub and Sea Dweller model from the 1960s to the present. The 5513s etc were too pricey, and I narrowed it down to a 14060. I was on the point of buying, and the seller said he had just got in a Sea Dweller, 40mm, 2008, lightly worn. I was smitten. Perfect size, alu bezel, no cyclops, not the heavy bulk of the supercased ones. In my opinion the perfect Sub.

DSSD: the finance guy's G-Shock

I wear my 126660 D-Blue daily without any issue. It was great to see Rolex finally come out with some larger sized models instead of being stuck at 40mm for so many years. So I completely disagree with your opinion that the Sea-Dweller line should have stayed at the same size as the Submariner. Way to go Rolex - keep up the unique designs, the D-Blue is a rock star!!

For once, the SD is making some sense to me, despite the opinion you may hold of the current generation. Any thoughts on the Oysterquartz?

I agree completely. The larger size of the DeepSea is an example of form following function. The larger size of the current Seadweller is simply form for the sake of form, and this is not how Rolex has traditionally designed sports watches.

I my view a diver should have a quartz movement. You just put it on, don't unscrew the crown, no need for that, it already is on the right time. Using a diver, for diving, means, a lot of abuse, from scratches, sand, salty water, oil and dirt. You should clean it after use, but most of the times it is not cleaned properly and the next time an automatic has to be set again. So the crown is unscrewed, dirt, salt and dust comes in between the seals and wear and tear is around the corner. That's why divers prefer quartz. You just trow your gear in the back of your 4x4 and you put on a nice watch for the evening. Nobody with a right mind is diving with a $ 10.000 watch, nobody. You wear a Rolex, watching your yacht from the restaurant in the harbor, not for diving under your yacht.

Excellent video as always.

I own a Sea Dweller, it's my best purchase ever,I love it, had it many years,no regrets , I'll never afford another,they've just gone far too expensive now .

Great video and it totally agree on your point of view. The only thing i dislike that at least half of the people who did view this are not looking for vintage sea dwellers and driving up the prices!!!!! ;-) My grail would be a birthyear 16660

I'm pretty sure my Rolex sea dweller 4000 is the watch that God also wears most days!

Love my deepsea. Had it for a good few years now and it gets the most wristtime of all my watches. I’m quite big so it looks just right size wise. I think it’s a stunning piece.

Always look forward to your videos.what are your views on the Rolex milgauss?

Thanks for posting your views. ⌚🤴👊

Interesting video, I get where you’re coming from to a degree. I wear the 116660 and the 126600 and rotate through each every couple of days. I love the size, if you set them up correctly on the bracelet they don’t feel too heavy and fit well on my 7.1 inch wrist. These watches are so underrated and always have been. Enjoy whatever you wear.

🇬🇧 Great video once again. Thought provoking and interesting. Never considered the 16600 before, but a great alternative to the Sub. Thank you

My 126660 is amazing, unlike your opinion on the SD, DSSD. Some people have big wrists and don't want to wear little baby 40mm watches like most of the Rolex lineup. I don't give a shit about diving 5ft in this watch, it's just an amazing watch - period.

I own a 126600 and love it. Couple of points: 1) the larger size means the bezel can have more tick marks, which I appreciate. It makes precise setting easier. 2) When you get older, you will appreciate watches with the date bubble on them :-). If you at all think that form should follow function, you should welcome that date bubble. It wasn't left off of the original sea-dwellers due to design issues: it was left off due to limitations in materials and manufacturing. As those limitations are overcome, we should be expecting more functionality from our watches. The two-tone version, however, is just egregious.....

I wear a deepsea james cameron most days and I love it...

In the end, which is problem in design?

I wanted the ceramic Ref. 116600 so bad. But one day, I tried on a 16600 and immediately loved the aluminum bezel AND the case size. It looks great on my wrist and although I have another Rolex, the SD is the one I wear 90% of the time.

A lot turned away from the brand due to low supply and high price. Those watches are stunning in person.

if you got, flaunt it. rolex definitely has it. sea dweller and the deep sea are the ultimate in dive gear. the fact they're a fashion statement proves their spot on top.

The Rolex Sea Dweller is my favourite piece in my Rolex collection, I have the entire range with the exception of the new two tone that I have ordered for my wife. But it's s personal thing for me as it is the best sized Rolex for my wrist being 43mm to 44mm the sweet spot on my wrist. I went from a daily wear of the Submariner to the first James Cameron DEEP SEA BLUE.

Great video!!

Ohhhhhh the Comex ! Superb !

I personally like the Sea-Dweller Deep Sea. There’s plenty of Rolexes in 36-41mm design for those who want a smaller watch and plenty of stainless steel options as well. I think too many people are concerned with resale as well as buying into market preferences as opposed to personal preferences. I’d never buy a Sub for personal use. I prefer the Yacht-master I with metal bezel, and if I could only have one Rolex, it would be two-tone. Far more versatility with my wardrobe.

Two things need to be pointed out: 1/ the deepsea blue is a commemorative model that follows a historical event based on James Cameron’s dive, and for that reason we can appreciate it, 2/ People who buy top-end Ferraris don’t so they can go over 200 miles an hour! They buy them because the nature of the design is to be marveled and appreciated well knowing that its potential far exceeds the owners abilities. Same with the sea dweller deepsea… I bought one because I appreciate the engineering even though I won’t ever really go diving!

I have the 126660dblue and its my daily piece. I got 6.5" wrist and it doesn't matter if you have a small or large wrist its more on being a fan and feeling good when you wear it.

I agree with you completely. As much as I love the James Cameron dial, it is just too much. Thank you for another excellent video :)

Got 1 SD43, cannot complain, looking back for the design on the early SD.Very comfortable, stable on the wrist due too the old style lugs,22mm bracelet and case back width.The bezel is larger too.For cyclop Rolex cannot set one on the old time , now they can ! For 126660,wonderfull watch but too heavy and gravity center too high unlike the SD43.So not that much comfortable on the wrist.

Would you ever do a video on some Sinn diver models? In my opinion, they are the most advanced from technological standpoint when it comes to dive watches--and also under priced and under rated.

The one Rolex I would buy if it was 40mm, and no Cyclops (I detest the Cyclops) and with the James Cameron Dial!

Like to hear you review pilot watches (a/k/a Fliegers) - e.g., Stowa, Laco, Archimede, Sinn, etc.

As a former commercial diver I worked for the company that followed Comex and others later on. My Dweller was an extension of my wrist and I wear it everyday. To keep it locked away and not enjoy it would be wrong and not in keeping with the history and provenance of such an amazing timepiece. It would be akin to owning an unplayed Steinway in my opinion. Wear your watches and know the history behind them. They are so much more than an investment.

Ok great vid but small correction inbound; In the 50th anniversary Sea-Dweller the cyclops and the crystal is actually one and the same piece of sapphire.

Not necessarily a design flaw but rather flawed perspective of your own opinion

Great analysis! Any thoughts on the 2019 2tone sea dweller and the 116613ln. Visually look very similar from an arm’s length. Would Rolex discontinue the 2tone black dial sub next Basel?

The 1665 Rail Dial is the best.

Having a small wrist the Sea Dweller has never been on my Radar. I looked at the Sub but ultimately picked the Omega Seamaster 300 pro 2017 as my Diver. Pretty much the same specs as the Sub for Thousands less.

Great vid clip; however, I am a fan of the 50th anniversary, though I do not own a Submariner, I am proud a owner of a 2009 Tudor Hydro 1200, capable to a depth of 1200 meters (3930 feet), with a helium valve...I feel it's comparable to the Sea Dweller...and no, my timepiece does not have a cyclops.

Once again, IDGuy, you’ve knocked it out of the park with this one. While I consider the Sea Dweller to be the Mercedes G-Wagen of watches, I’d also offer an alternative car analogy. If the Sub is the BMW 5-Series, then the Sea Dweller is the M5. If the Triple 6 and 116600 are the E34 and E39 M5s (subtle, elegant), then the James Cameron is the E60 and F-Gen M5. Loud, obvious, boasting tons of extra visual adornments, and screaming to not be mistaken for the standard model. Yes the new models are technically better in nearly every way, but the subtle art of flying under the radar has been lost.

I really happy with new geometry size of new sd. Sub always been too small for me but dssd I don’t like because of thickness.

I`m pretty sure the 116660 will increase in value over time, that it`s "too big" and over engineered is not a problem but rather the opposite.

All good points with which I agree.... you have been reading my mind .

As a brand new James Cameron deep sea owner I don’t disagree with anything you said but I have to say that I absolutely love this watch. I’m a bigger guy and I think the size looks better on my wrist. I bought a sea dweller in 1991 and wish I still had that one too.

I own one Rolex, a 16600 Sea-Dweller which I bought new in 2008. I haven't worn it in a few years and am thinking of trading in against a GMT Master, but I'm undecided at present.

The Deep Sea is a great tool watch, but as a daily wearer, no way. it is huge, beefy and just to heavy. No doubt that it is a beautiful watch. But you would have to have your long sleeve shirts custom made just to be able to wear it. If I could afford one I would buy and older, smaller one. Great review.

I think it would be helpful to see this side by side on the wrist but from a bit of a distance so we can take in the full sense of proportion. The new massive grills on several BMW ruin the car. I don't think this size increase does that here.

I totally agree about the cyclops. Shooting itself in the foot is accurate.

Very good report..well said.............

My best friend bought an 16600 sea dweller for his fiancée instead of a ring. He has a deep sea.

Also I have to say if Rolex had released a Seadweller single or double red line in a 40mm sized case with out the cyclops as a nod to the history of the seadweller but with the modern glide lock bracelet I would have paid serious money for that as for me it would be the ultimate Rolex watch...

The SD43 is the ultimate dive watch. Well balanced.

yes but is 43/44mm really that big? many gshocks are 50mm+ and dont even seem that big relatively speaking. i appreciate the case is very thick though...

Brilliantly summarized.

Exactly right. Watches are just getting too large in general...

Totally agree with this video and what is it with huge watch designs today? I love the 40mm Submariner and where mine with incredible comfort for the tough watch it is everyday. A great shame I think that Rolex has followed this trend. One question to everyone it is now fashionable for women to wear mens watches could it be that Rolex feel they have to give a guy an option to have a watch larger in size than his wife or girlfriends??

The 2017 SeaDweller 43 is watchmaking at its finest.

I bought a new 1665 in 1974. I'd kill to still have it.

I totally agreed with you!!!

I have the Rolex DSSD 116660 & I Love it, but I wish I would've known about the James Cameron Deep Blue before I got my DSSD. I would've purchased the Deep Blue instead or have both.

Never in my life have I come across an owner of a dive watch being scared of the rain 🤷🏻‍♂️

I have the 116600 and love it. 40mm, no cyclops and the most capable dive watch ever built.

I have a ceramic sub also a preceramic sub and the SD43 The ceramic sub leaves home every day the others have not been wound in forever

I agree completely. I don’t own a submariner or sea dweller but I do own a 1986 DateJust which I wear most days. It’s understated and innocuous... I wouldn’t want any new Rolex now as they have changed as a company and become ostentatious as a preserve of the rich. Back in 1986 it would have been within the reach of a hard working man. The watch I own (my uncles) cost £600 in 1986. If you factor in inflation that should mean it should be about £1,800.00 now but in fact a new one would be more like £5,000.00 which is about 3x as much. Are they 3x Better? No. But they are 6x more bling and have become a status symbol to an extent that I’d be actually put off from buying one new.

The Deepsea Sea dweller is a great looking watch. It's technical over kill. However it's just not balanced on the wrist. I bought it twice but flipped it. The earlier sea dwellers were better balanced and just felt more comfortable on the wrist. Less bulk means less chance of knocking or damaging the watch while diving.

Great review. I agree with you on the points of form and function - fit for use. I am heavy into outdoor activities to include diving, surfing, climbing and triathlons, and I prefer the 40mm 11660 (if I am using a mechanical watch) due to its lighter weight while still being super robust. I see there are many negative comments from the arm chair enthusiasts below in defending the 43mm. The fact is the 43mm is the only SD that is tracking on the secondary market at or below list (source Watch Charts) while the 40mm versions are selling at 6000-8000 USD above their initial retail - a clear indication of the higher demand for the original design. As for the comment below of ‘try to get one’ (43mm), this is BS, because over the last 6 years there has been a huge demand for ALL Rolex sports watches which now seems to be leveling out - a testament to Rolex’s brilliant marketing of ‘Rolex Ownership = Success’. I believe that Rolex will revert to the original dimensions of the sea dweller, and if the massive demand for the 11660 and 116600 are any indication, they would be well to do so. Moreover, the 40mm design just makes more sense for a watch that is at home in the board room as well as the most extreme outdoor settings.

The understatement of a rolex watch. Such an oxymoron. Besides the author forgets about the dimension of thickness here. Which makes the 116600 a shot glass. Leading the rolex design department to spread this 4000m thickness over a wider diameter - making it more balanced on the wrist. Something to consider. Not mentioning the better legability of the magnified date.

I guess it's all relative Mr. IDGuy. For those of us that don't have dainty wrists or toothpick arms, the Sea Dweller or the DeepSea look just fine. Too big or too heavy? Oh, please...

We will never find another 40mm Sub date with no cyclops. It was a gift from above when I happened to pass an AD one late evening and saw an almost new 116600 on the show case...

Can you do sky dweller pleaseeeee.

I totally agree. Technology might make it possible to add the cyclops on a Sea Dweller but Rolex solved a problem that shouldn’t be solved. The cyclops makes it harder to read time and under water being able to read the date is not a priority. I have owned the 126600 but sold it feeling that it was a tool that had become a fashion statement. It’s bigger for no reason. Also, Rolex is showing their lack of understanding of the Sea Dweller heritage by making the current reference in two tone. Thats like making a two tone wrench. 116600 was the last iteration where improvements from previous versions are understandable even if some might prefer aluminium over ceramic.