|
|
Post by carl on Jan 16, 2019 22:44:55 GMT -6
Has it really taken me almost 20 years to get to this point? Obviously, this is not an impulsive decision which, for me, and a pretty unique experience. I have often felt a craving for a Rolex diver, just to have it in my hands and experience the feel of the Triplock crown mechanism and enjoy the other features that only one of the best diver watches in the world can offer. After a sleepless last night, I woke up late and called my Rolex AD, to inquire if I could be put on a wait list for the SD43. They know me well, and with absolutely no hassle or deposit, told me they will call me when they get one with my name on it. It will likely take a while, as they are scarce as hens' teeth. I'm a patient guy, and I figure that the anticipation will be an adventure in itself. Being in my 70th year, I really wanted a special timepiece, one like no other I have owned. It was very close for me, with the Yacht Master Everose Gold and beautiful Oysterflex bracelet. But I am fortunate to have a few beautiful gold watches, and although the Yacht Master is no less beautiful, it would mean less wrist time for the others. Since the SD43 was introduced a couple of years ago, I have spent countless hours learning about the watch. I have probably watched just about every video, and perused every website that makes any mention of the model. There are so many attributes about the Rolex diver I appreciate, but the SD43 is just that much more special to me. I especially love the proportions of the case, lugs and bracelet on the new model. And I am a sucker for the red text on the dial as well which is not only distinctive, but a tribute to the original. And I could go on and on about the bracelet and the fact that I really want to experience the Glidelock clasp. I compiled a list of the various attributes of this watch: Triplock Crown mechanism for security and wonderful handling New 3235 movement Cyclops Date which I have not had on any previous Rolex Red Sea-Dweller text on dial, which is so iconic Oyster Bracelet with Glidelock extension system Oystersteel that Rolex makes in house Beautiful case proportion Size and wrist presence perfect for my 7.25in wrist Simply best impressive technology Seems like I have already done a review, even before I get to see the watch in real life and actually own it! The first new watch I have ever acquired without first seeing it in real life. I just know it will fit my wrist perfectly, especially since I own a few watches which are even larger. Two or three of the watches in my current collection will be sold. However, if the watch arrives before I have a chance to sell them, I am going ahead with the purchase anyway. Life is short. If I don't do this soon am I to wait until my 80th?! There must be some good reason that I have waited all these years to get a Rolex diver watch, especially after many brands and models costing far more. But the world of horology does make us behave sometimes in strange ways! No justification necessary, only anticipation! Cheers, Carl  |
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor 
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,970 
Name: Roger
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 16, 2019 23:17:10 GMT -6
Carl - I think you’ll love it. I was able to meet up with a friend last year who had one and I loved the proportions. I’d love to see it with a matte dial/bezel and no cyclops - my fantasy configuration - but it’s stunning in its current iteration.
Pre-arrival congrats!
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 16, 2019 23:25:15 GMT -6
Carl - I think you’ll love it. I was able to meet up with a friend last year who had one and I loved the proportions. I’d love to see it with a matte dial/bezel and no cyclops - my fantasy configuration - but it’s stunning in its current iteration. Pre-arrival congrats! One of my biggest reasons for getting this over the Sub ND, is because it does have the Cyclops. Don't ask me why, I really have no idea why this is so vital to me! But it just seems to me that a Rolex diver is not complete without the date/Cyclops. Totally the opposite to the way I usually think! This will be my only watch with a date function. Part of the reason also, is that Rolex only recently developed the technology to enable them to have a Cyclops on a watch with such a depth rating, so that means something to me. Funny thing, it is almost as though I have to acquire this watch in order to see it in real life. Ever since it was introduced a couple of years ago, it has totally eluded me. I have just never been at an AD at the right time to see one, even one that was already sold and not yet picked up.  I do have a gut feeling, however, that when I finally take possession of this watch, it might just become a favorite. |
|
CHIP
WWF Founder
Ad Astra Per Aspera
Posts: 37,824
Name: Chip
Location: Dallas
|
Post by CHIP on Jan 17, 2019 0:21:48 GMT -6
I struggle with saying this, but I didn’t bond with it.
To be honest, I probably wore it twice in the one month I had it on a loan, and I blame that on the size.
Let me explain, as I have no problem wearing a 43mm watch.
That shape is probably the most iconic watch shape ever, and it’s just meant to be 40mm. It felt bloated to me and the cyclops looked gigantic.
I really can’t explain it, because that watch has no parts that are wrong, but as a whole it didn’t add up for me. To me, the no cyclops dweller is the one to have.
The deep sea, which is much uglier, and worse in every way, appeals to me. Yes I know it makes no sense, but it’s sort of a new watch, and not a fattened iconic shape. Also, the crazy WR rating can justify the size.
The dweller, on the other hand, I see as “we know how to make the same watch with the same rating in 40mm, but it’s fashionable to have a big watch”. They made it big because big is/was in fashion, and for no other reason at all.
With that said, none of the watches we buy make sense. They are all emotional purchases, and that’s a very personal decision, one that can’t be judged.
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 17, 2019 0:42:47 GMT -6
I struggle with saying this, but I didn’t bond with it. To be honest, I probably wore it twice in the one month I had it on a loan, and I blame that on the size. Let me explain, as I have no problem wearing a 43mm watch. That shape is probably the most iconic watch shape ever, and it’s just meant to be 40mm. It felt bloated to me and the cyclops looked gigantic. I really can’t explain it, because that watch has no parts that are wrong, but as a whole it didn’t add up for me. To me, the no cyclops dweller is the one to have. The deep sea, which is much uglier, and worse in every way, appeals to me. Yes I know it makes no sense, but it’s sort of a new watch, and not a fattened iconic shape. Also, the crazy WR rating can justify the size. The dweller, on the other hand, I see as “we know how to make the same watch with the same rating in 40mm, but it’s fashionable to have a big watch”. They made it big because big is/was in fashion, and for no other reason at all. With that said, none of the watches we buy make sense. They are all emotional purchases, and that’s a very personal decision, one that can’t be judged. Well said, Chip. For me personally, very little I have ever done in life makes sense to anyone else.  For me, it's not about the size, but the proportions. I never bonded with the newest Sub versions, mainly because of the thicker lugs. I was kind of waiting for Basel 2019, so see if they are going to modify the case on the Submariner at all. Funny, a year or so ago I would have said that the watch is just too big, and I did try the predecessor at 40mm a few times. It was just top heavy on my wrist. And, the odd thing for me was that I didn't like it without the Cyclops! That is so unusual for me, who normally likes only watches with no date function. It was a very unusual move for Rolex to do anything because it is fashionable, but they clearly admitted it themselves! We all have very personal feelings, especially when it comes to watches. I remember so well my first Zenith Pilot Type 20 Bronze. I loved the watch, but it drove me crazy that it contained the small Elite movement, which you cant even see because of the solid case back! My OCD with that drove me so crazy that I eventually had to sell it, and had not even owned it for a long time. Now I have two Zenith Pilot watches with the El Primero movement, and absolutely love them. That's the great thing about a luxury item like a watch, no justification necessary! |
|
CHIP
WWF Founder
Ad Astra Per Aspera
Posts: 37,824
Name: Chip
Location: Dallas
|
Post by CHIP on Jan 17, 2019 9:57:26 GMT -6
Worth saying that I feel the same way about the sky dweller, it’s a bloated DJ, and I didn’t like it initially. I still think it’s comical looking.
After a while it grew on me and now I love it.
Perhaps the SD would be the same, and grow on me, but I just didn’t give it enough of a shot when I had it on loan.
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 17, 2019 12:29:07 GMT -6
Worth saying that I feel the same way about the sky dweller, it’s a bloated DJ, and I didn’t like it initially. I still think it’s comical looking. After a while it grew on me and now I love it. Perhaps the SD would be the same, and grow on me, but I just didn’t give it enough of a shot when I had it on loan. I suppose that is true of lots of watches. A couple of years ago, I would never have wanted anything on my wrist measuring more than 40mm in diameter. All the new watches were simply too large IMO! I can see from the photos, you got the nicest Sky Dweller. Damn, that it another watch I need to see in real life! Really hope I have the same experience with the SD as you did with the Sky Dweller. It has taken me almost two years to warm to it, and that is just seeing it in photos and reading about it. And, of course, wearing even larger watches in the meantime. BTW, I don't know if you ever saw my post about the Yacht Master Everose with Oysterflex bracelet, the model you have. One of the ladies at my AD has the 37mm version, and I was admiring it. And also commented that I had never seen the 40mm. Anyway, they had just got one in, so I spent a good half hour trying it on and admiring it. Really an amazing timepiece, and that bracelet is incredibly comfortable, and I did not realize it is so flexible. That was actually going to be my choice for my 70th. In the end, I decided that I already have the Omega FOIS in Sedna Gold which I really love. Although they are two completely different watches - the YM and the FOIS - I just didn't want to duplicate, nor could really afford, to have two red gold watches. As different as they both are, I can still wear them on the same occasions. Heck, I don't really worry too much about occasions any more, as I usually wear the same tatty clothes for all occasions! Anyway, since I am accustomed now to larger watches, the SD43 should fit me just right. And the back is rather bulbous, so it should fit beautifully in the small groove on top of my wrist. I think the wider lugs at 22mm and the slightly wider case will give it plenty of stability. Apparently, it is very comfortable. In keeping with my New Year's resolution, I will be selling at least two watches of my present collection to make room for this one. Anyway, I am rambling. Yes, I am really stoked about this one! Cheers, Carl |
|
aquajoe
WWF Veteran
Posts: 5,693
Since: Jan 17, 2013 20:13:30 GMT -6
|
Post by aquajoe on Jan 17, 2019 13:50:53 GMT -6
carl which two are you selling?
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 17, 2019 13:56:02 GMT -6
carl which two are you selling? Omega Seamaster 300M 60th Anniversary Trilogy. I have the Railmaster 60th Anniversary, which is a grail watch, so the Seamaster gets no wrist time. And it will get even less when I get the SD43. Panerai PAM 424 California. Also, possibly, PAM 673 Marina Militare, but haven't made up my mind about that one yet. But it would still leave me with two Panerai which is more than fine really. I just think that, with my decision to get the SD43, a lot of my watches will be spending more time in the drawer! |
|
|
|
Post by carl on Jan 18, 2019 19:43:37 GMT -6
Well, I finally got to see an SD43 in real life today! And I must say it was exactly - in every respect - how I had envisioned it. Of course, it had arrived for some other client, but I was pleased to try it. The size is absolutely perfect. And I can see that Rolex didn't make it larger only for aesthetic purposes. The comfort level is really evident. The bubble back fits beautifully in the curve on top of my wrist as well. It simply does not feel like a very large or thick watch. Plenty of space between the ends of the lugs and the edges of my wrist. Absolutely one of the best decisions I could have made! Now, all I have to do is wait.
Cheers,
Carl
|
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,970
Name: Roger
|
Post by Baco Noir on Jan 18, 2019 22:09:31 GMT -6
Glad you got to see it IRL and it was everything you hoped for. It really is a gorgeous watch and will be a nice way to celebrate 70!
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Feb 2, 2019 19:50:09 GMT -6
Well, after all that excitement and build up to the SD43, I have gone ahead and cancelled my order, and replaced the order with the Sub 114060. After I ordered the SD43, I kept looking at the Sub and asking myself why I would choose the SD43 over it. There is just something about the Sub without the date, apart from the fact that is how the original one was 1953, that is so down to basics. It has always been the one, over the years, that I told myself I would have if I ever did get a sub. And don't ask me why, because I don't know, but I like the look of the 114060 better. When it comes right down to it, I guess we just go where our heart takes us. This will very likely be the only Rolex diver I will ever own. I would hate to get the SD43 and regret not getting the 114060, and I just think that is what would happen. Even though I could likely flip the SD43 and be ahead of the game, that is just not where I am at right now with my decision. It has nothing to do with the price, as the money is set aside, just in case I got the call before my other watches sold. So there you have it. My SD43 has become a Sub 114060:  Cheers, Carl |
|
Baco Noir
WWF Advisor
WWF Admin
Posts: 31,970
Name: Roger
|
Post by Baco Noir on Feb 2, 2019 19:59:20 GMT -6
Nothing wrong with that decision. Gotta listen to the heart. I’ve been looking at the pre-ceramic version of late myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by carl on Feb 2, 2019 20:08:53 GMT -6
Nothing wrong with that decision. Gotta listen to the heart. I’ve been looking at the pre-ceramic version of late myself. That is a great one to have as well. And I remember in about 2010, I could have got one for about $4500CAD after a 20% discount. The AD had a number of Subs and Explorer models at that time. I didn't have the money then. And, I think it was 2012, when Rolex updated the case and I really liked the looks better overall. And I still like it the best. I was not wild about the idea of a ceramic bezel, but I'm over that now. And I like all the other improvements. |
|
|
|
Post by aerome on Feb 3, 2019 11:31:18 GMT -6
Had a dweller and although I didn't dislike it, I could really have cared less about it. I saw someone wearing one and absolutely hated how it looked. If was bansihed from the tribe not long after that at a price I'm kicking myself for.
|
|
I do have a gut feeling, however, that when I finally take possession of this watch, it might just become a favorite.
For me, it's not about the size, but the proportions. I never bonded with the newest Sub versions, mainly because of the thicker lugs. I was kind of waiting for Basel 2019, so see if they are going to modify the case on the Submariner at all. Funny, a year or so ago I would have said that the watch is just too big, and I did try the predecessor at 40mm a few times. It was just top heavy on my wrist. And, the odd thing for me was that I didn't like it without the Cyclops! That is so unusual for me, who normally likes only watches with no date function. It was a very unusual move for Rolex to do anything because it is fashionable, but they clearly admitted it themselves!
