SportsterRider Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 There has been a lot of buzz recently about the new Super Sea Dweller that most of the dealers are offering (Andrew, Josh, Paul, etc), enough so that I bought one. Mine arrived Tuesday and I figured I'd post my impressions while trying to be as objective as I can. One of the sticking points with this piece is whether or not it qualifies as a "Super Rep". Since there isn't any definitive definition of what constitutes a Super Rep, most of the time it's left to general consensus. In the case of this Super Sea Dweller, the consensus seems to be split. Many folks feel it qualifies as one, others do not. So let's look at some of the high level points that any rep looking for this title would need. 1) I think we can all agree that in order to get the title of 'Super', a rep has to be dimensionally correct. With Rollie reps, there seems to be a lot of discrepancy in this department. Take the Noob/So-Called Perfect (or more generically, Sub reps with the case number F520117). Many see this as the best out-of-the-box Sub replica you can buy. While I would tend to agree with that, there are some glaring shortcomings with this watch relating to size. In the case of the Noob, the case is smaller than a genuine Sub in these area's: If you've handled a genuine Sub, or owned one, you know as soon as you put this watch on that something is off. It just doesn't feel "right" and wears much smaller than a genuine. Turns out, this is due to the fact that it IS smaller. With the Super Sea Dweller, this isn't a problem. The case dimensions are 100% correct. 2) Being able to take genuine parts is also a pretty basic capability of a Super rep (and closely related to the first point above). But again, there isn't a consensus on how many or what kinds of parts a rep needs to take in order to qualify. Does it have to be able to take a crystal? A bezel? Bezel insert? Crown? Bracelet? All of the above? I don't know, but I do know that there isn't a replica made that can take every single genuine part without modification. The UPO will take a crystal, but not the crown/tube or bezel assembly of a genuine. MBW's will take many genuine parts, but some of those parts don't fit without modification. So, does the Super Sea Dweller hit any of these points? I believe it does in some areas, and doesn't, or hasn't been proven to, in others. Take a look at the crown: It's been shown that this crown is almost identical to a genuine part. This has always been an area where there was little consistency with Rolex sport watch reps. There either too fat, or too thin, or they don't have the correct amount of notches, or the coronet and triple dots were totally wrong. Along with that, the case tube is also another area where most all Rollie sport model reps are wrong. Ya, most of them had three seals like a genuine, but they were dimensionally incorrect. This new Sea Dweller, for the first time in any modern style Rollie rep, has a correct case tube as well. It'll even accept a genuine crown without the need for an aftermarket solution. I apologize for the lousy picture: Crown guards. Man, this is the one thing that NO Rollie replica gets right out of the box. The Noob is probably the best, but even that model isn't correct. The Super Sea Dweller is no different here, and in this instance certainly fails to live up to the "Super" moniker. I did some quick shaving to mine and, for me anyway, got 'em pretty close. Most Rollie replica's get the caseback correct, or close enough. The Super Sea Dweller caseback is as good as any replica, and perhaps the best yet on a replica sport model Rolex. I don't see where you could really fault it. Another area where Rolex replicas fall short is the rehaut. Funny thing is, before I found this board I had no idea what a rehaut was, 'nor did I ever pay attention to it. And keep in mind, I'm not new to this dance. I've been collecting watches for the better part of 30+ years, and replica's for over 20. Now that I know about it, I agree that it's an integral part of the overall effort to duplicate a watch correctly. So, does the Super Sea Dweller get this correct? I don't know. At certain angles, it looks 100% like a genuine. At others, not so much. Here are a couple shots (which also show the excellent dial - a dial that is every bit as good as the Noob dial): I'm of the opinion that the rehaut is correct. I think the crystal is distorting it due to the cut of the crystal, or perhaps the finishing? Maybe it's the crystal gasket? I don't know and until someone pops the crystal out of the case, we won't know for sure. The only think I CAN tell you is that in person, it looks very good. There are one or two folks on the various boards that have a genuine to compare to and have themselves said that in person, it's damn close. It'll be up to you to decide. When I owned my So-Called Perfect Sub (Sub case number F520117), one of the things that they really got right was the bracelet. But the end links always bothered me. While dimensionally correct, they weren't finished very well. The raised center part of the link's edges were rounded and just looked, well, wrong. The Super Sea Dwellers bracelet and end links are superb. I've seen recent posts where folks are having issues with screws sticking, or being stripped, and divers extensions popping open (my guess is that a simple 'adjustment' to the extension would fix this) but I've had none of these problems. Frankly, this is the nicest bracelet I've ever had on a Rollie rep, and is every bit as well made as my UPO bracelet. It just has that "feel" of a genuine, if you know what I mean. Here's a shot of the end link: I don't have any lume shots because the lume is typical of other Rollie reps. It sucks. I've learned that this isn't just a replica issue. Check out this site SD Vs PO for an example of a genuine SD not glowing very brightly. So, the million dollar question - Is the Super Sea Dweller a "Super Rep"? I don't know. That'll have to be left up to the general consensus. But I believe it IS a "Super" Sea Dweller, for sure. It is, without a doubt, the best modern SD rep, and maybe the best modern Rollie rep to date. When you consider the case, He valve, crown, case tube, bracelet, etc, it's head and shoulders above any other modern SD to date, and IMO, better than any modern Rollie sport watch rep. I know this wasn't up to some of the veteran members reviews, but I hope it was enjoyable nonetheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocsen Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Don't know why, but the watch looks really good in these pics. Where did you source yours from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 WTF! The rehaut looks different from the earlier versions. It looks cylindrical like it should be. Or perhaps it's the crystal that makes the difference as you say. I'm quite surprised. Either way, great review. Kudos! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baltic Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Great review SportsterRider, nice shots and well thought through descriptions. I'm looking forward to mine arriving - my first Rolex rep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsons Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 That is an excellent review, SportsterRider! Your unbiased commentary is very much appreciated as are the great photos. I read at RepGeek that someone received the SD with an etched crown on the crystal that was barely noticeable, as it should be. If they can correct this small detail, the rest of it seems simple enough to correct. Thanks for taking the time and sharing! Cheers, J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cskent69 Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Sportsrider - your crownguards do look great. Could you give a little advice on how you did that? I assume that you did not take out the tube, so did you fit a file in there with the crown pulled all the way out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin300z Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 How accurate is the datewheel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsterRider Posted November 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 WTF! The rehaut looks different from the earlier versions. It looks cylindrical like it should be. Or perhaps it's the crystal that makes the difference as you say. I'm quite surprised.Either way, great review. Kudos!Thanks, By-Tor. Much appreciated!Ya, I'm not sure what the deal is with the rehaut. More and more I'm leaning towards the crystal (and/or crystal gasket) as being the culprit here. In person, it looks fantastic. But again, in different light and at different angles, it either looks less like the genuine, or EXACTLY like the genuine. It can't be both, so the only thing I can think of is the crystal distorting it at certain angles.Don't know why, but the watch looks really good in these pics.Where did you source yours from?Trusty (Andrew). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsterRider Posted November 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Sportsrider - your crownguards do look great. Could you give a little advice on how you did that? I assume that you did not take out the tube, so did you fit a file in there with the crown pulled all the way out? When I did my CG's, I just removed the crown/stem and the outer seal. I used a Dremel, on low speed, with a small/thin sanding wheel to work the CG's. It came out okay and looks way better than it did. I could probably work 'em a little more, but they're so close that I don't want to risk taking too much material and ruining it. It was tricky, but obviously doable. I had to be careful not to nick the bezel and also not to allow the sanding wheel to drop too low and cut into the lower part of the CG. The sanding wheel was thin enough that it didn't contact the case tube, but it would have touched the seal, which is why I removed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perry563 Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 I have so many subs as well as the super SD where the divers extension keeps popping open. If there is a fix for this PLEASE let me know!!!!!!!!!!! Whats the trick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dani Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 Great read and you have convice me to try a rolex rep again Cheers, Dani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xyphis Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 (edited) Thanx for this transforum post. Very informative and makes me love my SD all the more Edited November 18, 2007 by Xyphis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolfire Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 Great read and you have convice me to try a rolex rep again Cheers, Dani Same here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bklm1234 Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 WTF! The rehaut looks different from the earlier versions. It looks cylindrical like it should be. Or perhaps it's the crystal that makes the difference as you say. I'm quite surprised. Either way, great review. Kudos! I think SportsterRider is right. The problem is the crystal. The crystal bevel is most likely too slanted. The top edge is probably too far into the dial so the crystal side blocks off the rehaut thickness detaisl, e.g. missing the "black ring". You can see the rehaut thickness at an angle but can't directly from the front. I'm getting 2 to mod for 2 members. I'll pop the crystal and take some pics of the rehaut thickness. If my theory is correct, there's still no easy way to fix it. Sigh. -bk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Chief Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 How accurate is the clasp? would you please add some pictures of clasp & date...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ta8088 Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 Nice review and great pics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cskent69 Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 I have a genuine crystal. It looks to be smaller in diameter than the one in the watch. So - no answers there. BK - would love to know if there is anyway to get rid of the etch at 6. Please let us know when you pop the crystal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopypants Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 I have a genuine crystal. It looks to be smaller in diameter than the one in the watch. So - no answers there. are you going to apply this crystal on this model and get an answer to us?!?! thanks PP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cskent69 Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Yep - but my it won't happen till January - when my next shipment goes to the Zigmaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephane Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Sorry for being late here but better later than never. Thank you very much for your review: pics and comments are really great. Cheers Stephane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.