The Results - New Super Sea Dweller Super Test & Review

[themuck]

* * * THE RESULTS * * * New Super Sea Dweller Super Test & Review * * * THE RESULTS

Heliox Blowdown, Saturation & Decompression plus Daily Deep Sea Diving

Introduction

Firstly it is very important that I thank all the professional saturation Divers, Diving Supervisors and Diving Superintendent who took part in the test and without whom I would not have been able to make this contribution to the forum. In particular I am very grateful to the Diver who wore the watch and spent a long time talking with me before, during and after every dive discussing the performance of the SSD and making every effort to ensure the test was as robust and comprehensive as possible. I would also like to thank all the RWG forum members who have supported me throughout this test with posts that included very encouraging comments and a special thank you to forum member UB7 who very kindly helped me with the photos that are included in this test review.

As you will see, my camera skills are nonexistent and many of the photos are blurred. This combines with the fact that my camera was blown into saturation, didn't work down there and has never been the same since decompression. In addition, I never noticed while taking the pre and post sat pics that I had accidentally captured reflections from the watches (SSD and gen) and the equipment I pictured the SSD with (chrome fixtures on diving helmets etc) that would either expose the test site or me or both. Unfortunately, this means I have significantly fewer pictures to include with this review than I had taken (literally dozens and dozens of pics) but I hope the ones I have included will be acceptable. I didn't include any photos of my Sea Dweller in its out of the box condition because it is the same as every other SSD and has therefore been fully and expertly reviewed with pics (far better than I could manage) elsewhere on this forum.

I compiled and produced this test and review because I have been highly impressed by the very knowledgeable, friendly and helpful members of this forum since joining around a year ago and I am fortunate to be in a position where I can give something back to RWG and my fellow enthusiasts. I am genuinely grateful to you all and I sincerely hope you enjoy this New Super Sea Dweller Super Test & Review.

The Super Sea Dweller

A lot has been written and said about the new Sea Dweller and whether or not it should be classed as a member of the elite band of new generation Super Reps. I am not in any position to make any judgement on this particular aspect but I have watched the development of this new watch with great interest and enjoyed the feedback given to the developer after he released prototype pics and requested advice and guidance from the knowledgeable members of this forum. I am of the view that this is exactly how every new rep should be developed and the trusted dealer who developed and released this new watch should be congratulated for his commendable efforts. However, it was with huge disapointment that I read the reports and posts of forum members after the final version of the Sea Dweller was released and pics posted because the flaws and errors in this watch could so easily have been eradicated and the true holy grail of reps (a mirror of the gen) could and should have been a reality for everyone.

Nevertheless, I decided to buy the new Sea Dweller because the gen is my second favourite Rolex - falling only slightly behind the Daytona (which I know will never be accurately or reliably repped after reading all the posts on this timepiece here at RWG). I've never bought any of the previous versions of the Sea Dweller or Submariner because they are far too inaccurate. Having received it and been reassured that it had been pressure tested to 10 Bar / 100 metres and was accurate to within a few seconds a day, I then decided that it should be put to the test and formulated this test and review.

First Impressions

My initial response when I opened the package to find my gleaming new Sea Dweller was one of amazement. First impressions were excellent and the watch makes a very positive initial impression and I just couldn't believe that I actually had my (second) favourite rep in my hands and I would be wearing it on my wrists in just a few short minutes after I had removed a couple of links to make it fit me. Those few minutes turned into quite a few minutes and then more than quite a few minutes as I discovered a couple of screws seem to be stuck in place and I just couldn't get them out. I persevered and eventually got enough screws released so the Sea Dweller would fit my wrist but I checked all the screws on all the links and unfortunately two of them were stuck fast and are impossible to get out - rendering the watch useless for people with very small wrists.

However, I had managed to release enough screws and links to make my Sea Dweller fit and carried on with the 'just out of the box checklist'. The crown feels high quality and unscrewed smoothly to reveal a ribber o ring and it clicked securely in all the right places so adjusting the date and time was simple and felt smooth. The crown screwed back in place absolutely perfectly with the Rolex crown pointing directly upwards towards the bezel - superb.

Putting the watch on my wrist proved to be awkward because the bracelet had been joined to the watch the wrong way round and the clasp needed a strong push to get the click. The clasp foldover safety catch was even more difficult to get in place and it needs a real pull to get it released when removing the watch. The diver's extension releases without any problems but doesn't click back in place properly or securely. My overall impressions of the bracelet was that it has many flaws that are unnecessary and make putting the watch on and taking it off more of a burden than it should be. The weight and feel of the bracelet also gave me the impression that this is not a premium quality product and would be an immediate 'tell' for anyone that had held any quality gen from any manufacturer not just Rolex.

The watch itself definitely looks the part. Even after reading all the comments regarding accuracy, I was impressed by the look and feel of the timepiece so I noted the following observations -

Bezel - Edges don't feel 'jagged' and the clicks felt nicely damped.

Pearl - Too small but well finished and doesn't look out of place and the pearl arrow points directly above the 12 o'clock position.

Crown Guards - Too big but didn't look out of place to my eye especially without the gen next to them for comparison.

Sweep - The second hand sweep is very smooth.

Markings - Laser etching looks slightly too dense.

Hands - All three hands look excellent and line up at 12 o'clock perfectly.

Date - The date is centralised in the window and the font looks the part.

Dial - Printing on the dial and hour markers are excellent and the lume worked well.

HEV - Looks precisely engineered and highly accurate.

Caseback - Seems exactly like the gen but the model number print on the hologram is poor and could wear off quickly.

Crystal - Flawless scratch and spot free with fantastic AR but sits slightly too high and edge feels too sharp.

Rehaut - I have no real idea what this is!

In no way am I an expert but I have handled many gen Rolex's and other quality manufacturer's timepieces over the years so the comments I have made are my genuine thoughts while examining the watch straight out of the box. To say I was impressed is an understatement.

The Test - Before Blowdown

Prior to blowing the watch into saturation on the Diver's wrist in the chambers, I asked twelve Divers, Four Diving Supervisors and a Diving Superintendent for their thoughts on the watch as many of them have gens on their wrists and all of them have seen and handled real Sea Dwellers. Please bear in mind that these guys aren't into watches as much as the people on this forum and only want a reliable and high quality timepiece to wear in the water without really paying that much attention to them. Their initial impressions when I showed them the watch on my wrist was that it is a real Sea Dweller that looked brand new and just out of the box. However, after I took it off and handed it to each of them for a close up comparison they all immediately noticed it wasn't a gen just by the feel of the bracelet in their hands. I asked them to forget about the bracelet and just concentrate on the watch itself and noted all their comments -

"The face just doesn't look right around the edges of the crystal (rehaut? / crystal height? / crystal cut?)" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"That pearl is wrong (too small)" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"Very smooth sweep" (wearing solid gold Submariner Certi)

"Looks exactly like mine" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"Best fake watch I've seen" (wearing limited edition diving company Panerai)

"Caseback edges need grinding (too sharp)" (wearing two tone Submariner)

"Writing (face) is brighter than mine" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"How can I get one" (wearing G Shock)

"Three hundred bucks is a bargain" (wearing vintage Sea Dweller)

"Looks decent but it's still a fake" (wearing G Shock)

"Bits round the crown (crown guards) don't look right" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"Can't believe this is a fake" (wearing Breitling Superocean)

"Numbers (date font) are slightly different" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"Awesome fake" (wearing Omega Seamaster)

"The glass (crystal) is higher" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"If it lasts (saturation and diving test) I'm getting one" (wearing Sea Dweller)

"Feels like a good quality watch" (wearing Divex)

I pointed out all the other flaws that have been mentioned on the forum and I received these additional comments -

"Nobody would notice the etching (laser) was wrong"

"Pearl is definitely too small and is noticeable"

"Crystal does look slightly different round the edges and it's definitely higher"

"Bezel numbers (insert) look the same"

"The guards (crown guards) are too thick"

After taking a note of all their comments about the watch, I asked them to comment on the bracelet - and everyone certainly did. Apart from the fact that the bracelet had been attached to the watch upside down, even the ones that had reasonably positive comments to make about aspects of the bracelet thought it was poor overall. These are the comments that I could post, the other comments were too rude and obscene to publish (they seriously didn't like the bracelet) -

"The bracelet doesn't feel right and it sounds wrong when you use it" (I noticed this as well when trying on the gen - the bracelet of the gen does sound different from the SSD when picking the watch up and attaching it to your wrist)

"The finish of the links isn't right at the edges"

"There is some lack of flexibility and two of the links are sticking" (I think this will probably 'loosen up' with use)

"The clasp is too tight and doesn't click in correctly" (I also noticed the clasp of the gen works much smoother than the SSD and I think this is a design issue that won't get any better with use)

"Total cr*p"

"The Rolex logo (on the outside of the clasp) is good"

"Worse than a cheap Timex"

"Feels and sounds tinny"

"Embossed logos and engraving (extended clasp) look right"

"Sh*t bracelet"

"Buy a real bracelet"

I have no idea if the bracelet I received with my Sea Dweller was defective or different from ones supplied to other forum members but I've looked at the review pictures and it does look to be the same.

The Test - Blowdown

I took pics of the Sea Dweller prior to blowdown so I had something to post just in case it didn't survive the test. There are fewer uploaded than I would have liked due to problems with reflections.

The Heliox blowdown to storage depth was uneventful but the Diver took the precaution of placing the watch on his bunk under a pillow to prevent any injuries if the watch imploded. He was going to open the crown to expose the watch interior and therefore equalise it with the chamber environment and make an implosion effectively impossible but I asked him not to do this as nobody with a gen has to so he kindly left the crown locked closed.

The Test - Saturation

My camera didn't work at depth so unfortunately there are no pics in the chambers during the test.

Throughout the SSD's time in Heliox saturation the watch performed well and kept very good time (+/- a few seconds daily). The only cause for concern was when the Diver removed the watch when he was sleeping only to find it often stopped when he got up in the morning. However, owners of gen Rolex's of all types have told me that this happens with their watches as well so it could be argued that this is a good point because the rep is behaving in the same manner as the gen.

The Test - Diving

I tried to take photos from the Diver's hat camera and ROV monitor screens but this disappointingly failed (reflections, horrendous resolution, blurred images etc etc). However, I will try to get captured stills from the Diver's hat camera DVD and upload these into this review when I receive the DVD.

The SSD was used on the Diver's wrist throughout each daily dive (except for one day when diving was suspended due to weather - the vessel couldn't hold station) and performed well. There was no flooding or fogging, the lume worked (although it is not really necessary because the working area is flooded with hat mounted, ROV and static lights) and the watch kept very good time in the water.

The videos of every dive are being transferred to DVD and I will upload these to YouTube after editing out all the footage that doesn't include the watch (many many hours) and dubbing the voice audio of the Diver and Diving Supervisor for obvious reasons. I'll update this test review to include the YouTube links. Please post any comments you would like to make after seeing the video here at RWG and not YouTube as I will not be visiting the site once I've uploaded the video and therefore cannot respond to any comments made there.

The Test - Decompression

The HEV issue caused a bit of confusion for me and a lot of wind up opportunities for the Divers. It works in the opposite direction to that which I initially thought and automatically deploys when the gas pressure within the watch exceeds the exterior environment. To test this, the Diver unscrewed the crown immediately prior to decompression in the chambers to allow the Heliox to enter the watch, he then fully screwed the crown back in and placed the watch between two pillows that were taped together. This procedure ensured that if the HEV failed and the watch exploded, no damage would be done to the Divers or the chambers.

The decompression was undertaken on a modified US Navy table that is very slow with 2 hour and 6 hour holds at various depths. I cannot state the depth for operational reasons but it may be safe to say that the HEV probably worked in the same manner as the gen because the Heliox inside the watch would have been a number of times greater relative to the external environment throughout the decompression and especially when reaching the surface if the HEV had failed. The crown was unscrewed when reaching surface and no escaping gas was heard.

The Test - Post Saturation

The watch continues to work well but has suffered visible effects of the test. The work being undertaken by the Diver with the watch on his wrist throughout the test was in a particularly harsh environment with significant and highly caustic pollutants in the water. Spots of what seem to be rust have appeared on the underside of watch bezel, on the case directly underneath the bezel, on the caseback and on various points on the bracelet. None of the other watches (all gens from various manufacturers) that were in the same saturation chambers, diving bell and water conditions have any of these marks, which raises serious questions relating to the calibre of the steel being used.

The crystal is perfect and still flawless (not a single scratch or spot anywhere) which is an excellent and impressive sign when you consider the treatment this watch has undergone but the HEV has a small surface scratch on it (not visible in any pics despite my best efforts to get the camera to pick it up) so it definitely isn't made of titanium - not that anyone really thought that it was anyway.

As predicted, the model number printed on the hologram sticker on the caseback has worn off.

I have tried to clean the rust marks off today using Q Tips but fresh water, standard detergents and elbow grease have so far failed to take them off. I will try other possible solutions and upload the 'cleaned' photos into this review if they work.

The Test - Side By Side With The Gen

I can only apologise once again for my obvious lack of any camera skills but my camera is definitely suffering the after effects of being blown into saturation and being decompressed so I will definitely have to buy a new one and learn how to use it for my next test and review. Spent ages with the two watches and really did my best to try and provide the most appropriate shots so hopefully they will provide a reasonable guide as to how the rep compares to the gen. Once again, there are fewer shots than I would have liked to upload due to reflections.

Apart from the flaws previously mentioned in this test review and elsewhere on RWG, the only other differences I noticed were on the face with the writing on the gen slightly fainter and a tiny bit thinner than the rep, the date font is noticeably thinner and the font style is slightly different from the gen on some numbers, the 12 o'clock hour marker is larger on the rep and finally the printed Rolex crown on the face is the tiniest bit larger on the rep.

Conclusion

I am in no position to make any definitive judgement on the new Sea Dweller so I have provided as much information as I can so that everyone can make up their own mind on the subject.

Is the new Sea Dweller a member of the elite Super Rep club? Well I would say that it is a superb rep but, because of its obvious and noticeable flaws, by my reckoning it can't be a Super Rep because to my mind a Super Rep is perfect in every way and a mirror of the gen - so does this mean that there are in fact no real Super Reps?..because it seems that every rep (even those described as Super Reps) have flaws and it is only the toleration of some of these flaws (often described as minor flaws) that allows the title of Super Rep to be applied.

At the end of the day, I like the new Sea Dweller but I am very very disappointed about the flaws because it could and should have been a perfect mirror of the gen especially after the knowledgeable members of this forum provided all the excellent feedback to the developer so that each and every flaw could have been addressed. Perhaps once our trusted dealers and new Super Rep developers look at the obvious efforts the enthusiasts (who are also their customers) here at RWG put into responding to prototype evaluations and reviewing production examples, they will perhaps start to take our comments more seriously and incorporate what we say into the final production watches.

To their credit, the developers have produced a very good rep that I would suggest provides value for money because it does perform very well in the extremely harsh test conditions that the gen was also designed to endure - even though there seems to be a problem with what appears to be rust because nobody will see this in everyday normal non diving use - I believe this problem is probably the factory's fault and not the trusted dealer's or rep developer's that are to blame. It would be great to see that, after they read this and all the other reviews of the new Sea Dweller, our trusted dealers and rep developers actually have a rethink and revisit the watch before incorporating many if not all of the amendments needed to make the Sea Dweller the perfect mirror Super SD we all want to see, buy, enjoy and be proud of.

Footnote

As a final note to end my review, I thought you would like to know that we decided to do a little final test...the result of which possibly asks more questions than it answers...but it brought a wry smile to my face anyway so I thought I'd share it with you.

We took the rep and the gen used for the side by side comparison pics to a very senior member of the marine crew (the ship's Captain) who owns a Rolex (a dress watch he hardly ever wears so he doesn't really know about sports models like the SD although he obviously knows a quality watch when he wears and sees it) and asked him which one he thought was the genuine article. After examining them both closely (obviously not noticing the 'rust' marks and clearly not really knowing what a sports model bracelet should feel like) and trying both of them on his wrist...he picked the rep...

And For My Next Trick...

If you've enjoyed this review and would like to see another one (with better pics etc), please visit http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=59798 and post your comments.

Edited November 19, 2007 by themuck

[TwoTone]

One of the best practical reviews I've ever read...

Thanks!

TT

[JoJo35]

Thank you ! ! ! The best review I have ever read!

That pretty much makes up my mind, I think I'll be headed to an AD tomorrow and buying a gen...

[UB7]

Fantastic review! Initially I did not have much interest in this watch, but after reading this review I am definitly going to purchase a SSD, I think the dealers owe you a free watch for all the troubles you went through, and for making a phenominal review that will probbably spark many members into buying this watch...You rock man, by far the most comprehensive, and informative review i've ever read..Cheers mate!

[SportsterRider]

Bravo! Well done! This kind of input is what makes this board so great.

It's interesting that your bracelet is so bad (and installed incorrectly). On my SSD, the bracelet is excellent and I doubt anyone would be able to distinguish it from a genuine, but I did go over it a bit to loosen it up. A lot of folks like to 'oil' the bracelet to give it a better feel. I use a fine polishing compound instead. Basically, I just remove the bracelet and saturate it in the polishing compound (and this is a VERY mild polish). I then work the bracelet and apply pressure to each link to force the polish into every nook and cranny. After about 10-15 minutes of doing this, I wash the bracelet and re-install.

Even out of the box, mine was very good. After treatment, it's as good as you're likely to get.

Now that I think of it, this polish might work well to remove the spots on your piece.

Meguiars Polish

Thanks again for the review!

[Pugwash]

One of the best practical reviews I've ever read...

I have to agree. It's the kind of thing you'd refer to when defending our reps in the pub.

Such a "we are not worthy" post.

[Jetsons]

themuck, this is an extraordinarily informative review. I can only imagine the time you invested to put this together. Truly amazing and VERY much appreciated.

You bring up issues with this watch that I don't think anyone else could have addressed , mainly the rust development. The bracelet problems have been documented by others but not to the extent you have.

As you mentioned, the watch can be improved on several fronts beginning with the bracelet. Secondly, I think some of us would like to know exactly what case material is being used. It doesn't appear to be the advertised 316L. You might try a Cape Cod cloth to remove the rust spots and hopefully that will work.

Again, thank you very much for the time you have invested and making this information available to us.

Regards,

J

[manuel]

Thanks for the review.

Funny that the rep fooled the captain.

[professor_yaffle1]

Themuck, I can only echo what others have already said, namely that that was an outstanding piece of work - hats off to you, sir!

:1a:

I'll admit that I was dithering a bit about getting one, but now I have to - to survive in that environment is just incredible, well worth the money!

[yt74]

Thank you that was amazing!

[malumouse]

AMAZING>..!!!..thanks for the review!!!

[ironmarshal]

Absolutely astonishing that you went to the lengths to put this review together. Look forward to reviews of the other watches....thanks.

[leitztozeiss]

I'm impressed that the watch worked and worked well under harsh conditions. A little CG mod and pearl would address my only concerns about this rep.

Mine arrives tomorrow from Angus, as it has cleared customs as of this morning (yes, Sunday morning). Yahoo!

Thank you for this fantastic review. The description more than makes up for the pics.

[deltatahoe]

it's too bad we aren't doing post of the month anymore -- themuck deserves the title regardless

deltatahoe

[Terje]

A-mazing! I can`t thank you enough for all the time and effort you put into this review. Wow!

[dangerman]

Great review!

I'm lost for superlatives.

Just amazed and awed by your dedication to our cause.

Thanks a lot mate.

[deltatahoe]

all of the negative comments about the bracelet from the genuine seadweller owners begs the question -- is there another rep watch out there (noobmariner?) that has a better quality bracelet that is closer to the genuine? i'm clueless about the modern seadweller bracelet (ie. i don't even know if the modern seadwellers have solid or hollow mid-links)....

any senior members / modern rolex fanatics have ideas about this?

deltatahoe

[Rolexman]

Outstanding test and write up... well done!

It would be nice to see the Breitling SOSF undergo the same tests ..... now THAT'S A SUPER REP

Edited November 19, 2007 by Rolexman

[Stephane]

Fantastic review TheMuck.

Thank you very much.

Cheers

Stephane

[slickdick]

Great review, Big up to you mate...

Rusting stainless steel makes one wonder though

[Tribal]

Fantastic review

Never heard that a rep stands this stress test....

Thank you for your time to provide this test run...

It's amazing...

[keith_bran]

Many thanks themuck, an excellent review.

I too was surprised at how poor the bracelet on my SSD was, and I had no real point of reference as this was my first Rolex rep. It just felt "off".

Still, no matter, my SSD sits on a heavy duty PU divers' strap now!

Again, many thanks!

Keith

[coolfire]

Great review, Big up to you mate...

Rusting stainless steel makes one wonder though

Precisely... 316L (as claimed to be used in our reps) is not even supposed to rust...

Nevertheless, what an outstandingly amazing and infinitely original review you have done here, themuck... :notworthy: This should most definitely be made a bloody sticky!!! :1a:

[coolfire]

Many thanks themuck, an excellent review.

I too was surprised at how poor the bracelet on my SSD was, and I had no real point of reference as this was my first Rolex rep. It just felt "off".

Still, no matter, my SSD sits on a heavy duty PU divers' strap now!

Again, many thanks!

Keith

Looking good... Wear it well!

[slickdick]

Precisely... 316L (as claimed to be used in our reps) is not even supposed to rust...

Indeed, I'd love to see this being cleard up, as a recent topic about a similar issue (Some 3717's made of cheap aluminum?) did not resolve in a definate answer to whats going on.

I feel another 'white lie' topic comming up.