Rolex Sea-Dweller 4000 Ref. 116600 Luxury Watch Review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 ноя 2016
- Watchuwant is now WatchBox. Subscribe to our channels for the best luxury watch content!
See this 40mm stainless steel Rolex Oyster Perpetual Sea-Dweller 4000 Ref. 116600 in high-resolution images on our website,
www.the1916company.com/watche...
Rolex Sea-Dweller 4000 (116600) self-winding automatic watch, features a 40mm stainless steel case surrounding a black dial on a stainless steel Oyster bracelet with folding buckle. Functions include hours, minutes, seconds and date.
Video and content by Tim Mosso and Pheline Jerome. 
Авто/Мото
The best kept secret in the Rolex watch world. The perfect Rolex diver.
Absolutely the best sport divers Rolex ever made and the last true Sea Dweller…40mm - refined lugs, mate dial and non cyclops… perfection
Been wanting one of these for ages (umm, since mid 2014 :-)), and then when it was discontinued, I simply HAD to have one at the first opportunity. And I got one! Instant keeper, absolutely no doubt!!
This will only appreciate in the yrs to come...a ss Rolex tool watch with less than 3 yr run...special
A wonderfully robust watch with meat on its bones. I knew of the sea dweller but wasn't overly familiar with them when I bought my Submariner. Since then, I've watched many videos showcasing these Sea Dwellers and I almost regret not choosing one over the sub. Great video, fantastic watch
I was fortunate to purchase this timepiece and it’s a phenomenal addition to my Rolex collection. Perhaps the most solid feeling watch over owned.
Detailed and thorough review thanks Tim, bought my sea dweller in Jan have not taken it off since. My opinion is this watch has stayed traditional to the rolex diver watches especially with no cyclops and the much more elegant case being the tapered lugs. The new sub super case is far to wide and reminds me of an AP royal oak. Furthermore this watch is far more understated and scarcely scene on wrists.
It’s almost impossible to find it by now
Great review and tnx for sharing the video...
Thanks for your support and be sure to tell your friends!
- WatchBox Team
Hi. So in this video, you say that Lug to Lug is 46 mm. In the other review on this watch, you said 47 mm.
So which is it?? Is it a lot smaller than the SubC or is it just the 1 mm as the early video said??
Thanks
Hi Tim, could you review and weigh a Panerai 351 please? and please provide your opinion on that 1950 case vs. the newer 1312 case and new movement refinements? Tks
Hi eal15, I'll do this as soon as we have one in-house. If it pops up on the website and I miss it, shoot me an email reminder.
Best,
Tim
My favourite Rolex diver less common than the Submariner
Indeed, and very below-the-radar. It's a great Rolex in every traditional sense.
Best,
Tim
116600 better than 16600 ?
Yes it is :)
Barely. It's got a maxi dial and a ceramic bezel. Other than that it's the same. Maybe the 3135 rather than the 3035, but other than the more magnetic resistance there isn't much difference.
Still, I prefer the cerachrome bezel over the aluminum one.
@@bloodymarvelous4790 Those are huge differences. The Cerachrom bezel will never fade and never scratch. Huge aesthetic and functional improvement over the aluminum insert. Also most importantly, the 116600 has a solid machined Oysterlock clasp with Glidelock. If you've ever actually held a five digit versus six digit Rolex dive watch, the difference between the build quality is night and day. All six digit reference Rolex watches have solid end links, solid center links, and machined Oysterclasps. The 16600 and those before it had those godawful soda can clasps that rattled around and were pretty terrible when you compared them to what other watchmakers from that era (eg. Omega, Jaeger-LeCoultre) were putting on their watches.