[Video] A Deep Dive Into The Rolex Sea-Dweller

Lex is taking the plunge

March 03, 2023

comments 17

In today’s video, Fratello senior editor Lex Stolk takes a deep-dive into the Rolex Sea-Dweller. The story dates all the way back to 1967 with the Sea-Dweller reference 1665 with a “Double Red” dial. Where the Submariner was water resistant to 200 meters, the Sea-Dweller could survive depts of 610 meters. It changed in 1978 when Rolex introduced the ref. 16660 “Triple Six,” allowing the wearer to go as deep as 1220 meters. Lex talks about all the Sea-Dweller models up to the 126600 (and 126603), except the Deepsea models.

Rolex Sea-Dweller 1665 & 16600

Lex’s favorites are the first Sea-Dweller (ref. 1665) and the later reference 16600. The original Sea-Dweller from 1967 is simply magic, and the reference 16600 is the last one with an aluminum bezel and tritium dial & hands (and since 1998, these were applied with Super-LumiNova). Later ones are all technically more advanced and more resistant (ceramic bezel and a higher quality folding clasp), it’s the earlier ones that Lex prefers.

What about you? What are your favorites? Let us know in the comments below.

Watch this and our other videos on the Fratello YouTube channel here.

Home
Video
[Video] A Deep Dive Into The Rolex Sea-Dweller

Read next latest →

The Fratello Watch List — Lex’s Pre-Owned Favorites From Jaeger-LeCoultre, Panerai, And Rolex

Lex Stolk

Hands-On With The New Meca-Quartz Praesidus Type H-75 Chronograph

Jorg Weppelink

Fratello’s Top 5 Reasonably Affordable Rolex Watches

Jorg Weppelink

17 Comments

Leave a comment... Join the conversation

Post with fratello account
Login

Don't have an account yet?
Create one here, it'll only take 20 seconds

SolidCaseBack says:

Mar 03, 2023 at 17:30

In fact, Lex, I certainly do know it. And that’s why I have a 16600. But you’re right, I would also like a 1665 DRSD, and a Great White, and a 16660.

I’ll also forgive you saying “1655 Double Red” instead of “1665” (at 2:08), because as well as a Sea Dweller, I do love an Explorer II too! ?

Reply
1. Lex says:
  
  Mar 04, 2023 at 09:38
  
  I messed up the reference because the 1655 Freccione is possibly my fav Rolex of all time.
  
  Reply
  1. SolidCaseBack says:
    
    Mar 04, 2023 at 18:43
    
    We’ve all done it mate ??
    
    Reply
SolidCaseBack says:

Mar 03, 2023 at 17:34

And P.S. is it not the case that the very first patent pending 1665 SDs were Single Reds, and the Double Reds came after?

Reply
1. Lex says:
  
  Mar 05, 2023 at 10:30
  
  Yes they were.
  
  Reply
Brian Donlevy says:

Mar 03, 2023 at 22:09

I have a 1665 double red can you let me know what year Rolex produced them it also.has a second number 2930419 and the braclet is 93150 is this the original brace let

Reply
1. Perezcope says:
  
  Mar 04, 2023 at 03:29
  
  2930419 doesn’t belong to the known case number range. Sure about the number? A 93150 bracelet would not be original to the watch. Should be a 9315.
  
  Reply
Perezcope says:

Mar 04, 2023 at 00:39

The first Sea-Dweller model was the ‘Single Red’ which didn’t have a helium valve yet as the 40 or so produced pieces had been manufactured before the idea for the valve reached Rolex. The first valve prototype was made in early 1968 and given to Dr. Ralph W. Brauer to be tested during Comex ‘Hydra 1’. However, Comex had nothing to do with the development of the valve and as a matter of fact, at the time Rolex gave Brauer the prototype, Comex was actually working with Omega to develop the so-called ‘PloProf’ (from plongeur professionnel, French for ‘professional diver’). The idea for the helium valve came from U.S. Navy SEALAB Aquanaut Bob Barth. The first ‘Double Red’ was made in 1969, not 1967. Here’s a real deep dive into the history of the Sea-Dweller:

https://perezcope.com/2020/05/27/the-sea-dweller-chronicles-genesis-of-the-decompressing-watch/

https://perezcope.com/2020/06/28/the-sea-dweller-chronicles-dry-run-and-teaming-up-with-comex/

Reply
1. Lex says:
  
  Mar 04, 2023 at 09:38
  
  Thanks for the factual update!
  
  Reply
2. jh
  James H says:
  
  Mar 04, 2023 at 16:18
  
  Immense! Thanks for sharing. ‘Watch Chronicler’ also had a very good history of the ‘Dweller on YouTube… And there’s a Hodinkee one too, but it’s a bit average.
  
  Reply
3. SolidCaseBack says:
  
  Mar 04, 2023 at 18:45
  
  ????
  
  Reply
Chris says:

Mar 04, 2023 at 02:00

Checked out the video, but going in I thought that any Squale 1521 or Yema Superman is a splendid Dweller replacement, and I was not dissuaded. Granted, I’d rather have a Dweller than a Sub, but the ridiculous notion of marketing watches that do 4000m depth is just grating. The vanishingly small amount of people that ever venture below 200m left aside, for 99,9999% of the planet a skin diver will suffice.

In light of the fact that the Dweller is large, cumbersome and somewhat gauche, I’ll pick a 39mm skin diver with French charm over that huge lump of steel any day. But if I ever really, really wanted something that screamed “toolwatch”, I’d pick up a Sinn UX or Seiko Emperor Tuna. In quartz. Because that’s the movement of choice if you want reliability and shockproofing.

Reply
Kenneth says:

Mar 04, 2023 at 04:13

The 16600 reference SD is still the best. Later model though technically more refined, are clumsy looking watches.

Reply
Damon says:

Mar 04, 2023 at 07:49

I love this guy, funny as hell!

Reply
Guy L. says:

Mar 04, 2023 at 12:41

great review, thx – I love the Sea Dweller(s), the old ones in fact, pre 2008.
actually, Sea Dwellers are the real Subs, a bit like Ducati Streetfighters are the real Monsters….

Reply
jh
James H says:

Mar 04, 2023 at 16:37

Nice resume! 116600 for me. Classic form factor but improvements to functionality in the movement, bracelet and lume. I also have a real fondness for the Great White. The modern 43mm monstrosity is an abomination. Rolex could have swung 43mm as an improvement to an instrument watch, but then dashed that excuse with the Cyclops – it leaves the Sub (no date) as the last true dive tool in the catalogue. I doubt the ‘because they could’ cyclops argument – the feedback for poor ‘Dweller sales was always that ‘real Rolexes have a cyclops..’ so I suspect it was a commercial decision. The current ‘Dweller is more Sub+ for the large of wrist and for emerging markets where bigger is always better. I think they originally eschewed the cyclops because it made the crystal even thicker and optical distortion was a problem. A diver in a bell might need to know the date as he’d be down for multiple days, but it was never a frequent need in the way of the desk diver. It will be interesting to see where the model goes – I think it could gain a unique character in the range by returning to the ‘pure tool roots: Ti, matte face, big lume, Oysterflex band with Glidelock clasp… Make that 42mm and the Sub could return to 40mm!

Reply
Robert Meringolo says:

Jan 14, 2024 at 23:25

The double red is the cats pajamas. Big statement for a steel watch. Theres no point in paying up for a great white, it’s got no visual distinction. I was lucky enough to grab a nice matte dial 16660. It’s got a splash of lume, still newish, all the mass and thickness that a sub misses. I think it’s ideal but I might pick up a 16600 with tritium to bang around. Leaving the triple 6 to stay as nice as possible.

Reply