Reply With QuoteAt 50m you're experiencing 6 bar. ;-) (I appreciate that that's not what manufacturers print on thier dials, but nevertheless...).
I've dived wearing 30m-rated watches, but not to that depth and with no ill-effect to them.
R
As per title, i appreciate that manufactureres are very cagey about "50m / 5atm " and advice only light swimming or dish washing, but has anyone here experience of taking a new (or well serviced) 50m rated watch to deeper depths or been diving in one ?
And what happend - anything ?
Am strapping on my flameproof trousers as i type this (LOL) but i am genuinely curious as to whether a quality brand 50m rated watch will survive a life in the ocean waves ?
At 50m you're experiencing 6 bar. ;-) (I appreciate that that's not what manufacturers print on thier dials, but nevertheless...).
I've dived wearing 30m-rated watches, but not to that depth and with no ill-effect to them.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
My personal view is that any watch that doesn't have a screw down crown should not be used for diving. Surface swimming, showers etc no problem if rated for it but diving no. There will always be exceptions of course but follow manufacturers guidelines. To be honest, a good dive rated watch is not expensive (See Seiko's, Citizen etc)and when you ding it, scratch it on rocks,coral, boat gear, or lose it etc it won't make you cry. Unless of course your one of the lucky few where money is no object and you can stand the loss or inconvenience. Regards.Kev
Only been snorkelling to no more than 20ft - no ill effects though.Originally Posted by Michael_Mcr
“ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG
Well.....
The internal pressure is 1 bar (1.006 bar) so the differential pressure, which is the actual pressure trying to force water into the case is only 5 atm.
What we are dealing with is differential pressure, not absolute pressure.
Last edited by lysanderxiii; 23rd December 2012 at 01:01.
Thanks all for the input. I am not a diver (or even much of a swimmer really...) but was curious about some of the quality watches (especially chronographs) where the manufacturers are especially cagey about "up to 50m" and "static pressure" and "surface swimming" etc, etc.
If you consider a legendary watch like the Speedy Pro, which can survive everything else in the universe , why is the manufacturer not able or not confident enough to say "its ok off the diving board and for snorkeling" ?
The PRS-53 is a good example in my mind, rated as 50m by the manufacturer but on hand-winding you feel a good solid resistance from the seal and the overall sturdy construction gives confidence that it could go deep and long with no ill effects, a 50m rated dress Tissot for example does not give me that confidence.
Before I "got into" watches I had a Seiko kinetic rated to 5bar. I wore it as I learnt to dive and for some years afterwards every time I went diving. I believed the claim that it was waterproof to 50m. It had several hours at 30-40m depth. Eventually the crown stem rusted through and needed replacement. Water never got into the case and it never once gave me any other trouble.
I wouldn't do it now with such a low rating but I do trust the 2000m rated IWC I have!
The whole water resistance issue is a bit of a minefield as even the official advice is contradictory.
For example, even 30m WR I assume means that the case has passed a (dry or wet) test to 3 bar of static water resistance, to the manufacturers standards i.e. the watch could be submerged 30m in still water and not leak. That's actually deeper than 99.9% of watches ever go. I know there is "dynamic" vs "static" pressure, but from what I've read about this the difference is negligible. I also believe there is a confidence margin, so the watch would pass actually 30m plus a margin of error. This is more WR than most people will ever need.
However, you then look at (nearly all) the manufacturer's guidelines for WR, and you see that a 30m WR rating is barely suitable for the odd splash, and should not be submerged in even 1m of water. This does not fit with the previous definition IMO.
I suspect there is probably the need to account for degradation and wear of seals through time/winding of the crown etc, so whilst a 30m WR watch is fine initially, it is unlikely to retain that. Hence why a greater degree of WR is preferred for watches that are going to be used for swimming long-term.
I do think it would be more transparent and less confusing to the end-user to not declare a watch 30m water resistant if it's not capable of being submerged to 30m of water on a regular, long-term basis.
I did guess that ANY WR rating us dependant on servicing history re case seals and to a lesser extent possibly things like local water temperature, air pressure etc etc
I am sure that 100m rated and better are built for the job but maybe 30 and 50m rated are just ordinary watches with tight fitting backs and some rubber seals? And hence the manufacturers cover themselves with the small print.
I guess that ultimately the question I have is this : if I were to buy a Speedy Pro or a Zenith chronometer (say) rated to 50m, then could I spring off a diving board without a care in the world?
You have to consider the seals and how the watch case is constructed. Most watches rated to 50m/ 5 atmospheres won`t have a crew-down crown. The crown will contain an O-ring which makes contact with the crown tube (protruding from the case) on it's inner diamater and the crown itself on the outer diameter. It is snug fit so it will keep water out when new. However, over time the inner diameter will wear somewhat and the seal will 'relax' as the rubber ages. Another factor with hand-wound watches is wear and potential scoring of the case tube, which gives the potential for leaks and further compromises the water resistance. A screw-down crown usually contains 2 seals; one of which sits at the back of the crown and is copressed as the crown tightens. The O-ring is also squeezed and makes tighter contact.
Screw-down casebacks contain a rubber seal/gasket which will stand a lot of pressure in most examples. Snap-on casebacks rely on the tension created as the caseback snaps over a radial lip to force the back against it's seal. Some rely on a nylon/plastic gasket and a flange which gives a tight fit with the case. This type don`t actually snap on, they rely on the friction/compression of the gasket to seal and stay in place
Water ingress around the glass is the other area to consider. Most divers have a thick glass that's a tight fit in a nylon sealing ring. Lesser watches may contain a rubber O-ring with the glass held down by the bezel. Older watches with an acrylic crystal rely on the tight fit of the crystal against the watch case; owing to the slightly domed design an increase in pressure will increase the sealing force.
That's it in a nutshell; it isn`t rocket science. The weakest area is usually the crown seal and this is where problems arise with older watches. I would always pay heed to the manufacturers claims; a 50metre watch should be fine for swimming/snorkelling but isn`t ideal for diving. When looking at old watches I would assume the water resistance to be zero unless the watch has been checked. Seals get changed for the wrong ones, they get worn, they even get left out completely.
With so many cheap dive watches available, why would you need to dive/swim in a lesser-rated watch anyway?
Paul
Thank you for the insights into watch engineering Paul.
I agree with you about buying a properly rated watch, even a cheaper one, if one intends to go swimming.
I have a "proper" dive watch now and my concern was if I should buy an expensive watch that was only 50m rated, would I be forever paranoid about getting it wet.
I can now see that a properly serviced 50m rated quality watch should stand any sort of casual immersion or light swimming (tho I note that chrono pushers should never be used underwater)
I am a diver and the only watch I've taken to 50m or greater is a Citizen Promaster Aqualand:
Clearly, it's specifically designed for the purpose so any issues over water damage can be taken up with the manufacturer without too much issue. I can see absolutely no point in taking an expensive watch diving or even swimming. I have been diving with my Seamaster but that was to no more than about 20m in Capernwray whilst testing my rebreather following some mods; there were certainly no issues but given that it's rated to 300m I'd have been surprised if there were. Regardless of what depth/pressure to which a watch is rated, you'd potentially have a problem convincing a manufacturer that you stayed within its ill-defined criteria for water resistance, had correctly screwed in the crown etc.
I believe if correctly sealed at service that a watch rated to 50m would happily cope with a life on the ocean waves though I wouldn't take it 'into' the ocean waves unless absolutely necessary.
Last edited by Skier; 23rd December 2012 at 18:27.
Excellent summary. Thanks.
Last edited by Hamish; 23rd December 2012 at 22:31.
Hi Michael_Mcr. Most of the responses you've gotten above will be of far more value because the knowledge and experience of these TZ-UK members is far beyond my own. For what it is worth, though, I've never personally had any kind of a water resistance problem with even 30meter WR rated push/pull crown armoured acrylic crystal screw-back vintage military field/pilot type watches and I wear these all the time and have for years. I also heavily wore a moderate quality all-steel classic analog style 50m WR quartz chrono with conventionally constructed single gasket/non screw-down pushers for years (it was my main beater) without any wr problems whatsoever, and I imagine this watch would, or at least might, be roughly analogous to a Speedy Pro as regards its water resistance characteristics.
The caveat, though, is that I do follow the manufacturer's WR guidelines and recommendations, and closely heed to their precautionary advice --- and even if it's on the conservative side, I'd personally much rather err on that side myself. I also try to keep to the mfg's recommended periodic WR seal change maintenance timetable even though that advice is also likely on the conservative side as well.
Also for what it's worth, I've long heard that the single-gasket-on-the-stem, non screw-down pushers of classic chronographs like the Speedy Pro are highly vulnerable to moisture getting through, apparently for the most part iether in the form of steam, or from long term exposure to humid air, or from inadvertantly or accidently pushing them when submerged. Personally, and for myself, I just never have nor never would if I could avoid it deliberately take into seawater, or otherwise intentionally submerge or subject to steam, etc., a watch like my old beater chrono, much less a vintage original or even recent 50m WR rated Speedmater Professional, or any other vintage design chronograph like the PRS-5 either. That latter vintage design chronograph is one I would very much like to own someday, but I would myself just think of the 50m WR rating the watch has as a "fail-safe" if I accidently fell into seawater with it on, or otherwise unintentionally submerged it or subjected it to steam, etc., etc.,. In other words, I just wouldn't personally do that type of thing routinely while wearing such a watch.
Then again, though I wouldn't baby or worry much about a 300meter WR diver, I wouldn't normally or intentionally do things with it I didn't have to either, like taking a hot shower or soapy bath with it on, or cleaning it up with kerosene or whatever. Some very well known manufacturers warn about that type of thing with any watch and I just don't see a reason to push it when I don't have any real need to.
Best of luck, Rollon
Last edited by Rollon; 1st February 2013 at 09:05.
i've just been for a very nice steam room experience wearing my GMTII-C which is only 100m wrt. i have no issues with that - 45C then straight into a 5C shower - superb !!!
“ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG
There is tonnes of info available on this subject, however only a couple of responses below actually answer the OP question. We all know the theory behind it, but how does that equate to real life??
For my 10 pence worth, if it doesn't have a screw down crown it doesn't even come into the shower with me.
very good question, and I would like a simple straight question, as I was thinking of buying a Stowa Flieger...
they are rated at 5ATM
Can I SWIM with them SAFELY?
Its a BRAND NEW STOWA FLIEGER...
thanks..
I have a TAG Carrera...which I have been wearing every where for the past 4 years...and have been swimming/snorkling with it all summer...and swim twice to three times a week here in he UK.
It is rated at 100m..
It doesn't have a screw down crown?
interesting. If it is rated 100m then it must have decent internal sealing.
.... and it clearly does the job well :-)
Always wondered. I guess if you jump into the water and land wrong that pressure on the watch can far exceed what you expect from depth only.
Below the surface are there equal effects that could change the actual pressure on the watch vs the pressure at that depth, e.g dinging it against a rock, speed etc?
there is a natural size barrier to water ingress through a gap that will stop a drop of water if the gap is very small , but water vapour is another matter - which is how Goretex type materials operate.
Thanks all for the real life examples you have provided. It is a subject which fascinates me and I have to say that when wearing cheap watches in the past I just glanced at them for ANY wr rating before leaping in LOL
Thanks to Michael for bringing this subject up. It has always fascinated me that watches are rated at 50mts but when you read the manufacturers literature it qualifies that as meaning nothing more than use in the shower!
I have used an Omega, Fortis, Citizen, Rolex etc for swimming and snorkeling but they all had screw down crowns. I also had a Tag F1 (original type) that was rated to 200mts which only had a push in crown, but again had no problems with it.
Barry
The conclusion i have come to is that a watch from a decent brand that is 50m rated should survive jumping in and swimming, as well as snorkel diving.... when new or when well serviced
Which is really what the origonal question was - if i buy an expensive 50m rated watch, do i need to play safe and remove it before any exposure to water ?
Thanks again all for the real-life examples - please keep them coming and also any disaster stories....
A few thoughts on this for you, in no particular order.
- No manufacturer is going to make a blase comment about it being fine to do anything. The guidelines will alway be unnecessarily conservative.
- The actual capability of a watch is likely to exceed the given rating (again, manufacturer conservatism). My only known example is hearing of the Bremont Supermarine tests. It was designed to withstand 500m, and the caseback eventually failed at over 1400m.
- Maintenance is important. Don't expect 10-year old seals to work as well as more recent ones.
- There are plenty of high-rated WR watches that do not use screwdown crowns. I have just sold a Fortis B42 that was 200m rated that was not screwdown crown. They were originally, but they have a huge (8mm diameter) crown, so owners could apply a high torque and were stripping threads, so they re-engineered a 200m simple crown, no problem. It was the subject of a free recall to get the new one retrofitted.
- There is no adverse affect from poolside diving. There is a lot of mythology about "dynamic pressure" of water, but in fact unless you are travelling at many tens of miles per hour the additional pressure from speed through or into the water is minimal.
- Shock cooling can cause water to be drawn into a watch that would be otherwise quite well sealed, but it has to go from very hot to very cold to stand a chance. This is unlikely to cause a problem.
- Water ingress does not necessarily signal the end of a watch, although salt water as an electrolyte is likely to cause more problems with a quartz watch.
- 50m is fine for swimming and diving in, I have doe so many times.
D
very informative...
thnx...just what I was looking for..
so I suppose a new Stowa Flieger at 5ATM will be safe to swim in...
I tend to use cheaper watches rated to 100m when I go scallop or lobster hunting... I'd say the max depth I go to is about 30 meters and I've only once had a problem. That was when I was 10 ad wearing a timex 'dive' watch! It was a big wave though!
Don't think diving at shallow depths would cause problems.Wearing in the shower or dish washing in hot water with the possibility of uneven expansion of the case my have more of an effect.
Posting Permissions
