Reply With QuoteSounds wrong to me. That makes absolutely no sense......
Evening all
I took my 200m rated TAG into Timpsons and the guy there who carried the test out said it was failing because his machine could only test to 100m but mine was 200m so it would always fail.
Is this correct? Surely it can't be?
If it fails then it fails due to a leak but he looked at his machine and told me the above.
Last edited by Yunsung; 13th January 2014 at 14:29.
Sounds wrong to me. That makes absolutely no sense......
He's an idiot. End of.
I've got a 50m pressure tester and funnily enough it passes my 200m watches. Physics eh!
Let's try to give him the benefit of doubt. Timpsons won't be investing in expensive pressure testers.
Are there such things as inferior leak testers that would fail the test in such a way?
Well most water resistant watches will pass a presure test of 10bar.
A water resistant ' water proof watch will generally fail about .5 if is going to fail at all, as the presure builds up the seals in the watch tighten up and it creates a better seal.
A watch a rating of over 50 meters or 5 bar is pointless really as you would not be able to read your own name at that depth let alone read what time it is, although it looks good on the adverts.
So if my watch was failing on his machine, do I assume its due to my watch or due to the operator?Originally Posted by antonyh
How, the Hell, the tester should know the watch'es depth rate? LOL
It should test up to it's max.
You can't assume anything. It's highly likely the operator was talking out of his arse but until you get your watch properly tested you won't know for sure.
Timpsons? The same one that does shoe repairs and key cutting services? Must be a different outfit.
^^^^This.
A watch won't fail a test because it's being tested at a lower pressure than it's maximum. If it's failing the test then there's either a problem with the watch or a problem with the tester. Having it tested elsewhere will give you the answer to which it is.
Yes timpsons. The place that does shoes, key cutting and watch batteries/straps.
Where in Central London can I take it that won't charge an arm and leg for 5 minutes of their time?
I'm not sure I would trust a pair of good shoes to them for re-heeling let alone a pressure test on my watch.
My wife got the battery changed in her Tag at an AD here in Northern Ireland including new seals and a pressure test for circa £50. Only needed every 4 or 5 years so seems reasonable value for money.
Took it to tic-toc-man in hatton garden and it also failed a pressure test.
So the conclusion I have is that no matter what the guy says at Timpsons, ignore them. If it fails the test at any depth, it means there is a possible leak.
Its a Chronograph diver TAG from the 2000 exlcusive range. I am guessing it will need new seals on the pushers as I checked the one on the caseback and it looked as good as new.
I could be wrong here, but aren't you supposed to replace all the seals every time you take the back off because of the torsion pressure when you screw the back on and then remove it?
I removed case back after it failed the first time, but as I understand it, if the seals look fine and the caseback is on tight i.e everything installed correctly it should still pass pressure test
I took my 1680 to Timpsons recently for a pressure test and was told they don't pressure test automatics.
Disagree! A very misleading statement.
I`ve pressure tested lots of watches. A watch may be fine up to 2 bar but will leak at 3 or 4 bar, I`ve seen it several times. Vintage watches can suffer with corrosion around the sealing areas, making the job of the seal harder. I`ve even had to try different thicknesses of seals to get an old watch to seal up to 1 bar....and it definitely wouldn`t seal at 3bar. You really cannot generalise on this. as for claiming that the pressure causes the seals to seal better.........I wish! It doesn`t usually work that way. The only example where this is true is for snap-fitted casebacks, where the pressure on the case can exceed the tension on the seal and thus increase the loading, causing the seal to be compressed harder. Same applies to glass seals which are held in by a bezel, but it can`t apply to a screwed back or crowns that seal solely by an O-ring around the pendant tube.
Agreed, in many cases a watch either leaks at very low pressure (<.3bar) or it's fine up to a significantly high figure, but to claim that most water-resistant watches are OK to 10bar isn`t true.
As for the OP's experience with Timpsons, I would`ve asked for clarification. The story as it's related doesn`t seem to make sense. Maybe the guy was trying to say that he couldn`t guarantee it to 200m because he can`t test to that level?......that seems plausible to me.
Paul
I don't really know what you mean by that.
Professional divers regularly get their watches wet at 200 meters plus.
I think comex set the record at over 500m.
Even free divers break 100m.
Undoubtedly 200, 300 and even 500m watches are not just a marketing ploy for some people, even if most of us will never take them deeper than the bottom of a swimming pool.
Try phoning Russell Talerman to see what they charge
It is already with tic-toc-man, as I knew they had a pressure test machine and I was not sure Russell Talerman had one. Although one would imagine they do.
I once took a Seiko 6309 to Timpsons for a pressure test. The chap at the counter took one look at it then told me he would have to send it away for testing because it was rated to 150m and his machine only went to 100m. I explained that I wasn't bothered by this and a 100m test would do fine but he refused as it was against company policy. So I asked how much it was to send it off for testing and they were looking for £65 but he also explained they would fit a new battery (in an auto) and replace any gaskets if it were to fail. I left it at that and purchased a pressure tester soon after.
I've heard Timpsons will be servicing cars too.
Must take the Bristol there sometime...
Posting Permissions