Reply With Quote^^ be uglier......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rolex submariner 14060
Blancpain fifty fathoms
something else
What can the Sinn do that the submariner and fifty fathoms can't?Originally Posted by luddite
^^ be uglier......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are all capable, though the Sinn has substantially higher water resistance.
Sinn also seems capable of indexing a dive bezel fully, which appears to have escaped Rolex and Blancpain on the Sub/FF
I always found a healthy Jesus factor compensated for a fully indexed bezel.
mike
Not capable of applying lume that isn't blotchy however.
ehhh the U1 is far away from my taste, maybe am too conservative or maybe I would never actually dive with any watch that costs more than 200 GBP. Am not as cool or as rich yet, maybe in the future though if I will stop purchasing watches hehe
If you just want a dive watch for poncing about in, pretending to be James Bond, either of your nominated watches will do the job.
But...
If you want a watch suitable for actual diving try a Sinn U1
Sent using my finger and the TZ-UK app
My understanding is that this ^^^^^ accounts for the majority of dive watches worn by roughie toughie ''desk divers''.
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
As a U1 owner (and ex serial Rolex junkie!) I’d simply say the U1 is a utilitarian chunky dive watch with an incredibly clear dial, whilst a Sub or FF has morphed from that into highly expensive jewellery which happens to still be a divers watch (the classic that started it all). Simply put, man jewellery looks fine with jeans and t shirt or a suit and tie, whereas the U1 has no pretensions to ‘style’ - its just supremely legible and has no frills whatsoever. Frankly bash any automatic watch hard enough and it will break - I’d wear a g shock or cheaper quartz for diving but that’s just me!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hahahah- someone had to say it. They have a certain clinical charm though!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Does swimming with arm bands count?My understanding is that this ^^^^^ accounts for the majority of dive watches worn by roughie toughie ''desk divers''.
My partner moves in 'arty' circles and when I accompany her to gallery events I wear the U1. It has somewhat of a Mondrian feel to it and works perfectly in that context :-)
I agree with your main point, that sacrificing function for form has resulted in the Sub and FF being more oriented to jewelry than diving tools at this point. A properly indexed elapsed-time bezel on a 3-hand dive watch remains the easiest way to track dive duration and current time efficiently when you are busy in the water...and I run 2 dive computers.
The small LCD displays on G-Shocks are not good for readability underwater. Nothing beats a three hand dive watch...though there is no reason it can't be quartz.
You'd think they'd get on that anti-reflective thing and make an oil-filled G-Shock.
Edit: looks like people have already done that, just more for its water-resistance properties.
Last edited by hughtrimble; 19th November 2017 at 04:08.
I think at the time James Bond wearing a Sub is akin to someone today wearing a U1 or Pelagos with a suit. Those watches at the time were not sophisticated looking timepieces but sports watches. The man made the watch (not the other way) and it's precisely because he wore a tool watch instead of some calatrava type (as you might expect him to) that makes the thing cool. It was formality be damned.
Looks like the OP needs a ''posing'' watch not a diving watch.
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
Here’s two of the best dive watches you can buy at any price..
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
you got my point :)
I don't dive.
14060 definitely!
You tried diving with one of those Sinn dive straps? Completely useless and way too prone to damage.Here’s two of the best dive watches you can buy at any price..
I'd take a basic quartz tuna over either.Here’s two of the best dive watches you can buy at any price..
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I have not been diving with my Sinn’s but this clasp was worn (left in photo) by me for 10 years straight. Once they start getting scratched up it is easy enough to brush with a green pan scourer.
I also find the Sinn Silicone/large clasp very comfortable to wear all year round.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Ahhh so it is a luxury brand of "mens jewellery" rather than a serious tool watch you are after? Forget Sinn then ;-)
You'd brush a beadblasted surface?
You might well find them comfortable but they completely fail as dive straps.
I really like my U1 but as dive watches for similar money Sinn's offerings are buried by the Marinemasters in my experience. That said, I doubt anyone would be disappointed with a Sinn. My experience of them has been very good :-)
Not normally... but that particular clasp had traveled to deserts, rainforests and other harsh environments and worn at shooting ranges every week, with the associated brick/concrete/stone-chipping surfaces..... so at a certain point I decided to brush the surface.
I'm loathe to contribute this idea, but it looks like you are "in need" of a diving watch because it's a base not covered in your collection.
You also don't have a gmt complication by the looks of things.
Could you potentially cover diver-esque looks (oyster, black bezel, triplock crown) with gmt function in the black ceramic gmt?
You can still swim with it and if you're not going to dive it may be a more useful addition.
A good idea, and even if you do dive it looks like it would be recreational so the GMT 2 would be ideal. Go for the black as it is fairly easy to get and cheaper than the BLNR.
Sent from my SM-G920F using TZ-UK mobile app
You tried diving with one of those Sinn dive straps? Completely useless and way too prone to damage.
Hang on, that's aesthetic wear to the surface. 'Useless' and 'they completely fail as dive straps' in what terms? Have they actually failed on you, popping open etc.?
If you're declaring them useless because you've scuffed them up, then maybe don't choose materials that can get scuffed up. Wear a nato or something.
I think he was referring to the material, nothing to do with a scuffed clasp.
Yes, they fail to work as a dive strap. Sinn supply them as dive straps and they are not up to the task. So, I wear my U1 on a properly designed strap; either an Isofrane or rubber NATO.
Quite aside from the design issue, the finish on the buckle doesn't cope well at all.
That is two separate reasons to buy a better dive strap than they supply with the watch if you plan to dive with a Sinn. Great watches though.
Roger that. Can you detail how they're not up to the task? Do they fall apart, or degrade when exposed to salt water etc.?
BTW I don't own a Sinn, just a very interested party in their wares!
Sinn 104 all the way
What's with the diving snobbery? The guy needs a dive watch to round his collection off nicely and they are available to everyone. That's besides the fact that divers wear dive computers. The automatic dive watch as a tool is redundant considering there are Ł100 digital watches which serve the purpose better than a sub ever could. Whilst some wealthy people may wear a sub as a back up on dives, The genre is a style rather than a purpose nowadays. It could be argued that all automatic watches are not required due to the ubiquity of mobile phones with highly accurate timekeeping.
^
Do you not think it’s a bit daft to state the obvious?
We’re all astutely aware of the redundancy of a wristwatch for its time-telling ability, which doesn’t negate it being a wrist adornment purely on aesthetic grounds.
Pretty sure not all of them do. I think watches are still used.
mike
How exactly would you expand the strap to fit over different thickness wetsuits? Unless it seems reasonable to you to own a different strap for each dive suit you wear, it seems pretty useless to me.
Get what you like the look of. For me a 16600 is perfect.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
That's exactly my point reference the "do you dive" questions when the OP is saying he needs a dive watch!We’re all astutely aware of the redundancy of a wristwatch for its time-telling ability, which doesn’t negate it being a wrist adornment purely on aesthetic grounds.
No he doesn't "need" a dive watch, but as you said, none of us need a watch (certainly an expensive automatic) at all!
If that's the issue I'd hope it would be raised - you can't tell from the photo of the underside of a clasp whether it has an extension mechanism within
I bet any of these do a better job at less than half the price!Here’s two of the best dive watches you can buy at any price..
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Disagree. They perform the function of timing dives better.
They do not perform the function of being watches capable of diving better.
Point taken and maybe we’re splitting hairs but any dive computer (and they’re not all huge behemoths either!) is also perfectly capable of telling you the time.
I have to admit that a plethora of extremely ugly watches has been mentioned so far assuming they represent the 'other' option.
I reckon I should have clarified that I need a dive watch to wear as jewel, away from water levels deeper than my sink's. That would have avoided all this mess with the sinns and the seikos.
The Omega I suggested is a very good looking watch, and with the totally antimagnetic hairspring and hour hacking, makes a strong case for itself.
D
Correct
To work as a dive strap you need the strap to be flexible (all Seiko straps, Isofranes, etc) or have a moving ratchet type clasp (like Oris have).If that's the issue I'd hope it would be raised - you can't tell from the photo of the underside of a clasp whether it has an extension mechanism within
As you dive deeper the water compresses the wetsuit. On the boat my current wetsuit is 8mm thick, at 40m it might be around 3mm thick. That's a significant change in diameter. If your strap/clasp doesn't adjust with that change the watch starts flopping about on your wrist.
Also, a fixed length supposed 'dive extension' is totally useless. I have 3mm, 5mm, and 8mm wetsuits. The dive extensions generally are designed for a 5mm suit. They are useless on anything else - either too loose or too tight to close the clasp.
When a company sells a dive watch and includes a non-flexible dive strap with a pointless extension, or a partially indexed bezel, I find it hard to believe they are taking the diving function seriously.
Last edited by bedlam; 21st November 2017 at 01:30.
Really. How do you time navigation legs with those computers when doing search and recovery?
None of the dive computers I have ever owned tell you the time without having to cycle through into sub-menus. When I am grappling with cameras and torches I don't actually have an extra hand available to be digging into alternate screens.
There is the same issue as to why wrist watches replaced pocket watches. They work better to give you the required information simply and efficiently. Underwater a three-hand watch is way easier to read than one small section of an lcd display
People seem to think a dive computer is the answer to all things. They are great to have, but a watch still has a place in diving.
Last edited by bedlam; 21st November 2017 at 01:28.
Interesting and useful information, thank you
I agree. My point was that a multi thousand pound, all singing, all dancing 1000 metre + watch doesn’t automatically mean it’s the ‘best’ dive watch out there. In professional and amateur diving what’s the ratio of cheaper Seiko’s, Citizens etc compared to multi thousand pound luxury brands? I don’t dive, but have been out on plenty of shouts with an underwater search team and none of those guys wear anything over a couple of hundred pounds.
We have gone off topic slightly as the OP has clarified that the watch won’t be used for diving anyway. Which is fine, I own two ‘divers’ watches!
Last edited by Bobbyf; 21st November 2017 at 14:49.
We are in complete agreement :-)
In lots of these discussions we are really talking about preferences for diver 'style' watches, so pushing into the actual dive functionality of them is a bit lost on the needs of most forum participants. And anyway, on TZ-UK the predictable answer to most dive watch questions is going to be 'Submariner'.
Last edited by bedlam; 21st November 2017 at 10:49.
Splendid.
Having had both, 14060 imo is the winner.
The BP is a resurrection. The 14060 is an evolution.
Quote Originally Posted by Evangelos View Post
I reckon I should have clarified that I need a dive watch to wear as jewel, away from water levels deeper than my sink's. That would have avoided all this mess with the sinns and the seikos.
Ahh, a poncing about watch.
I'm just a very naughty boy.
Good deals with- VINSTINK, kevkojak, Optimum, Omegary, seikoking, acg, SPEEDY, kfman, Card Shark, wajhart, Jot, danboy, zenomega, gaz64, minke, Mal52, Alas, norfolkngood, Sparky, rdwiow, mrteatime, gravedodger, joeytheghost, lordoftheflies, Silver Hawk, Filterlab, brooksy, marmisto, Fray Bentos, Bootsy, Harvey69, Mantisgb, bristolboozer, Jedadiah, newtohorology, Zephod, jimm1, Draygo, Raptor.
I may have forgot one or two, apppologies.
Posting Permissions
