Reply With QuoteInteresting, thanks for sharing.
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
This may be general knowledge, but I only came across the ISO 6425 divers' watches standard recently....
As well as setting out the various requirements for divers' watches, it explains why divers' watches have luminous paint on the second hand - a small point, but good to know those setting the standards are thinking things through when a working watch could mean difference between life and death.
Here is an edited version of the standard:
Besides water resistance standards to a minimum of 100 metres (330 ft) depth rating ISO 6425 also provides minimum requirements for mechanical diver's watches (quartz and digital watches have slightly differing readability requirements) such as:[4]
The presence of a time-preselecting device, for example a unidirectional rotating bezel or a digital display.
The following items of the watch shall be legible at a distance of 25 cm (9.8 in) in the dark:
- time (the minute hand shall be clearly distinguishable from the hour hand);
- set time of the time-preselecting device;
- indication that the watch is running (This is usually indicated by a running second hand with a luminous tip or tail.);
- in the case of battery-powered watches, a battery end-of-life indication.
The presence of an indication that the watch is running in total darkness. This is usually indicated by a running second hand with a luminous tip or tail.
Magnetic resistance...
Shock resistance...
Resistance to salty water...
Resistance of attachments to an external force (strap/band solidity)...
Marking. Watches conforming to ISO 6425 are marked with the word DIVER'S WATCH xxx M or DIVER'S xxx M to distinguish diving watches from look-a-like watches that are not suitable for actual scuba diving...
Full details from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
I've learned something today, ta.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk
The Tudor 79220N is probably the best divers watch I’ve ever owned. I’ve managed to swim down to at least 2 metres, evading many big sharks in the process and the ETA movement remains accurate to at least +/- 5 seconds a day.
I have a special edition Casio Frogman that apparently meets the standard, but I still occasionally struggle to read it, sat somewhere vaguely dingy like the car on a cloudy day. How it passed the standard I have no idea!?!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One of the plus points for the Cartier Diver
Interesting. Some years ago, there was someone on the forum convinced that no Seiko watch was suitable officially for diving - i.e. failed this ISO standard - as the lume was on the tail of the seconds hand, and it must be on the tip. As you can imagine, passions raged over this pretty trivial issue.
The text you quote clearly says 'tip or tail'
Which version of the ISO spec is this (as in year of issue) - maybe they updated it to clarify?
I thought it was Seiko that helped devise the ISO standard.
If you read the full standard, there is no specific requirement for lume on the second hand - just an indication the watch is running (the second hand is a suggestion of how to comply).
So long as the lume is clearly able to show the watch is running at 25cm in the dark then it's compliant.
Sent from my SM-G950F using TZ-UK mobile app
The latest standard is dated 2018 - not sure what it says about the second hand as you have to buy it to read it.Originally Posted by thenikjones
I tried to look at the standard but you have to pay for it. If the lumed second hand is an example of an indication that a watch is running, I wonder what other methods are in use?
Very interesting,I expect I wasn’t the only one who went and checked their divers, they all passed
Yes, it’s dangerous and not everyone’s cup-of-tea but I have to admit that when all is said and done, the Tudor Black Bay is nearly as good as a Rolex and a lot cheaper!
5513 😆
Like every other watch, the person who wears it.
Posting Permissions