What’s the alternative ?

[NIGE UK]

This Kemmner is almost my everyday, does everything watch - apart from one thing- it’s only 50m water resistant.
So I’m just trawling you all for ideas for something very , very similar, perhaps a micro brand I’ve never heard of. The look is top of my list but I do also need it to have a bezel ( as I use it to show time of high tide)
Don’t want to be breaking the bank - £500-£1k range ) or less)
Thanks

Nige


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sinnlover]

You have me wracking my brains, it’s a difficult to find something with with the same / similar aesthetic.
For your price and the functions needed and use intended I would look at an Alpina chrono, they do some sailing watches as well
If new it will be quartz But they seem to offer great value used.

My first thought was the Sinn manufactum 155.




I paid £750 for mine but it was over 5 years ago (or more - ok 8 years) but these have 100m WR. However it’s unlikely that you will pick one up for less than a grand now I would have thought. Edit - Chrono24 has one on for £2750 WOW!

[sweets]

There is a watch company called HKED that does a Bund chrono, but I see that too is 50m WR
I think your best bet is to try and find a bargain Junghans Meister Pilot, but I see them going for about US $1500 at the moment, so a little over budget.
A chrono with 100m WR is a hard thing to make, they don't usually come very cheap, especially with an iconic design like the Bund

[NIGE UK]

You have me wracking my brains, it’s a difficult to find something with with the same / similar aesthetic.
For your price and the functions needed and use intended I would look at an Alpina chrono, they do some sailing watches as well
If new it will be quartz But they seem to offer great value used.

My first thought was the Sinn manufactum 155.




I paid £750 for mine but it was over 5 years ago (or more - ok 8 years) but these have 100m WR. However it’s unlikely that you will pick one up for less than a grand now I would have thought. Edit - Chrono24 has one on for £2750 WOW!

Thanks for your reply -I think Sinn might be the way to go


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[watch-nut]

what about a Ollech & Wajs Mirage III Chronograph if you can find one, waterproof to 100m i think

[rodia77]

Why isn't 50m good enough? If the manufacturer's rating is valid, there shouldn't be a problem when it comes to casual activities in the water, including taking a shower or swimming.

[Dr Wolff]

Why isn't 50m good enough? If the manufacturer's rating is valid, there shouldn't be a problem when it comes to casual activities in the water, including taking a shower or swimming.

Most people can't swim 50m horizontally, let alone vertically!

[2012]

Why isn't 50m good enough? If the manufacturer's rating is valid, there shouldn't be a problem when it comes to casual activities in the water, including taking a shower or swimming.

Had a watch rated to 50 metres. Took it swimming one day, and it filled with water.

Took it back to the jeweller. To cut a long story short, he said never take anything rated less than 100m in to the pool.

That was decades ago. Lived by this ever since, and it's served me well. So far.

[Nealywheelie]

Longines Hydroconquest chrono' within budget I think & WR to 200mts.


Sent from my Nokia 3.1 using TZ-UK mobile app

[canuck]

Had a watch rated to 50 metres. Took it swimming one day, and it filled with water.

Took it back to the jeweller. To cut a long story short, he said never take anything rated less than 100m in to the pool.

That was decades ago. Lived by this ever since, and it's served me well. So far.

Yes. 50 meters as far as I’m aware refers to the pressure of water at 50m. Take a watch to 20m and wave it gently in the water... you now have the same pressure at being at 50m depth.

[Dave E]

Yes. 50 meters as far as I’m aware refers to the pressure of water at 50m. Take a watch to 20m and wave it gently in the water... you now have the same pressure at being at 50m depth.

Not so, that's a pretty widespread belief but in fact you'd need to be moving your arms at some absurd speed to make that kind difference. Swimming doesn't come close to the speeds you'd need. I've seen at least one good and thorough explanation of the numbers, but I can't put my hands on it right now.

[rodia77]

Had a watch rated to 50 metres. Took it swimming one day, and it filled with water.

Took it back to the jeweller. To cut a long story short, he said never take anything rated less than 100m in to the pool.

That was decades ago. Lived by this ever since, and it's served me well. So far.

Can't speak for decades ago, but these days it's fine to swim with 50m or even 30m rated watches, provided that the WR has been properly ensured by the manufacturer. Which a regular person has no way of checking, other than by a practical test, and that's where the real risk lies. The advantage of 100m and higher WR rating is in that those watches are (or at least should be) tested by the manufacturer to higher standards, but the rating itself won't matter if you're unlucky to get a poorly assembled example.

[Sweepinghand]

What about https://helmwatches.com/watches.html

[Geralt]

Yes. 50 meters as far as I’m aware refers to the pressure of water at 50m. Take a watch to 20m and wave it gently in the water... you now have the same pressure at being at 50m depth.

Water pressure increases by 1 atm every 10m. So, at 20m the pressure is 3 atm. At 50m it's 6 atm. I fail to see how 'waving it gently in the water' can double the pressure. Perhaps you could explain?

[Saint-Just]

Water pressure increases by 1 atm every 10m. So, at 20m the pressure is 3 atm. At 50m it's 6 atm. I fail to see how 'waving it gently in the water' can double the pressure. Perhaps you could explain?

Just to correct: when it comes to watches, the inside of the watch is at 1 atm so it is about the pressure differential (so 1 atm for 10m deep, 5 atm for 50m, etc.)
Of course I completely agree that waving your wrist around is unlikely to double the pressure. But then you have to remember that most watches rated 30m would take on water faster than the Titanic after the collision if they were simply submerged.

[higham5]

Water pressure increases by 1 atm every 10m. So, at 20m the pressure is 3 atm. At 50m it's 6 atm. I fail to see how 'waving it gently in the water' can double the pressure. Perhaps you could explain?

I think what the poster is saying , is in addition to the hydrostatic head of 6 bar you have a dynamic pressure by pushing the watch through the water. My son who is a skipper says watches can be dropped over the side say in a bay can be retrieved and still be fully functioning. However he has worn watches to clean a fouled propellor or untangle an anchor line and they have let in.


And heres lots of science and physics to confuse matters more

https://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/forces3.htm

[Geralt]

Just to correct: when it comes to watches, the inside of the watch is at 1 atm so it is about the pressure differential (so 1 atm for 10m deep, 5 atm for 50m, etc.)
Of course I completely agree that waving your wrist around is unlikely to double the pressure. But then you have to remember that most watches rated 30m would take on water faster than the Titanic after the collision if they were simply submerged.

Thanks for the correction. However, a 30m Casio has been taken down to 30m and shrugged it off, but again, I take your point.

[Saint-Just]

Thanks for the correction. However, a 30m Casio has been taken down to 30m and shrugged it off, but again, I take your point.

Indeed, some do. Hence my ‘most’ instead of ‘all’

[Der Amf]

Why isn't 50m good enough? If the manufacturer's rating is valid, there shouldn't be a problem when it comes to casual activities in the water, including taking a shower or swimming.

How many of your 5atm chronos do you wear to go swimming?

[TimeThoughts]

I would say a Guinand Series 40 is the closest in appearance to what you have but its a few hundred above your budget....

I'd hold out for a Guinand if I was you.

https://www.guinand-uhren.de/series-40/serie-40.html

[rodia77]

How many of your 5atm chronos do you wear to go swimming?

I don't swim and the only chrono I have is an Eco-Drive rated at 10 bar.

The only watch that I don't wear in the shower, though, is my WEW Sowar -- not because of its WR rating (50m), but because I don't trust its build quality.

That said, I have passed on many Longines I liked, the reason being their 30m WR -- again, not because of the rating itself, but because to me it meant Longines didn't care enough to stand behind their products (and the standard gaskets etc used in them).

[NIGE UK]

I would say a Guinand Series 40 is the closest in appearance to what you have but its a few hundred above your budget....

I'd hold out for a Guinand if I was you.

https://www.guinand-uhren.de/series-40/serie-40.html

Good shout, not really heard of them before but bit of a google found that they also do this, which is pretty close to what I was thinking and 20 bar WR


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gerard]

Good shout, not really heard of them before but bit of a google found that they also do this, which is pretty close to what I was thinking and 20 bar WR


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Great watches. You won't be disappointed.

Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Tapatalk

[canuck]

I think what the poster is saying , is in addition to the hydrostatic head of 6 bar you have a dynamic pressure by pushing the watch through the water. My son who is a skipper says watches can be dropped over the side say in a bay can be retrieved and still be fully functioning. However he has worn watches to clean a fouled propellor or untangle an anchor line and they have let in.


And heres lots of science and physics to confuse matters more

https://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/forces3.htm

Yes. I was making up the numbers but it’s the idea that I was trying to pass along. I wouldn’t personally swim in anything less than 200m. Maybe overkill but I wouldn’’t want to take chances. With that said... I have lost quite a few 200m watches while surfing. As you’’ve seen I haven’t done the math but a six foot wave crashing down on you and rolling one around I would think likely surpasses the 100m pressure though you’re actually only in about 8 feet of water.

[Kingstepper]

Yes. I was making up the numbers but it’s the idea that I was trying to pass along. I wouldn’t personally swim in anything less than 200m. Maybe overkill but I wouldn’t want to take chances. With that said... I have lost quite a few 200m watches while surfing. As you’ve seen I haven’t done the math but I six foot wave crashing down on you and rolling one around I would think likely surpasses the 100m pressure though I’m only in about 8 feet of water.

According to this link https://www.surfertoday.com/surfing/...ght-of-a-wave/ the pressure of a wave can be 250-6000 pounds per sqft which by my calculation is ~ 0.1-2.8 atm so not much at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[canuck]

Proper dive watch with screw down crown... no problems surfing.

I never did the math on waves but I can tell you when you get hammered it hurts and those pressures seem to be quite a lot. With that said I’ve likely never dove past 50m though that didn’t hurt at all. The waves in the other hand... it sure feels like a lot more and I’ve seen the condensation in a few watches when I was younger. I’ve certainly had a few straps come off ... guess now I think about it I’ve lost more that way than through water ingress. Also guess that has nothing to do with water pressure in terms of depth ratings of a watch.

I think to get into technicalities ... I know I don’t change the rubber gaskets in my watches every two years and that they likely degrade a bit over time. My rule of thumb now is... if I’d be disappointed if I lost it I won’t surf in it. Diving would be a different matter all together. Perhaps we can get a new measure on watches for wave size ?!? 300m depth or good for a 8 ft wave, 10ft if on a nato.