closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 53

Thread: Water resistance ratings vs reality

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Kent/SW London
    Posts
    1,667

    Water resistance ratings vs reality

    Thinking ahead to holidays and what watch to take, is there an idiots guide to stated water resistance and what it actually means in reality?

    For instance, does a 50m WR really allow you go to depths/pressures of 50m?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    50m - A leisurely float but no diving in or watersports. Maybe cover it up if the heavens open.
    100m - Ok for most swimming and a little snorkelling.
    200m - Is bombing allowed in this pool?
    300m+ - Fancy a dive?

    It’s also worth getting the watch checked before travelling. Just because a watch met a certain standard when it left the factory doesn’t mean it still will a few years later.
    Last edited by Danstone; 23rd May 2022 at 15:06.

  3. #3
    a reputable watch company will test the watch design but its no guarentee in real world conditions and a certain age watch etc.

    divers use a dive computer these days, far superior and made for the job

  4. #4
    Grand Master number2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North and South.
    Posts
    30,562
    "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."

    'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.

  5. #5
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,926
    Blog Entries
    2
    My own interpretation is as follows -

    30m - its not waterproof, drizzleproof perhaps, clean it with a wipe.
    50m - safe to rinse under a slow tap if you clean it, but personally no swimming/showering/anything where it might get a water blast at pressure.
    100m - fine for swimming snorkelling
    200m - swimming snorkelling etc fine
    300m - deep diving fine
    Dweller / ploprof territory - sat diving fine
    DSSD and ultra deep - you have to be James Cameron or you'll die before the watch does.

  6. #6
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    12,336
    Blog Entries
    22
    Here you go - Omega states all their watches have been tested to the ratings given. Example a 30m wrt is tested to 30m - my pool depth is 2m at most so even these watches should be more than sufficient (even with the mythical “dynamic pressure” effects which I will leave the reader to find debunked in the literature).

    https://www.omegawatches.com/fileadm...ance_chart.pdf

    I remember reading long ago that wrt figures are largely in the hands of the marketing department.

    If you’re going on hols and you are taking your watch in the sea / pool as said - have the wrt checked - only takes 10mins at a decent watch shop and well worth checking.
    Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 23rd May 2022 at 16:12.
    “ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG

  7. #7
    Grand Master abraxas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    33,737
    Never less than 100m for holidays. 150-200m if you are serious. At least 500m if you are a WIS.
    "Owning one is almost as satisfying as making one." ~ Rolex 1973

  8. #8
    Grand Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10,942
    Quote Originally Posted by abraxas View Post
    Never less than 100m for holidays. 150-200m if you are serious. At least 500m if you are a WIS.
    Or for full WIS credentials an oil filled watch!
    If it’s not leaking oil, water can’t get in.

  9. #9
    Master M1011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    3,221
    Surprised by some of the comments implying 200m isn't suitable for diving. Isn't that pretty much the dive watch standard?

  10. #10
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Stockton, Teesside, UK
    Posts
    1,496
    Quote Originally Posted by M1011 View Post
    Surprised by some of the comments implying 200m isn't suitable for diving. Isn't that pretty much the dive watch standard?
    Well Yes. And not so long ago, some proper Dive watches were only 100m. In the real world, normal people go into the water or swim with WR 50m or even 30m watches quite successfully. In the freaky WIS world, a 200m watch (with screw down crown and helium release valve, obviously) might just be sufficient to wash your hands with... if the owner is feeling brave and has had the seals checked within the last week.

  11. #11
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    12,336
    Blog Entries
    22
    For those interested - read this: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/ta...gs-really-mean
    “ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG

  12. #12
    Grand Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10,942
    Quote Originally Posted by MrGrumpy View Post
    Well Yes. And not so long ago, some proper Dive watches were only 100m.
    Quite correct
    A Fifty Fathoms sounds much more professional than a Blancpain 91.4 meters

  13. #13
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Kent/SW London
    Posts
    1,667
    Interesting replies, thanks.

    Why don’t they give them accurate ratings?
    1cm - OK in the rain
    10cm - OK in the bath
    1m - OK in the pool
    10m - OK for shipwrecks
    100m - OK for subsea pipelines

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by rico View Post
    Interesting replies, thanks.

    Why don’t they give them accurate ratings?

    Brands do give accurate ratings, usually in metres, which couldn't be clearer. Yet many here just don't trust what the manufacturer claims.
    For about 8 years a Speedmaster Pro was my daily watch. I wore that on every holiday, and in every pool, and ocean I swam in over that period and it was perfectly fine.

    There are people here that would worry about wearing such a watch in fog.

  15. #15
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,926
    Blog Entries
    2
    Funny how people are isn't it.

    I'm very wary of water resistance ratings below 100m so mailed Omega to ask if you could rinse a speedmaster.

    They replied with the following -

    This timepiece is water resistant to 50m so technically this is possible to do. If you do so, what is very important is to always make sure the crown is fully shut and to not operate the pushers in contact with water. I would recommend using alcohol wipes to clean general dirt off your timepiece.

    I'm not liking the "technically possible but use an alcohol wipe" level of reassurance.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by rico View Post
    Interesting replies, thanks.

    Why don’t they give them accurate ratings?
    1cm - OK in the rain
    10cm - OK in the bath
    1m - OK in the pool
    10m - OK for shipwrecks
    100m - OK for subsea pipelines
    The ratings they give are probably the best that they can come up with and most makes will tell you exactly what you can and can’t do with them. The meter rating suggests that the watch can withstand the pressure at that depth in static water. The problem is that water isn’t static and neither is the wearer. A watch might be water resistant under the pressure of 30m static water, but jump into the deep end of a pool and you will be subjecting the watch to much greater pressure than would be experienced in 30m of static water.

  17. #17
    Grand Master Saint-Just's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    28,934
    Quote Originally Posted by Danstone View Post
    A watch might be water resistant under the pressure of 30m static water, but jump into the deep end of a pool and you will be subjecting the watch to much greater pressure than would be experienced in 30m of static water.
    Quite simply, an urban legend (or a cunning marketing ploy from certain (most?) watch companies to claim a greater WR than they should)
    'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.

  18. #18
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,543
    My take, and experience:

    30m - shower, bath etc
    50m - swimming
    100m+ - snorkelling, recreational scuba
    200m+ - diving

    I’ve snorkelled with 30m with no issues (Suunto core, it even has a 10m depth gauge!)

    Edit: seal checks/pressure test every 18 months, 2 years at a push!

  19. #19
    Master Halitosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    West Lothian
    Posts
    1,916

    Water resistance ratings vs reality

    Dummy question - where might offer a pressure test? Typical high street watch store, Timpsons, or somewhere less common? Thinking about my 5 year old Damasko dive watch ahead of the summer holiday to Spain.

  20. #20
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    12,336
    Blog Entries
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Halitosis View Post
    Dummy question - where might offer a pressure test? Typical high street watch store, Timpsons, or somewhere less common? Thinking about my 5 year old Damasko dive watch ahead of the summer holiday to Spain.
    Timpsons do pressure test. Or check a high street AD (of other brands) may have the testers available onsite.
    “ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG

  21. #21
    Master Halitosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    West Lothian
    Posts
    1,916
    ^ Thanks Martyn

  22. #22
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Kent UK
    Posts
    2,440
    Quote Originally Posted by Danstone View Post
    The ratings they give are probably the best that they can come up with and most makes will tell you exactly what you can and can’t do with them. The meter rating suggests that the watch can withstand the pressure at that depth in static water. The problem is that water isn’t static and neither is the wearer. A watch might be water resistant under the pressure of 30m static water, but jump into the deep end of a pool and you will be subjecting the watch to much greater pressure than would be experienced in 30m of static water.
    The Hodinkee seems to dismiss the dynamic pressure issue or with maths https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/s...-again.610734/

  23. #23
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Stockton, Teesside, UK
    Posts
    1,496
    Quote Originally Posted by gerrudd View Post
    The Hodinkee seems to dismiss the dynamic pressure issue or with maths https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/s...-again.610734/
    Several learned gentleman on this and other watch forums have tried to estimate the amount of what this fabled dynamic pressure might be. All have concluded that the effect is trivial. But its a great marketing strategy to panic buyers into buying watches with higher WR ratings than they need.

    The reality is that a WR100m watch (assuming its seals are in good nick) will be ample for any water based activity any normal human will undertake.

  24. #24
    Master sweets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bristol - UK
    Posts
    6,031
    The difficulty is that different companies state different things.
    As stated above, Omega are happy to say that all watches are immersed to the rated depth. They do not say so, but the implication is that any rating is fit for purpose.
    Longines certainly used to have ratings that were astonishingly full of disclaimers. Their 30m was recommended to avoid washing up, and 100m was requied for pool swimming (making 50m effectively useless).
    So depends what you have too.
    And dynamic pressure is nil.

  25. #25
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Kent/SW London
    Posts
    1,667
    Quote Originally Posted by sweets View Post
    The difficulty is that different companies state different things.
    As stated above, Omega are happy to say that all watches are immersed to the rated depth. They do not say so, but the implication is that any rating is fit for purpose.
    Longines certainly used to have ratings that were astonishingly full of disclaimers. Their 30m was recommended to avoid washing up, and 100m was requied for pool swimming (making 50m effectively useless).
    So depends what you have too.
    And dynamic pressure is nil.
    That's exactly what i'm getting at. Who on earth is doing washing up at 30m underwater? 30cm maybe.

  26. #26
    Master Ruggertech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Deepest darkest South Wales.
    Posts
    7,052
    I emailed CWC to ask if their 5atm watches were suitable for pool swimming, and their answer was an emphatic no, splashproof only. So the 5atm is total nonsense in the case of CWC at least.

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruggertech View Post
    I emailed CWC to ask if their 5atm watches were suitable for pool swimming, and their answer was an emphatic no, splashproof only. So the 5atm is total nonsense in the case of CWC at least.
    Would be interesting to pressure test one of their watches to see for yourself though.
    My take on it is that like the shelf life date on food, more often than not, they would rather be too cautious than not enough and cover themselves by stating less than what it’s capable of

  28. #28
    Master Ruggertech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Deepest darkest South Wales.
    Posts
    7,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    Would be interesting to pressure test one of their watches to see for yourself though.
    My take on it is that like the shelf life date on food, more often than not, they would rather be too cautious than not enough and cover themselves by stating less than what it’s capable of
    It would be very interesting to see the results, I wonder I anyone has had one tested?
    I understand the overcautious bit, but to label a watch 5atm and then state it is splashproof only when asked is way beyond overcautious in my opinion.

  29. #29
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    12,336
    Blog Entries
    22
    As far as dynamic pressure - check this guy out!



    Landing (belly flop) into 12 inches from 35ft up - mad!



    Here is the accompanying technical discussion that ends saying the de-cceleration experienced from that dive into water is about 35g (350m/s2) or equivalent to 35atm (350m water pressure). This is an extreme example. I leave it to you to plug in the figures for a poolside belly flop.

    https://www.wired.com/2008/11/the-ph...foot-of-water/
    “ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG

  30. #30
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruggertech View Post
    I emailed CWC to ask if their 5atm watches were suitable for pool swimming, and their answer was an emphatic no, splashproof only. So the 5atm is total nonsense in the case of CWC at least.
    This may be them being cautious as most 5atm CWCs (iirc) have a battery hatch for self changing, and who knows if people check seals etc.

  31. #31
    Master Ruggertech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Deepest darkest South Wales.
    Posts
    7,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost Chilli View Post
    This may be them being cautious as most 5atm CWCs (iirc) have a battery hatch for self changing, and who knows if people check seals etc.
    Maybe yes, but I specifically asked about brand new from Silvermans T20's which don't have a hatch.
    Last edited by Ruggertech; 24th May 2022 at 10:56.

  32. #32
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruggertech View Post
    Maybe yes, but I specifically asked about brand new from Silvermans T20's which don't have a hatch.
    Ah, that’s my theory out of the window then!

  33. #33
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    1,278
    How do pressure tests work? Ie, if I fails the test I assume you've not got a watch full of water! Is it 'saturated' at depth with air pressure then put in a bucket and watch for bubbles?

  34. #34
    Master Ruggertech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Deepest darkest South Wales.
    Posts
    7,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost Chilli View Post
    Ah, that’s my theory out of the window then!
    I'd say your theory holds water (see what I did there?), just not in this particular case :)

  35. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK) View Post
    As far as dynamic pressure - check this guy out!

    Landing (belly flop) into 12 inches from 35ft up - mad!



    Here is the accompanying technical discussion that ends saying the de-cceleration experienced from that dive into water is about 35g (350m/s2) or equivalent to 35atm (350m water pressure). This is an extreme example. I leave it to you to plug in the figures for a poolside belly flop.

    https://www.wired.com/2008/11/the-ph...foot-of-water/
    Can acceleration be equated to pressure like this?

  36. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruggertech View Post
    I emailed CWC to ask if their 5atm watches were suitable for pool swimming, and their answer was an emphatic no, splashproof only. So the 5atm is total nonsense in the case of CWC at least.
    I’d be surprised if nobody in the US has sued a watch company over water resistance claims. Surely a product under warranty is able to perform to spec printed on the dial, it’s often the second most prominent dial text.

  37. #37
    Master Ruggertech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Deepest darkest South Wales.
    Posts
    7,052
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisparker View Post
    I’d be surprised if nobody in the US has sued a watch company over water resistance claims. Surely a product under warranty is able to perform to spec printed on the dial, it’s often the second most prominent dial text.
    This thread in general and my CWC email tale has got me thinking much the same, although more to do with warranty claims than actual litigation, but yes, that aswell.
    If a manufacturer states a watch is 5atm water resistant in the watches technical specifications and stamped on the caseback, there must be many who take that at face value, when apparently you have to be carefull washing up with it on.

  38. #38
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,926
    Blog Entries
    2
    I think a lot of people who aren't "into" watches believe that 30m and 50m watches mean that you can go 30m/50m underwater with them safely.
    Ive seen a few posts littering the internet regarding water ingress that have said "but it says 30m!"

  39. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by verv View Post
    I think a lot of people who aren't "into" watches believe that 30m and 50m watches mean that you can go 30m/50m underwater with them safely.
    Ive seen a few posts littering the internet regarding water ingress that have said "but it says 30m!"
    Not surprising TBH, the ratings are very misleading.

  40. #40
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruggertech View Post
    I'd say your theory holds water (see what I did there?), just not in this particular case :)
    :)

  41. #41
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Kent/SW London
    Posts
    1,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    Not surprising TBH, the ratings are very misleading.
    This was my point entirely!

  42. #42
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    1,278
    Force is mass times acceleration. So 350m/S2 acceleration of (for easy calc) a 100kg man, requires 35000 Newton's.
    Pressure is force divided by area, so if the frontal area of the man is 1m˛ and the pressure is equal all over, 35000 Newtonsper square metre, or 35000 pascal. 1 atmosphere is about 100000 pascal. Unless I've dropped a zero somewhere you should be starting to see, an atmosphere of static pressure is considerable

  43. #43
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    SW, UK
    Posts
    184
    Once got into a ding-dong with one of the common high-street vendors over a Breitling Navitimer GMT/World. The watch (and me) were caught in a tropical downpour. Drenched through a shirt and top coat, the Navi showed misting a few hours later.

    Took the watch back to the vendor who tested it (crystal deflection IIRC). Said it was OK. I said not and demanded it fixed under warranty. They said it was my fault and neglect.

    Upshot was after a long and sarcastic letter, citing that there is confusion on the product which was not explained at point of sale that the case engraving said 3bar, or 66ft, the user manual advising “safety factor of 3bar” and Breitlings own website stating 3bar equals “splashing”, I stated it was reasonable for the average person to be confused by all ambiguous measurements like splashing and safety factor and that the name plate engraving should stand. More than happy to take it to trading standards as it was at that time.

    Full refund on the spot. Never another Navi until they fix this unreasonable water resistance.

  44. #44
    Master sweets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bristol - UK
    Posts
    6,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    Can acceleration be equated to pressure like this?
    No.
    G is not equivalent to an atmosphere of pressure.
    G in this case is the gravitational acceleration of 9.81 m/s2.
    An atmosphere is 101 kPa, which is 101 000 N/m2.
    You can see the units are not even close.
    They happen to have the same numerical value, that's all.

    The point (also calculated above) is that 30m of water is one hell of a pressure, enough to shrink a 1 litre (plastic) bottle full of air to a quarter of it's volume at the surface. 3 bar is 303kPa, the evuivalent of 30 Tonnes weight per m2.
    If a watch can genuinely withstand that, it should be able to be soajed, splashed and jetwashed.
    If it doesn't, they are lying, it is not 3 Bar waterproof.
    Last edited by sweets; 24th May 2022 at 19:50.

  45. #45
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    sussex uk
    Posts
    15,483
    Blog Entries
    1
    ................you guys!!

  46. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by sweets View Post
    No.
    G is not equivalent to an atmosphere of pressure.
    G in this case is the gravitational acceleration of 9.81 m/s2.
    An atmosphere is 101 kPa, which is 101 000 N/m2.
    You can see the units are not even close.
    They happen to have the same numerical value, that's all.
    Yes, what I thought, checking I wasn't being dense.

    G is the gravitational constant though, not to be confused with g, the acceleration due to gravity used here!

  47. #47
    Grand Master SimonK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    19,497
    Just get a 60 quid Vostok Amphibia. Watch will keep working until around 800m (more than twice than any human has dived) and break at 1600m.


  48. #48
    Master Lampoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lincs. The bit with hills.
    Posts
    6,174
    It's really not that difficult -just follow one of many water resistance tables on the internet to see what you can and can't do with your watch.


    Look - 50m water resistance: feel free to go swimming!





    But don't even think of taking a shower in it :(





    Whatever you do, DO NOT go scuba diving in your 300m rated watch:





    But you're fine to do it in your 100m diver's watch:



    Simple.

  49. #49
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    12,336
    Blog Entries
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    Yes, what I thought, checking I wasn't being dense.

    G is the gravitational constant though, not to be confused with g, the acceleration due to gravity used here!
    Sorry guys. My interpretation was wrong. The page referenced gave the de-celeration calculated at about 35g (35*9.8m/2s) in about 0.07s - please see the last paragraphs
    “ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG

  50. #50
    Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ever sunny Birmingham
    Posts
    2,128
    https://youtu.be/_2wGjokbPJo

    This video was an eye opener for a humble gshock.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information