Reply With QuoteI would be more bothered about it falling off the ROV!.Originally Posted by Niall1975
Being that i own one of these, i would really like to know. i am considering brining mine out & sending it down with the rigs ROV to about 7.5 thousand feet where we are drilling just now. Would i get a warranty repair if it "failed".
Any thoughts or advice
Niall
I would be more bothered about it falling off the ROV!.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Well I know Davy Jones likes Breitlings :D
Cheers
Simon
Ralph Waldo Emerson: We ask for long life, but 'tis deep life, or noble moments that signify. Let the measure of time be spiritual, not mechanical.
It will if nothing else, it will give the old HE valve a good workout. This one is for holiday diving only, so should be fine.
I suppose you're familiar with this link I already posted:
http://bruno.cracco.free.fr/montres/rev ... ongee.html
I would think that if your Seawolf is reasonably new you can try.
Try and document it as professionally as you can, if the watch passes the test Breitling might buy them from you for their own use...
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Erm....will not give the HEV any workout at all if it's on an ROV since it's in the water :roll:It will if nothing else, it will give the old HE valve a good workout. This one is for holiday diving only, so should be fine.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Ask Breitling/ your AD. Whatever we say its up to them to honor it. If it leaks/ stops working and they will warrenty it then got for it.
Stick it on the skid/support out of the way and get the ROVers to get a decent bit of video. Just a suggestion but check what they are doing on the dive; you don't want your watch over the side for a couple of days!
The rig would have something to say about you trying to sell and/or distribute video!
If Breitling wants it they will know how to sort it :wink:The rig would have something to say about you trying to sell and/or distribute video!
That is assuming the watch passes the test
Mind you, if it doesn't they might still buy it, and all copies, for more money :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Hi Niall,
I can test down to around 11,400Feet or 3,337metres
If you can send the watch down with the movement removed, I will test her. 8)
Regs
Bry
[quote=Saint-Just]If Breitling wants it they will know how to sort it :wink:The rig would have something to say about you trying to sell and/or distribute video!
[url="http://bruno.cracco.free.fr/montres/revues/polpalacios/plongee.html
That is assuming the watch passes the test
Mind you, if it doesn't they might still buy it, and all copies, for more money :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:[/quote:s7qti1fi]
I had already seen this story and the guy called ROLEX before, they said that they would repair it (probably for free) in case of damage, maybe you could do the same and call Breitling.
A second point is : if the watch has been serviced, verify that it as been tested for 10 000 ft.
Good luck for the challenge !!!
Nicolas
Well i doubt a rig in Brazil will know much about what im selling at the end of the day. The way i see it is that, it says its fit for 10,000ft so it should be able to do it. If it doesnt then Breitling are full of S**T and they should make good on the repairs. Equally if i decide to do it ill make sure they get plenty of stills & video. Never thought of punting it on to Breitling but maybe worth a try,
Niall
You're completely right, I was just giving the advice of the phone call because if there is a problem and if (that's a lot of if) they don't want to assume it they could say that it's due to ROV vibrations or movements
Nicolas
Who cares ? if it stands the shower and some Holiday scuba I am happy. :)
Don't forget the mineral or sapphire glass needs to be totally flawless to survive that kinda depth, around 4,330Psi or 304.8Kg/cm2!
Yup. A Steelfish on test for a German mag had the crystal implode at 175 bar, instead of the 200 it was rated to, due to an internal flaw. A replacement was tested, and went past 250 bar - 25% beyond the rated depth - with no crystal movement or case deformation.
Ah, which to hang your opinion of the brand on?
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
I´d contact Breitling first, if it interests them, maybe they could have the watch checked to verify its condition prior to the dive.
I'd definitely do it if it was me. If it fails send it back for warranty repair, and say "well it was only at 7500 feet when it failed", nowhere near the limit. :D
Yup it's easy to test too 10,000ft, personally i'd test in 1000ft intervals, finest testing is around 10metres or 32.808 feet!
Regs
Bry
And what about the other members of the Monkees?
I heard they preferred Casio's - Cheap bums !!!!!!!
Emailed Breitling so we will see what they say. May still do it anyways!!!! Just to see.
Having a Seawolf myself, this idea interests me, and a few months ago I found this snippet whilst searching for evidence of testing the deepest diving watches...
http://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB...t=6725&start=0
I know this is purely anecdotal evidence, but interesting nonetheless... and quite remarkable if true.
I see you live in my neck of the woods, so if Breitling step up to the mark here, I'd be half tempted to let you strap my Seawolf alongside yours... pics of the great feat would be obligatory of course. 8)
Erm....will not give the HEV any workout at all if it's on an ROV since it's in the water :roll:
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
I was tempted to strap the UX I used to have to our workplace ROV which is rated to 6500m but chickened out. Like the Sinn, our ROV fills void spaces with oil to enhance the depth rating.
Steve
Sounds like an interesting experiment! If its still in warranty then I assume Breitling will honour it.
Regards,
Eugene
Just to let you know, I once, on my way to England for my holiday, tied my Prisma blue-line 100 to a fishing-rope, and slung it overboard into the sea to see if it would survive.
It did, and is still sitting in my father's drawer, ticking away fine after 20 years or so :) .
So, go for it I'd say :D
Cheers,
Daddel.
Got a new watch, divers watch it is, had to drown the bastard to get it!
You sure it wasn't the IWC AT?Yup. A Steelfish on test for a German mag had the crystal implode at 175 bar, instead of the 200 it was rated to, due to an internal flaw. A replacement was tested, and went past 250 bar - 25% beyond the rated depth - with no crystal movement or case deformation.
Ah, which to hang your opinion of the brand on?
Similar episode with that one in any case,
TBH though - pointless specification for dive watch (unless ROV's take on a terminatoresque role) and equally pointless test :wink:
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Watch is a pointless object when we all have wifi laptops and mobiles
Mechanical watch is pointless since quartz are cheaper and more precise
Divers are pointless both because a tiny fraction will go deeper than 3 feet and because real divers rely on specific instruments.
What was your point, then, Chris? :twisted:
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
All manufacturers warn that water-resistant watches must have their seals changed and be tested every year to maintain the rated resistance. So what you'll need to do before tesing it to 10,000 ft is send it to Breitling service, who'll, uh, test it to 10,000 ft.
But take an nth-owner used Seawolf off the 'Bay that's been bashed into a few door frames and dropped a few times, then subject it to a thousand bars of water pressure would be very stupid. Still, it's better to waste money that way than blowing it on coke, or kiddie pr0n, or something :twisted:
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
i am convinced that watch makers are expecting the consumer to test the limits of their production!
"Real divers' do not rely on specific instruments at all.
Use them, yes. Rely on them, not likely :evil:.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Are you saying you do not trust your diving computers? how do you operate then?
Are there many discrepancies between what the 'puters says and what surface says? what if audio goes AWOL?
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Imho 3.7mm glass thickness for a 200Bar watch is absolute madness!
From what I recall the vintage Seiko 600metres used a 4mm glass.
Regs
Bry
Divers keep the black gold flowing from the North Sea :wink: Inspecting, reparing and tie-ing in new hardware to keep the existing infrastructure going. A dam site faster than ROVs. And the sat boys dont use instruments other than maybe a diving watch :)
If you read my post you will see it was about watches, not persons :roll:Divers keep the black gold flowing from the North Sea :wink: Inspecting, reparing and tie-ing in new hardware to keep the existing infrastructure going. A dam site faster than ROVs. And the sat boys dont use instruments other than maybe a diving watch :)
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Brave :wink:
They would maybe go for it on the publicity front. The only issue other than it going bang is the video evidence could be an problem as it would be the property of the company the rig is on hire to hence you/breitling cant use it unless you get company approval.
[quote=Saint-Just]If you read my post you will see it was about watches, not persons :roll:[/quote:2i0tmqb4]Divers keep the black gold flowing from the North Sea :wink: Inspecting, reparing and tie-ing in new hardware to keep the existing infrastructure going. A dam site faster than ROVs. And the sat boys dont use instruments other than maybe a diving watch :)
Sorry, if you said watch, mechanical watch, divers watch I wouldnt have made a comment
A bit lazyand did not want too many repetitions. I thought the context was clear enough (at least it was in my head, promise :D ) but I accept it wasn't... I thought that the 3 feet deep was enough of a clue. I am not a pro and even my SM GMT has seen 30 m :D
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
True - but glass isn't always the limiting factor. Recent tests on the Bremont Supermarine 500 showed deformation after 140-odd Bar. Interestingly, it was the caseback that deformed, not the crystal. The caseback was literally sucked into the body of the watch, causing a concave deformation of the back, and totally wrecking the screw fitting. The crystal (sapphire) was fine!
Link to pics, etc if anyone's interested in the results of 147Bar of pressure on a 500m rated dive watch! http://forum.atgvintagewatches.com/s...ead.php?t=1400
M
Interesting I have seen the concaved caseback effect before!
I would love to see the results if this goes ahead, , i think there must be some small print about the difference between static pressure and dynamic pressure, ie there is no movement in the pressure chamber where a watch is tested to 10000ft but there is on the ROV, but in court you can alsways argue that it says 10000ft on the dial as long as it was serviced by brieting what are they going to say?
Since it is a diver WATCH ( :wink: ) it has to be ISO 6425 certified. This implies a resistance 25% greater than the maximum stated. They won't have a case
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
[quote=Saint-Just]Watch is a pointless object when we all have wifi laptops and mobiles
Mechanical watch is pointless since quartz are cheaper and more precise
Divers are pointless both because a tiny fraction will go deeper than 3 feet and because real divers rely on specific instruments.
What was your point, then, Chris? :twisted:[/quote:15v5aa0f]
The watch could not be worn physically by a diver at that depth - the world record for a commercial saturation diver stands at 701 metres.
Which is why I posed the tongue in cheek comment about ROV's wearing them.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
[quote=Saint-Just]Since it is a diver WATCH ( :wink: ) it has to be ISO 6425 certified. This implies a resistance 25% greater than the maximum stated. They won't have a case[/quote:2mmidu9p]
Never knew that one, good to know that is built in, so in static presure that the factory has tested this case to would have to be 12500ft, is there any way of determining what the max dynamic pressure would be at a given depth, for example the wearer swimming at a 10m depth with the watch moving through the water on the end of his arm at a given speed then the pressure would be???
Or could the pressure be measured at the point of impact like when i diver it the pool from a 5m high board, i am guessing that this would be greater than the depth at 30m for example
however i am getting a bit OT here, lets see this watch take a swim
I was aware of that... :wink:
But most modern watches boast of capabilities far greater than necessary. So, in effect, pointless.
Those watches with an HEV have ridiculous pressure specs, since when He gets into the watch it reduces the pressure differential. And Rolex just decided to improve on the perfect tool watch by increasing its depth rating, thus making it needlessly thicker.
Taking them to task in a test is therefore not pointless at all: it's fun if you have the possibility, thrilling (I bet the adrenalin of the owner will flow throughout the test) and ultimately instructive (groundless claim, or flying colours)
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
^^^^^^^
helium doesnt get in straight away unless you open your crown, if you keep it closed it takes roughly 2-3 days to seep in thus equalizing the watch, so if your diving before the 2-3 days which yyou always are, the watch will not have the lower differential.
cheers
mike
What do you think to the Seiko Helium gasket system Mike?
Regs
Bry
hi bry, yes the seiko l gasket is a good systrem, i used a 600m for a while and found it a good work watch however i like the lightness of the sd better.
cheers
mike
Thank you for the input. I thought it was a much faster process.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Posting Permissions
