Water resistance ratings for watches

[Web Monkey]

So...um....do you guys do a lot of swimming, poolside diving, or dish washing at anywhere close to 100m? Just curious.

I was bored and flipping thorough the TV channels a few months ago and ran across a cool-looking watch on the Jewellery Channel that was "Waterproof to 1,000m". figuring that a watch that was good to almost a mile should do great in ~100', I gave them a call.

Me: Hi, I'm calling about the watch. Is it really waterproof?
Them: Yes! It's good to 1,000 Meters.
Me: Do you realize that 1,000m is nearly a mile underwater?
Them: Yes!
Me: If I buy it and take it diving and it leaks and is ruined, will you replace it?
Them: Well, it's not guaranteed if you take it under water.
Me: ?????

 

[NudeDiver]

A lot of people are mentioning cost (cheap watches in particular). I'm not real sure why. Didn't have anything to do with the OP or the point I was trying to discuss - which was the very deep ratings, accompanied by text which basically says, "don't take it anywhere near the depth we have rated it for". Cost is not the issue

The one post - not sure whose it was, mentioned static vs dynamic movement. OK, that's educational. But suppose you're at 30m finning around. Surely that can't be the static equivalent, of say, 100m. Is it?

 

[boulderjohn]

I looked at those Amazon ratings a year or so ago when I was being offered a great deal on a Seiko that was said to be specifically designed for scuba diving. It really wasn't that important to me because I only use a dive watch for instruction, so I really only wanted the convenience of having a nice everyday watch that I could just keep on my wrist when I got into the pool.

I noticed the leap to 300 meters before you could go scuba diving with it. Then I noticed that very few of the watches available on Amazon were rated to 300 meters, but many were rated to 200 meters, a depth they did not mention. Hmmm.

The Seiko I was considering was one of the ones rated to 200 meters. I did buy it, and so far it has held up just fine in our 12 foot deep instructional pool.

 

[NudeDiver]

The Seiko I was considering was one of the ones rated to 200 meters. I did buy it, and so far it has held up just fine in our 12 foot deep instructional pool.

I should hope so.

 

[garyfotodiver]

There is a Seiko watch on my wrist right now. It has a gasketed screw-on back, a screw-down crown, fully mechanical (auto-wind), and is rated to 200 M. It gains about 30 seconds each day, which is fine for general timekeeping. It hasn't failed me yet...

Oh, I have owned it for almost 3 years.

 

[NudeDiver]

30 seconds a day??? Damn. That's pretty poor time keeping man. Although, to be fair, I haven't determined what mine is doing - I suppose it could be even worse

I have a (non-diver) Seiko Kinetic I bought in 1997. I'm in the situation of needing a new strap for it. Factory replacement strap is $100. I bought a cheap one for $15, but this thing sucks. Even so, I'm having problems justifying spending $100 on a strap....but I really love this watch...and I really hate this cheap strap. It's a problem.

It also says it is "water resistant to 10 bar" - rather than feet or meters. I find it interesting they used bar - esp. since it is not a diving watch.

 

[Garrobo]

The reason that people post stories about the cheap watches they buy for diving is two-fold. One is that there is only one correct answer to the question and Two, most of the posters seem to want to tell you that buying an expensive watch for scuba is a waste of hard-earned.

 

[Mayor]

I have a few highend watches and use a Breitling Super Ocean for diving. Great watch that has a depth rating to 6600 feet. Tested at 140 feet and over 120 dives on it. Did have an issue with a main spring but after $350 it's as good as new! Good thing is if I drop it I know some fish will enjoy it.

Breitling 2009 - BREITLING | INSTRUMENTS FOR PROFESSIONALS TM

 

[Puffer Fish]

30 seconds a day??? Damn. That's pretty poor time keeping man. Although, to be fair, I haven't determined what mine is doing - I suppose it could be even worse

I have a (non-diver) Seiko Kinetic I bought in 1997. I'm in the situation of needing a new strap for it. Factory replacement strap is $100. I bought a cheap one for $15, but this thing sucks. Even so, I'm having problems justifying spending $100 on a strap....but I really love this watch...and I really hate this cheap strap. It's a problem.

It also says it is "water resistant to 10 bar" - rather than feet or meters. I find it interesting they used bar - esp. since it is not a diving watch.

It is mechanical.. your kinetic watch is a quartz....30 seconds is fairly normal...

 

[NudeDiver]

most of the posters seem to want to tell you that buying an expensive watch for scuba is a waste of hard-earned.

Seems to be the case. That's a shame

I've got no interest in spending money on a watch to take diving anyway. I've got two dive computers. Don't really need a watch. I don't have any big appointments to keep when I am diving

I was just trying to poke fun of these deep ratings, given the text that explains the ratings.