I want to design a Dive Watch. What would make the best watch?

[MattJ]

In addition to what the other posters said, I need good contrast between the watch face and the second hand. There are skills that students have to do for a certain number of seconds; it can be tough to see a thin second hand if the pool's a little murky.

 

[Dr. Lecter]

The other half should sell your watches and donate the money to charity. 1000m depth rating, puhleez

Or, I'll keep wearing my Planet Ocean above and below the surface, and you can give to charity to your heart's content

 

[rhwestfall]

Unlike others, I say "BIG honkin dial/face". Its got to be robust and visible....

now stop this silliness, and get back to the DRIS Goodman Handle project!!!!!!!!!!!!:cool2:

 

[00wabbit]

The goodman handle is being worked on daily. Don't worry. We're just trying to figure out the best way to produce it.

Thanks for the feedback so far. Ideas are starting to form here. I am moving at the end of October so I may not have time to put pencil to paper until then but this is all good research material.

Unlike others, I say "BIG honkin dial/face". Its got to be robust and visible....

now stop this silliness, and get back to the DRIS Goodman Handle project!!!!!!!!!!!!:cool2:

 

[dmoore19]

This one seems to meet most of the requirements. Clean up the face and make it more stylish looking and find something else for the band. I have one of these and have had no problems with it. Maybe make it a bit smaller?

I found mine in a mall at a jewelry store in the clearance case. I paid $300 for it after a little big of haggling with the manager. This one is in imperial units, I have seen one in metric units too.

Citizen Aqualand Men's Black Strap Black Dial Watch

 

[Diver0001]

The thing about depth gauges, by the way, is that most of the world's population measure depth in metres, not feet. The watch above is useless to about 2/3 of the diving population for that reason.

You'd have to either make two models or have some way to switch between feet and metres.

R..

 

[dmoore19]

The thing about depth gauges, by the way, is that most of the world's population measure depth in metres, not feet. The watch above is useless to about 2/3 of the diving population for that reason.

You'd have to either make two models or have some way to switch between feet and metres.

R..

As mentioned here is another one in metric units. I wouldn't think it would take much to have that option.

Metric Citizen Eco-Drive Aqualand with Dive Log - 20th Anniversary Model JV0020-12F

 

[vladimir]

The only thing it needs to have is the rotating bezel, keeps excellent time and can take the pressure and abuse. I give you....the submariner

Agree. For what it seeks to do, the Submariner is perfect. Nearly useless as a dive tool, but otherwise perfect.

1) It should work like a bottom timer, not just a time keeper. In other words, it should time AND depth. This is the main reason I don't use a dive watch outside of the swimming pool now.

2) It should start accumulating dive time automatically upon submersion to to given depth (1m?) and stop accumulating dive time 5 or 10 min after the dive is over. Yes. Without these two features (1 & 2), it's really only good for timing lunch and swimming laps; in other words, not a diving tool.

3) I like *simple* analog faces but the bottom dive time and depth could be displayed digitally if it were done discretely. Digital, by definition, is discrete (discontinuous). You mean discreet.
Digital is also ugly, in my opinion. If you're watch isn't better looking than a D9, why bother?

4) In terms of appearance it should have a sleek simple design that you can wear at work (I work in business) without people thinking that you just walked off the set of robo-cop. This is my main objection to most of the citizen designs. Yes, well said. While a little bit casual for classic business attire, the Submariner meets this requirement nicely, especially in today's more casual environment. Most days I wear mine, even with a suit.

5) the glass face should have a concave form inset under the line of the bezel so that it doesn't get scratched while diving. Nice idea, but a sapphire crystal is pretty scratch-proof.

8) The face should be clearly readable if you shine a light on it. To me it doesn't matter if it has a back-light or phosphorescent bits that are hard to read anyway. Readable, yes. The date on my Submariner is illegible to me, even with the little magnifying bubble. The date on my Tag Heuer dive watch is also illegible to me. That's not the watches' faults, it's my failing eyes. But if you want to price a watch in the $1K to $5K range (theoretically) it better work for the 50+ set. So, for me, that means a large face.

Thanks for the detailed response.

I think a watch without a battery, automatic, eco-drive solar or something of that type would be best because you don't ever need to remove the caseback and risk damaging the seal.

As far as stylish designs go - What would that be to you?

I wouldn't pay more than a couple of hundred dollars for a non-automatic watch. IWC Portuguese (not their diving watches), Rolex Submariner, Omega SeaMaster, Jaeger LeCoultre Master Compressor, etc., all variations on a theme. Oh, and Dirk Pitt's watch, the Doxa (and the Seiko clone).

You have a very cool occupation, Wabbit.

1000m depth rating, puhleez

Nobody takes the depth rating seriously. It's sort of a theoretical, not to mention marketing hype. So, for example, 100m depth rating means it's safe to swim and shower (in cold water) with it on.

Water Resistance Guide
No Rating - 30m/99ft	Does not allow contact with water
30m/99ft - 50m/165ft	Allows for contact with water such as washing hands and rain
50m/165ft - 100m/330ft	Allows for light poolside swimming
100m/330ft - 200m/660ft	Allows for swimming, snorkeling and showering (do not expose to hot water)
200m/660ft - 500m/1650ft	Allows for impact water sports such as board diving and scuba diving
500m/1650ft +	Appropriate for serious deep water diving.

 

[Tortuga68]

Nobody takes the depth rating seriously. It's sort of a theoretical, not to mention marketing hype

You're getting confused between the so-called water resistance (WR) ratings, and dive watch ratings. A quality dive watch that says it's good for 1000m is capable of it outside a lab

 

[vladimir]

One of us is confused, yes:

http://www.prestigetime.com/page.php?water-resistance#WRWP

The U.S. FTC (Federal Trade Commission) which enforces the truth-of-advertising has deemed the term "Waterproof" inappropriate. In their opinion, a watch can never be 100% truly impervious to water, as the gaskets deteriorate over time & exposure, thus reducing the specified depth of water resistance. In the words of the FTC "The word proof connotes a measure of absolute protection that unfortunately does not exist with respect to watches, especially over prolonged periods of time." The FTC has found the term Water Resistant to be more appropriate.

When a watch is tested by the manufacturer it is done in a laboratory under optimum conditions, such as a fresh gasket, sitting stationary in a pressured water tank and with still/motionless water. However, real life action will produce completely different results. Here are a few scenarios:

Water temperatures in a hot-tub or a hot shower will effect the shape of the gasket seals. Especially if the watch is taken from hot temperatures & immediately plunged into cold water - such as going from a hot-tub into a pool.

Sudden & rapid changes in pressure - such as diving (even shallow diving) into a pool, the force of plunging your arm into the water while swimming, will stress the gaskets for a fraction of a second. If the gaskets are not up to specification they may rupture and cause the watch to take in water.

As the watch ages the seals begin to erode & will not maintain the same water resistance levels.

My Rolex Submariner's water resistance is warranted for one year after service.