Invicta watch??

[RJP]

I'm wondering if Invicta has a decent reputation for water resistance, durability, etc?

Invicta is quite literally the punchline to half the jokes in the wristwatch industry.

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

I wouldnt take a 200 meters rated citizen to 200 meteters for several reasons, non of wich has to do with the 200 meter rating...
First of all I wouldnt go to 200 meters as I dont do saturation diving or like to carry the entire dive boats supply of tanks with me while diving. Second if the watch is rated only Divers 200 meters it is NOT rated for mixed-gas enviroments, thats a rating all of its own..

However if the watch was less than 100 bucks I wouldnt give a damn about the watch crapping out, what Id be conserned with would be the result of the watch crapping out. Like wether I would have to abort the dive or my suit get all eaten up by battery acid..

Hmm, the batteries are Silver Oxide now, so no acid....

Obviously no one here is likely to hit 200M, I was just pointing out the depth ratings by themselves for water resistance for divers are rather arbitrary.As Peter pointed out, there are 2 different standards for water resistance, and as I pointed out, the manufacturer is not required to follow either one. Unless they say Per ISO 6425 or something similar, its just a marketing claim.

 

[SOFDiver]

Guys,

I was not suggesting that a 200m rated watch could or should be taken to 200m, only that I have found that a watch rated less than that was likely ro crap out in recreational diving limits.

 

[Tigerman]

Guys,

I was not suggesting that a 200m rated watch could or should be taken to 200m, only that I have found that a watch rated less than that was likely ro crap out in recreational diving limits.

Because, according to standards any watch rated anything less than "Divers 100m" is NOT suitable for scuba diving.
God knows who decided that "water resistant 200m" (or 20atm) was a brilliant way to mark a watch you can barely take a swim with, but thats sadly how it works..

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Guys,

I was not suggesting that a 200m rated watch could or should be taken to 200m, only that I have found that a watch rated less than that was likely ro crap out in recreational diving limits.

I think the issue I took exception was the line in the sand at 200m, less=junk, 200M or better=good. The mix of 2 different standards that mention 200M plus the guys who don't follow the standards (lots of watched from SE Asia made for 2nd tier companies) make this a bad line.

My personal watch is rated for 200M (sounds good) , but the wrong standard. I like the watch, it meets my needs (boating, showering, daily abuse) just fine. I don't consider it junk, but neither do I consider it dive gear. I have owned multiple junk watches purchased from Walmart, Target, etc... They last a couple of days to months max in my hands. The pseudo dive watches last 5 years or so. The last real dive watch I owned (35 year ago) stop self winding a month after the warranty expired (13 months). I had pad $150 for it, in 1978 dollars. So I am jaded a bit.

 

[skimon]

Thanks to all for their comments. I decided to get the Citizens pro divers series rated to 300 meters. It is $165 on amazon with the full Citizen warranty. The water resistance complies with the ISO standard as mentioned in this thread. So I'm paying more than the Invicta would cost, but as per the comments on the thread I think I'm getting a better watch that will last longer. Thanks again.