The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

[Belligero]

What a disservice these dealers did. You certainly don't need a diver's watch for use in water. At least they got the maintenance thing right, although you'd be surprised how long the interval can be. One of my GMTs went seventeen years on its unserviced original seals before it finally failed a pressure test.

Also, whether a crown screws down has nothing to do with its pressure resistance. Nor is there any luck involved with exposing a maintained and tested watch to its full rated depth.

I don't understand the paranoia and old wives' tales around watches and water. Just pressure test the thing and you're good to go for the next year if it passes. If you're that concerned about tested O-rings suddenly failing, then don't ever travel by air, because you wouldn't even want to think about how many of 'em the aircraft depends on, or the pressure and temperature range to which they're exposed.

 

[DeSense]

It is 1atm at sea level which increases by +1atm for every 10 metres below. So at 30m you are at 4atm, that's double a normal car's tire pressure. At 5km height the pressure falls by just -0.5atm. They maintain roughly equal 3km pressure on a commercial plane. Very roughly 3-4m depth equals that, with the slight difference that entering/escaping air hasn't destroyed too many watches, sea water did.

 

[Dino944]

Is it me or is this thread getting less and less open to non TWAT approved watches. About half an dozen watch brands and elicit fawning approval and most others grudging acceptance or outright hostility. These are profit making companies and there is as little sense in the fan mentality for companies as there is for football clubs or pop stars.

Hmmm, I don't think that is the case. I think we all find it interesting to see less common watches here, and to hear ownership experiences concerning them. I don't think there is out right hostility, although maybe some of us are rather blunt with our opinions. I do think that the brands that many of the so called approved watches are approved for a number of reasons such as good reputation for quality, iconic design, good resale value (should a buyer tire of it and wish to sell/trade), and reasonable value for its cost.

I think we could all agree Patek and Rolex fit those common traits (although some could argue that basic Calatrava costs are hardly reasonable today). I think AP, VC, Lange, JLC fit the above also, but with a bit lower resale value, but maybe better discounts from the start.

Many of us like other brands but sometimes feel that for what a particular watch costs, there could be better choices that we would prefer. Rolex may be approved and somewhat common here, because its often within the budget of many forum members, and has good quality, and good resale value. However, even among popular watch brands, when we reach a certain price level we may think there are other choices that make more sense. I love my steel Daytonas...but in platinum, I think many people here would pause and consider something a bit more unique, with more hand workmanship, be it from PP, AP, VC or Lange, or some other brand.

That happened to me once. Took my YM diving, water got in. Long story short, movement was damaged beyond repair, Rolex wanted $7,000 (or some other silly money) to fix it. I figured screw it, managed to find a used 3135 somewhere (eBay I think?) and paid a watch repair guy to replace it. Think it cost me less than $2,000 in all, except I can't ever take my YM back to Rolex ever. Expensive lesson, and then some.

Ouch!!! Sorry to hear about that expensive lesson.

Dumb question maybe, in my understanding 'water resistance' ratings are not to be taken literal, unless it is a real diving watch? 30m means you can wash your hands with it, shower or swimming not advised. 100m means shower and (light) swimming should be ok. Starting at 200m or 300m you only get into diving territory.
Bit baffled by the comments where people seem to take ratings quite face value.

I agree with Belligero regarding water resistance, however I have read and heard the same thing that you have stated. I'm not sure if what you stated is simply a from a bunch of overly cautious watchmakers, dealers, or salesmen who don't want people to be a bit more cautious with their watches, rather than having them come in damaged and blaming the watch for not being up to the task and expecting free repairs. I've seen a customer in a shop get pissed off when he was told that his dropping a watch from a counter top to a tile floor causing the sapphire crystal to crack, is not a repair covered by warranty. The customer was of the believe that the sapphire crystal is essentially unbreakable and was adamant that because it cracked on impact it should be replaced under warranty.

In general, the watches I've seen that are only water resistant to 30m, are often dress watches on croc straps that I would never wear to go swimming anyway. In general, most watches that I'd go swimming with are sporty enough that they have WR ratings to 50 or 100m.

 

[tifosi]



That happened to me once. Took my YM diving, water got in. Long story short, movement was damaged beyond repair, Rolex wanted $7,000 (or some other silly money) to fix it. I figured screw it, managed to find a used 3135 somewhere (eBay I think?) and paid a watch repair guy to replace it. Think it cost me less than $2,000 in all, except I can't ever take my YM back to Rolex ever. Expensive lesson, and then some.

Hmmm,
Ouch!!!  Sorry to hear about that expensive lesson.  

I really don't see a "lesson" here unless the OP forgot to screw down the crown in or he was 300ft+ under water??

Older watch? Not serviced?

 

[Belligero]



It is 1atm at sea level which increases by +1atm for every 10 metres below. So at 30m you are at 4atm, that's double a normal car's tire pressure. At 5km height the pressure falls by just -0.5atm. They maintain roughly equal 3km pressure on a commercial plane. Very roughly 3-4m depth equals that, with the slight difference that entering/escaping air hasn't destroyed too many watches, sea water did.

That's true, but I'm talking about the conditions that exist in things like fuel, cooling, hydraulic and fire suppressant systems. Also, ratings are stated in gauge pressure rather than absolute pressure, so the 1 atm at surface doesn't count.

 

[RFX45]

 

[mimo]

Remember Fok's "under $1k" watch competitions? I bet you "TWAT Masters" do. Well regardless of what you might have said then, or felt like saying, here's a simple question:

"What is, in your view the best watch of any kind, that can be had easily for $1000 or so, new or mint used?"

N.B. I have plans to buy one. So your answers will probably be wrong.

 

[DeSense]



That's true, but I'm talking about the conditions that exist in things like fuel, cooling, hydraulic and fire suppressant systems. Also, ratings are stated in gauge pressure rather than absolute pressure, so the 1 atm at surface doesn't count.

Don't remind me. Watched this series about major plane disasters and their root cause research. One was about a 747 disintegrating in mid air. Reason was (forgot some of the details, though), the plane was held up on the ground for 2+ hours in severe heat, aircons blasting at full force inside. Once taking off something happened to the cooling system pipes crossing right on top of a main fuel tank, causing this one to explode.

Last one on WR, totally agree that any given rating should be what it says. I'm just saying it ain't. And that anyone can google.

On a totally other note, very happy new owner of a new 116520 (and she came in black). Thanks to Dino for the excellent write-up a short while ago.
She is dead accurate. I saw her and she smiled back at me. That was that.

 

[Belligero]

Used Sinn 556 on bracelet, Nomos Club, 34 mm Rolex on strap (patience required), some Seiko whatchamacallit or a well-looked-after pie pan Constellation would all be in the running. New... I dunno.

 

[mimo]

One, dude. And you're optimistic on some of those prices. That's why it's hard. Step up.

 

[Hayward]

Oh Dear.

This impresses me as a variant of the "one watch" question.

From a purely functional perspective I'd have to go with the white metal version of the CWC SBS.



I was just reflecting on how my SBS is actually one of the most accurate watches I own (which is to say in HEQ territory - less than a second every few days, like my Seiko SBCM023), and in terms of functions and looks it hits most of the bells. It my not hit the bells spectacularly, but it touches them all. And while it's a parts bin watch, it's put together well (everything lines up). Bezel, day and date are going to be the most often used features apart from basic timekeeping. Fixed spring bars mean you have to use NATO bands, and fortunately there are a good selection of leather NATOs out there. You may not be able to wear it with a dinner suit or business suit, but for anything else it works.

Of course I just checked Silverman's and it looks like they're out...

If you restricting choices to mechanical then it's more subjective and much harder. Seiko, Orient, Stowa, Longines, maybe Junghans?

 

[mimo]

No, it's not a one watch question. It's a one watch now question. This is TWAT.

And so far, two most learned men have failed to nail "one watch", without caveats. To be fair though, you did start without equivocation, and I certainly didn't see that coming? Er..a what?!

(*looking*)

 

[RFX45]

$1k watch = $1k or under or is there some give to that?

 

[Mr. Moo]

Damasko DA36

I am strongly considering one on the new bracelet for well under $2k.

 

[Wes Bourne]

mimo, you should get a White Stowa Partitio, a watch you actually posted about not too long ago.