Likes Likes:  27
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: WR thingy

  1. #21
    Another Member crownpuller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Bristol UK
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Seriously View Post
    I did what now
    You broke it.
    Some people have opinions - The rest of us have taste.

  2. Likes Seriously liked this post
  3. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by rodia77 View Post
    I'm not the only one! I'm not the only one!

    Attachment 91254
    https://www.jswatch.com/water-resistance-guide

    I still don't see much rationale behind it but at least I have company.
    Quote Originally Posted by crownpuller View Post
    I've always found WR ratings quite baffling.

    For example:
    My neighbour is an enthusiastic scuba diver; he tells me he rarely ventures beyond 40m on a dive, and his deepest dive was 52m....
    So why do 'they' tell me I need at least a rating of 100m WR just to go swimming ?.... or indeed 200m to go scuba diving ?

    My criteria for most of my watches is: Do I need to take it off when I take the kids to the pool ?.... If the answer is yes, I'll change it for one that I can keep on.
    Quote Originally Posted by tribe125 View Post
    If ‘they’ is a watch company, it’s probably due to product liability concerns.

    The ISO standard (ISO 22810:2010) is presumably the most definitive -


    Attachment 91261
    This.
    There are two ISO standards for WR with watches. This one relies on a small sampling of the watches to be pressure tested. These are often not tested in water and once again, those tested only cover a small sampling of that model. So, you pays your money and you takes your chances.

    The other standard is for dive watches. Every single watch made is tested, in still water to a depth that exceeds the rating by 25%. Not all watches that are dive tested say Dive 200, for example, but if a watch has Dive 200 on the dial that very watch did not flood when tested in water at an equivalent pressure of 250 metres depth. Can't remember what the ISO standard is and can't be bothered to look it up, but there you go.
    Solve all your doubts through question mode.

  4. Likes Seriously, crownpuller, synequano, Dimman liked this post
  5. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Henry Krinkle View Post

    The other standard is for dive watches. Every single watch made is tested, in still water to a depth that exceeds the rating by 25%. Not all watches that are dive tested say Dive 200, for example, but if a watch has Dive 200 on the dial that very watch did not flood when tested in water at an equivalent pressure of 250 metres depth. Can't remember what the ISO standard is and can't be bothered to look it up, but there you go.
    ISO 6425
    Watches for SALE:
    <PRICE REDUCED> Nivrel 322 Black Dial: http://www.intlwatchleague.com/showt...869#post447869

  6. Likes Henry Krinkle, synequano, Dimman liked this post
  7. #24
    I see your shenanigans rodia77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Cork, IE
    Posts
    2,484
    Back on this -- how do we interpret a 'water resistant' on the caseback without any rating given?
    I'm sorted and so not buying any more watches.

  8. #25
    Moderator - Central tribe125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Kent - UK
    Posts
    14,164
    Quote Originally Posted by rodia77 View Post
    Back on this -- how do we interpret a 'water resistant' on the caseback without any rating given?

    I’d say it was pretty meaningless.

  9. Likes rodia77 liked this post
  10. #26
    Another Member crownpuller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Bristol UK
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by rodia77 View Post
    Back on this -- how do we interpret a 'water resistant' on the caseback without any rating given?
    I'd interpret that as 'splashproof'; and I'd be wary of heavy rain.
    Some people have opinions - The rest of us have taste.

  11. Likes rodia77 liked this post
  12. #27
    MWC is that my watch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    came for a look stayed for the biskwits
    Posts
    32,307
    Quote Originally Posted by crownpuller View Post
    I'd interpret that as 'splashproof'; and I'd be wary of heavy rain.
    so hmt like
    one night I dreamed I was locked in my fathers watch, with Ptolemy and twenty one ruby stars mounted on spheres and the primum mobile coiled and gleaming to the end of space and the notched spheres eating each other's rinds to the last tooth of time and the case closed - John Ciardi ...

    https://emgwatches.com/
    http://www.instagram.com/iyonk_strap/
    http://wristwatchreview.co.uk/

    ЖИЗНЬ НЕ ОСТАНАВЛИВАЕТСЯ, ПРОХОДИТ ТОЛЬКО ВРЕМЯ.
    Russian Watches



  13. Likes rodia77 liked this post
  14. #28
    I see your shenanigans rodia77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Cork, IE
    Posts
    2,484
    OK, in this particular case I just didn't have a good look at the caseback (great idea to put the rating apart from the 'water resistant' text), and it's, hello Longines, 3bar:

    I'm sorted and so not buying any more watches.

  15. #29
    Ich bin ein Ebeler! WWII70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Boston ex-pat Brit
    Posts
    2,980

    WR thingy

    Quote Originally Posted by CFR View Post
    Let's fix it once and for all

    Attachment 91257

    Rated and laboratory tested @15,000m and actually used in real life @ 10,928m.
    and then there’s the Rolex DeepSea Challenge at 51mm in diameter, and 28.5mm thick. My friend has one of the three that were made and I tried it on at the end of January.

    https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/li...camerons-rolex


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by WWII70; Feb 25, 2020 at 08:44 PM.
    Ebels (lots), IWC, Omega, FC, Eterna, Tag, Invicta, Movado
    If you are interested in the details http://www.intlwatchleague.com/membe...70&tab=aboutme

  16. #30
    I'm fine with 30-50m WR, and prefer 100m and above for sports watch..

    like i always said... my most complain with Water Resistant is -- its me that is lack of water resistance..

    I'm on instagram: @iyonk_strap

  17. Likes rodia77 liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About Us
We are an independent and wide-ranging forum for watch enthusiasts. From mainspring to microchip, from Europe to Asia, from micro-brand to boutique - we cover it all. Novice or expert, we want you to feel at home. Whether it's asking a simple question or contributing to the fund of horological knowledge, it's all the same hobby. Or, if you like, you can just show us a picture of your new watch. We'll provide the welcoming and courteous environment, the rest is up to you!
Join us