1950s Diving Watches: A Stacked Review

All is here, summed in one or two pictures, or almost.

 The roots of Diving Watches have to be searched in the Fifites, and the brands which set the fundamentals of what are our modern toolwatches are represented here:

 Blancpain and the Fifty Fathoms,  and Rolex with the Submariner, of course... Since 1953.

 Then, the others: Tudior, Omega, Breitling, Jaeger Lecoultre, Zenith, Longines, and even Breguet, the great brands of that era wanted to play the underwater game.

 The cards of this game are simple:

 An automatic movement, to preserve the seal between the crown and the case, a turning bezel, a legible dial under all light conditions.
 
Then some found some improvements: The screw in crown ( Rolex ),  or the Alarm ( Jaeger-Lecoultre ).

 An exception to the basic rules of the Diving watch: Jaeger Lecoultre, whose bezel was not turning, the diving being timed by the alarm...

 Here is my personal conception of the infernal tower. 6 are missing, though: The JLC European Deep Sea Alarm, the Tudor 7922, the Breitling Superocean Chronograph, the Breguet, the Longines Nautilus Skin Diver, and the Zenith S 58.

 I still have to hunt the 5 last ones, for my biggest pleasure, but even without them, the show is pure dizziness.

 From the top to the bottom: Tudor 7924; Rolex 5508, Omega CK 2913, Breitling Superocean, Lecoultre Deep Sea Alarm ( US ), Blancpain Early Milspec and Blancpain Early Rotomatic Incabloc: 

 


 

The good thing with a stack is that it allows you to immediately see, notice the differences between the watches.

 Here,  mostly the case, the bezel, the crown, and the plexy.

 - The crowns, from what you can see can be small, too small, like on the Breitling Superocean, which is fastidious, very fastidious to wind, or big, very big, like on the Tudor 7924, which is a pure element of coolness and desirability.

 The size goes from 5 to 8 mm, and each extra millemeter makes a huge difference. The stack brings a brilliant demonstration, here.

 - The case is a much more important detail than we could think.

 Here we have all kind of sizes, from 37 mm ( Superocean ) to 41 mm ( The Fifty Fathoms ), with an average 38 mm ( Rolex and Tudor ), but also all kind of thickness, the champion being the Tudor, here with something like 15 mm while the king of thinness is, withlut doubt, the Superocean.

 More than the numbers, which is interesting with a stack is that it shows the true character of a watch.

 We have some refined competitors, such as the Superocean, the Omega CK 2913 or the Lecoultre Deep Sea Alarm, these last two sharing the same case ( Huguenin Frères ).

 The profile of these 3 watches, and their beveled lugs, is almost scultptural, which would make a Fifty Fathoms or a Rolex / Tudor look normal! 

The Rolex 5508 looks elegant, with its thin case, while the Tudor is the king of machos, without any doubt.

 The Fifty Fathoms have a more " basic " case. After all, they were designed as toolwatches for divers, and that was the most important point.

 You will notice that the Milspec has a microbillé case, which is unique for a diving watch from the Fifties, as far as I remember...

 - As for the bezel, same differences among the brands. An element of style which goes with the character of the watch.

 As previously written, the form and the functions are closely linked: The bezel is a tool, so it has to be luminous and to turn.

 Which is, undisputably the case for the Rolex / Tudor and the Blancpain watches.

 We have some particular examples, here....

 The Omega, with its very thin bezel, is very elegant,  but practical?

 The Breitling, with its funny concave bezel is beautiful, but efficient?

 And what to say about the non turning bezel of the Lecoultre / Jaeger-Lecoultre Deep SEa Alarm? Cool, but not useful at all, as the time was measured though the alarm, not through the bezel.

 - Last point, the Plexy.

 Each of these watches has its plexy, differently shaped. But we can say that, basically, there are two schools, here: The slightly domed, and the hyper domed plexys.

 For the distortion, there is nothing worse than the hyper domed, but in terms of sensuality and coolness, it wins, by far.

 If you are not convinced, have a look at the Rolex / Tudor Big Crowns...

 More sensual than elegant, the hyper domed plexy has an inconvenient: It adds some important height to an already thick case.

 But it may also be seen as part of its coolness.

 Anyway, I hope that you are now convinced that a stack is not only a kind of show off or dangerous game for immature adult ( what I am, by the way...   ) but most of all a delicious and very interesting way to enhance the differences which may exist between our beloved watches, even when they belong to a same category or Family.

 Looking forward to reading your comments and thoughts,

 Best.

 Nicolas.