Waterproof

I have a rolex submariner that is only water resistant to 300m and my Girard Peregaux Sea Hawk II is waterproof to 300m as etched on the back
I have gone swimming with my Panerai 98 which is labeled 30m no problem but I wont take my GO gold perpetual in the water being that it is rated at 50m, because is that much more valuable and would be a real pain to fix if i had to ship it to germany and it also has a ton of pushers on the side and more importantly its not the watch one wears at the pool. I have gone swimming with my JLC reverso Grande Date GMT rated at 30m and it even has a fish next to depth label. I suspect that with most modern watches the depth label is factual and should not be a problem to go in the pool or the beach.
There is too much handwringing about it and static testing at a given depth is likely to be appropriate and adequate for most real life situations...IMHO

💰1882 Marketplace Listings for Rolex›

question: water resistant vs waterproof

By: bart1 : May 2nd, 2009-08:01

why is my $12k GO "water resistant" (to 30 meters for example) instead of "waterproof" to 30 meters? When I was a kid, my $7 Timex was waterproof. Today, my $12k GO is just water resistant? Specifically, what is "water resistant?" Will it leak, or not? Th...

In theory

By: dannymc : May 2nd, 2009-11:40

In theory, no watch is waterproof because with enough pressure it would let in water. Although it could be argued that any watch that is water resistant to 11,000 meters (eg. B&R Hydomax) is 'water proof' as its resistance surpasses the deepest natural po...

I still don't understand

By: bart1 : May 2nd, 2009-12:40

what is static pressure? what relativity does a static pressure test have with a watch being water proof in the real world? if my watch states that it is water resistant to 30M, am I safe swimming with is or taking it down to 50 or 60 feet? Thank you, Bar...

water resistant = euphemism for not water proof

By: donizetti : May 2nd, 2009-13:19

Hi, static pressure means that the watch isn't moving and the pressure not changing. That is what the watch rating refers to. The problem with that concept is that to get to 10m down, say, you will have had to move the watch and subjected it to some rapid...

be careful...

By: MiniCooper : May 2nd, 2009-16:21

this is good advice 30m (100 feet or 3ATM) is only protection for accidental splashing, in a shower water pressure may be stronger than 3 atm and thus create problems in your watch and it would be a shame for your GO You can only use a watch while swimmin...

Unless you have an IWC.

By: mkvc : May 2nd, 2009-18:25

My 60m-rated IWC UTC is my resort travel watch, which means that it is submerged repeatedly and vigorously. I have not yet had a problem. I think that when IWC say 60m, they mean 60m.

I thought...

By: MiniCooper : May 2nd, 2009-18:34

that IWC measures in bars, not meters cheers

one wonders...

By: bart1 : May 2nd, 2009-19:42

why the manufacturers advertise with a reference to an impressive number of meters or bars if they are really just saying that you better leave the watch on the beach. When one sees 30M or 50M, I automatically assumed that I could use the watch without re...

WP v WR

By: BDLJ : May 2nd, 2009-21:35

Bart, My understanding is that watches used to be marked "Waterproof" until some US ruling in the 70's forced them to change to "Water Resistant".

Waterproof

By: sirjun : May 3rd, 2009-06:03

you bring up an interesting point...

By: bart1 : May 3rd, 2009-06:34

My GO (also a perpetual) has those pushers... I wonder how they are made watertight? O-ring or rubber gasket? I really like the idea of my watch being impervious to external conditions but it feels too risky to take chances. I remember when watches were r...

Maybe I'm an optimist.

By: CaliforniaJed : May 3rd, 2009-14:27

I have been in pool and ocean with numerous Rolexes, my IWC Aquatimer, Casio Pathfinder, Seiko Samurai. For a decade or so, a Rolex Datejust (almost) never left my wrist, including (almost) daily showers. If my Panerai were on a rubber strap, I would not ...