Horological Meandering

No intention to offend anybody. This question has been bothering me for a while.

Most divers today (at least the ones I know - I am a scuba diver myself) do not wear dive watches to go diving these days. They wear dive computers that tell them everything including remaining dive time, depth, decompression times etc. and all the calculations that a so called 'dive watch' cannot tell you.

In the old days, a dive watch was necessary because divers needed to bring some form of a timekeeper into the waters to calculate remaining dive times. No longer today with the advent of dive computers.

So why are watch companies still making dive watches and why are people still buying so called dive watches? And why did Rolex spend all the R&D dollars to come up with the Deep Sea? I suspect that it's the idea or concept of a waterproof watch more than any practical considerations. So, Rolex spend R&D dollars on coming up with a marketing concept to sell to people and people are still buying the concept - not to improve diving in itself. I, for one, still like dive watches because of their looks and the 'idea' of a waterproof watch and their association with the oceans, which many people (myself included) have an affinity for. I have no illusions however, that the dive watches of today are 'diving instruments' in any way.

But then, it's the same argument about mechanical versus digital watches that tell time more accurately in most cases. It's just the watch companies calling the watches 'dive' watches that bugs me, I suppose. "Superlative waterproof watches", I'm okay with. This message has been edited by Kong on 2008-10-08 23:32:39

I wear a 'dive watch' of sorts when I've been diving. An old g-shock, batteries changed at home, o-rings never replaced, bit hacked really, no idea what it would be rated at now. I've also worn a old Seiko diver. But I also have very very ugly second hand old dive computer that I depend on (not to mention the experience of my dive buddy)

The issue for me is that if you wore a GP SeaHawk (tourbillon?) with dual (!) HRVs on the little tropical recreational dives I have been on, you'd get laughed at on your Open Water certificate. And in some ways, justifiably so.

I get what you mean regarding the likes of the Rolex SD, but the same could be said for almost ANY diver (or diver-style or superlative whatever) you care to mention. It's marketing wind. Fun watches, though.

1000m dive watches? 2000m dive watches? All admirable in a purely engineering sense but I'd like to see something like a impactor test on the crystal. That would convince me that the watch was tough and up to the task....

This message has been edited by BDLJ on 2008-10-07 23:00:24

Most people who wear luxury dive watches aren't professional divers in the 1st place.

Compare the function of a modern digital dive watch like suunto and a modern luxury dive watch like a rolex DSD, which has more functions?

A suunto has a depth gauge, thermometer, you name it; on the other hand, a rolex just reads time, maybe just a bezel for elapsed time. Obviously, people who wear a rolex to dive don't depend on those Suunto functions, although they are useful. Which is more value for money, and practical? The rhetoric is obvious.

So why do people like UN MM,rolex DSD, Sinn U1......?

It's my opinion that it's the macho factor behind those almost indestructible ticking machines, which take time and patience to create. It's buying into a brand, a philosophy, a history. Surely, anyone who wears a Panerai would like to be associated with wearing a fragment of italian commando history. Or someone who wears a Blancpain FF, a piece of Jacques Consteau's amazing life story, and his trusted companion. When we buy a luxury watch, it isn't just for the functions, rather, it's the identity we buy, we buy an image to show the world, a relic to remind ourselves of the values we espouse.

I went to Tioman recently, and the divers there do not wear swiss luxury watches to dive, just a simple Suunto, or Seiko Monster. Therefore to sum it up, divers watches are not only for divers, but rather, it has resulted in the term meaning a tough luxury watch that can take more knocks and bangs.

I've been diving off Tioman!

I understand what you are saying, and definitely agree on the macho factor, but indestructible? Dare you to bang the face of an SD or FF on a rock.

The likes of the Rolex and BP FF were created as tools, they no longer are. The Suuntos etc are the new tools.

As for buying identity, that's exactly the point I was making re: experienced divers and $$$ dive watches...

(and ooo, don't get me started on being associated with Italian Frogmen blowing things up!)

I think that the same question can be asked about Mechanical ( and expensive ) watches against Quartz ( and very affordable ) watches.

Why do we buy Mechanical watches, when Quartz Watches offer us the same, I mean ..The Hour?

Why even buying a awatch when computers, cellular phones, even cars give us the Hour for free???

Just because we are attracatred by the uncomparable " poesie " of a mechanical movement, by its quest of  perfection, of accuracy, of reliability, as we, Human, want to reach the same things, the same goals.

For the same reason you want to gift yourelf with a nice pair of shoes, a nice bottle of wine, or a nice car...

A Diving watch is more than a watch to dive, a watch is more than a watch, this is a way of being.

Best.

Nicolas

 

How many here have been diving?

Where did you get to enjoy that fantastic sport?

And What was on your wrist?

Madness of watches..LMAO.

But I love to live with my watches, and when I go to the Sea, I bring with me My rolex Explorer II, an IWC Cousteau Diver, or now, my Triple 6 Rolex SD.

I wouldn't swim with my PP World Time of course, nor with my Vintage Divers, but I live with them, I wear them, I love them.

I think we have to make a distinction between Watches and Utility.

About mechanical watches, I mean.

Watches are poesy, not Utility, IMO.

Best.

Nicolas

 

i only dive with my seiko 5.

Rocks, corals, and boat hulls can really damage a beautiful rolex.

mechanical dive watches have nothing whatsoever to do with diving. they are all about lifestyle. people like the look of them and buy them to wear as a leisure watch or in a lot of cases an every day every occasion watch. 

i used to wear a vintage Tudor Sub snowflake but my tastes changed. i also owned a Breitling avenger seawolf, but 10,000m is a bit ridiculous when i dont even swim much anymore

 

I can imagine it: "John, so who's the bloke crushed at 10,000m underwater"
"Sorry Jake, not recognisable, too much pressure. But his Breitling is still OK".

Next time try a Zenith Defy Xtreme (tourbiloon) - no real mountain climber would wear one since his life can depend on his watch.

Madness has no limits...

...I've worn my Submariner Date on every dive. Even when I've had a dive computer on as well. As a watch enthusiast, it's kinda cool to know that one of my favourite timepieces can hack it when it comes to my hobby.

Do I baby my Sub? Hell no.

Have people laughed at me for using a Sub as my primary dive timer? Hell no.

Do I own a dive computer? No.

do I use dive tables? Yes.

with my watch? but of course.

along with my analogue depth and pressure gauges.

And I also know professional divers who wouldn't dream of diving without their Rolex or omega's.

That's cool and the best use of a Sub.

You still use dive tables? They take too much timeout of the dive! Still, I admire that. I wouldn't trust myself to be able to comprehend them below about 30m. Then again, I'm lucky to have very experienced dive buddies. My Dive computer is mainly used for logging times.

Where do you usually dive?

I'm quite conventional in that I'll plan before hand and keep the info I need on a slate. No point fumbling to calculate while diving.

Most of my diving is in Sabah, home of Sipadan, Mabul, Mataking etc.

all-adventure' watch?

...and I suggest this whether your adventure is diving, multi-continental spying or simply gardening and cleaning out the garage.

I don't dive, but I do swim, my understanding is that real diving is much aided by modern dive computers and also that many will will wear a watch as well, perhaps as a backup.  The 'dive' notion for these watches might be somewhat defended by this, as well as the mechanical -- notwithstanding manufacturers' recommendations to depth-test your watch annually, a good mechanical watch might well be used (and abused!) for 5-10 years before even needing to be opened.

Personally, aside from the style and sometimes the historical associations, I like these watches because they can be enjoyed without much concern in all weathers and most circumstances.  I believe that many share this attitude, and so the remaining decision is mostly at what price point does one cringe when their watch get scuffed and scratched; personally I favor Seikos, but certainly others will be similarly comfortable with a Blancpain or Audemars Piguet (with or without tourbillon!).  As for Rolex, this is the archetype of such watches, an all-purpose, all-occasion timekeeper which can be expected to perform properly ('superlatively'?) for a lifetime with minimal care; if I were in the market for such a watch I would buy and enjoy it without hesitation!

This is like everything else. People do not write with a fountain pen anymore (they used basic push leads or simply text on'cell phones"...), but superb fountain pens are still produced and called a "Writing instrument".

The mechanical diver's watches that are being produced today simply follow the tradition. Why would we be changing their name since they actually represent the genesis of a diving instrument?

And it is OK that a non diver person would be wanting to own a piece of tradition. I certainly do! I love wearing my UN Maxi Marine Diver. It reminds me of the marine traditions, it is way tougher than a Tourbillon with leather strap and I can certainly play in the water with it. On the counterpart, I do not think that anyone who has a Suunto computer will keep all day long at the office.

Conclusion: Of course Divers do not wear a Diver's watch anymore to dive, they wear a "DIving Computer" and this tool should not be categorized as a watch. A mechanical Diver's timepiece should not loose its identity because of this evolution in the Diving world.

Kind regards,

Yves

Let me preface this reply that I am an experienced recreational diver.

1. COMPUTERS are not necessary or required dive equipment! A timer (watch with bezel), compass, and my charts are all I need for a dive besides my SCUBA kit.

2. Even if you use a computer (I do), a simple mechanical/quartz wristwatch with a unidirection bezel is appropriate equipment for a diver, especially for multitank/over head environments. This serves as a backup in case of a failure of the primary dive time indicator. If you lose your computer at depth, especially if it is air integrated you may decide to immediately ascend, but if this is not possible (overhead/deco?) then it sure is handy to have that watch on your other wrist!

3. A matte finished, waterproof to 10ATM, simple timepiece with hours/minutes on a visible dial, decent lume, and a unidirectional bezel are your complications/features required. Helium escape valves, 1000M ratings, tourbillions, precious metals, chronographs, poorly operating/gimmicky depth gauges, and even bracelets have no place on a true diving watch. My diving companion is a SE Seiko Blue Monster on a NATO. A NATO strap assures that even if one spring bar breaks, you don't loose your watch.

All being said, the "dive watch" is a marketing term today, but people really DID dive with Rolex and Panerai watches. They are just less relevant and much more expensive!

Very good points, Loopsand sounds.

Particularly re: the redundancy.

I'd like to purvey the board's opinion on two questions that's been bothering me.

1. Are modern high-end mechanical dive watches jewelry first and engineered wonders second? I've read with interest the various pressure tests conducted by watch magazines reporting catastrophic failure of the crystal on several high-priced divers, among them an IWC and Breitling before the spec-ed depth is reached. I can accept gasket leaks (and other modes of qc related failure) but a shattered crystal points to poor engineering or a deliberate attempt to inflate performance figures for additional tool-cool points. Are they even tested to said depths if samples submitted for high-profile tests fail in that manner?

2. I don't understand the one-upism of 1000m WR yesterday and 3900m today. It's a brainless exercise to increase dimensions for ever-increasing depths. After all, the one difference between a low pressure pipe and and high-pressure one is wall thickness. Costs more and weighs a ton but there're no secrets, and certainly no need for patented "ring lock". I'll be impressed if one can keep to the same form factor with increased WR. That's engineering. To my mind, anything more than 300m is just marketing.

Some of these watches with 1000m+ are not even tested to the ISO standard for Divers watches. They use the DIN standard for water resistance testing solely, I would guess to allow the use of the number on the dial.

The ISO (6425) standard is specific to Dive watches. The DIN is just for water resistance.

So, yes. Jewellery.

 

which give buyers the "feeling" of being an adventurous pilot or race car driver or a fan of such endeavors. Some of the first "life-style" marketing. Modern versions include things like "Tap Out" clothing where the buyer can "feel" like they are a tough UFC fighter. All hype.

My first post by the way. Glad to be here and try and learn about watches.

i started diving in 1977, and used a citizen and then a seiko. i bought a submariner in 1981 and wore it for all my dives for maybe 15 years.  the lume is gone now - so i dont use my sub in the water anymore, but i still like to wear the watch - it still keeps beautiful time 27 years later.  for diving i often wear a u1 which i think is the most easily read watch in the world in low light levels.  i think we all should wear a mechanical watch to back up a battery powered computer - just in case.

anyway - i hardly ever dive beyond 40-50 ft anymore - i am more interested in the life and colors and dont really see that much at depth, so rarely use the computational power of the suunto that sits in my cluster.  but regardless, i still like to wear dive watches, whether in the water or out.  fyi i am also buying the allblack u1 bcos it is cool looking.  i dont dont think we have to have a reason to buy or wear a watch other than liking it... 

just my 2cents