50 meters is a little over 160 feet...

[Tritto]

For those who're worried about pushers and non-screw down crowns, I don't believe these are the reason for the 50m WR. I believe it's the crystal tension fit hesalite crystal.
I have a '72 Flightmaster. I believe it was originally rated at 120m. The crown and pusher setups are exactly the same as the Speedmaster. What's different is the crystal. The Flightmaster has a massively thick flat mineral glass crystal with a nylon gasket around it.
I just had my Flightmaster serviced (including case kit) and it passed the 10 bar/100m test.
I don't swim with vintage chronos because why, when I have other options? It's nice to know it could handle a dunking if necessary though.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Tritto

For those who're worried about pushers and non-screw down crowns, I don't believe these are the reason for the 50m WR. I believe it's the crystal tension fit hesalite crystal.
I have a '72 Flightmaster. I believe it was originally rated at 120m. The crown and pusher setups are exactly the same as the Speedmaster. What's different is the crystal. The Flightmaster has a massively thick flat mineral glass crystal with a nylon gasket around it.
I just had my Flightmaster serviced (including case kit) and it passed the 10 bar/100m test.
I don't swim with vintage chronos because why, when I have other options? It's nice to know it could handle a dunking if necessary though.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alllexandru]

Originally Posted by Tritto

I just had my Flightmaster serviced (including case kit) and it passed the 10 bar/100m test.

Nice watch!

[ratty]

Originally Posted by gnuyork

Well said

I agree.


Has anyone on here actually had a problem with water getting into a Speedy?

[Kinnakeet]

I swim often with my Speedy. Never had a problem. Husband has one and will not risk it.

[GTS Dean]

Originally Posted by ratty

I agree.


Has anyone on here actually had a problem with water getting into a Speedy?

You're only likely to hear from those who haven't, or those who will never know.

[ratty]

I suspect that if people on here had actually had problems with Speedies and water we would certainly have heard about it loud and clear, but I can't find a single thread about a Speedy drowning!

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Kinnakeet

I swim often with my Speedy. Never had a problem. Husband has one and will not risk it.

Ahh but how many hundreds of feet do you go down to?

[DCheeta]

I can go hiking in dress shoes if I want to, but why would I when I have a pair of good hiking boots at home?

[ratty]

Originally Posted by DCheeta

I can go hiking in dress shoes if I want to, but why would I when I have a pair of good hiking boots at home?

I know what you mean but you don't (shouldn't) need a 'diver's' watch just to float around in a swimming pool! For years I have swam wearing various Daytonas and other watches even though I have Submariners as well.

I would liken it to the following. If it's dry, I don't mind walking on some off-road trails in my dress shoes, but if I'm going up in the hills with waterproofs I wear more specialised footwear.

If, for instance, I go on holiday I usually take which ever watch is in rotation with me and I certainly do not take a second watch for if I decide to go into the pool. I know some people on here seem to need to take numerous watches when they go on short holidays, but I feel that any watch I have should be able to cope with anything I do.

Let's face it, if the Speedy was so good it passed all of the NASA tests and was chosen to go to the moon, it shouldn't be scared of six feet of water!

Just my thoughts!

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by ratty

Ahh but how many hundreds of feet do you go down to?

No one goes down hundreds of feet with any watch without a full team of diving personnel and decompression chambers. But if it matters, the 50 meter water resistance gets you over 150 feet and if you went that deep, you need to spend more time decompressing than the actual dive. The Speedmaster isn't built for this mission, it's built for space travel.

50 meters lets you enjoy space travel which no one talks about while letting you enjoy your vacations and leisure time at the beach or pool with the same watch.

[WatchThinker]

As swimming / vacationing with a watch is a choice, I don’t bring my speedy and risk an inadvertent pusher mishap. Risk v reward low when i have other divers. Brought my Doxa last vacation and was delighted.

I do wish they’d make an adjustable clasp, sport speedy some day w 200m or so wr and screw down crown/pushers..,,not as huge as the seamaster chrono. just durable with classic speedy look.

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

No one goes down hundreds of feet with any watch without a full team of diving personnel and decompression chambers. But if it matters, the 50 meter water resistance gets you over 150 feet and if you went that deep, you need to spend more time decompressing than the actual dive. The Speedmaster isn't built for this mission, it's built for space travel.

50 meters lets you enjoy space travel which no one talks about while letting you enjoy your vacations and leisure time at the beach or pool with the same watch.

Rightly or wrongly when Michelle said she goes swimming wearing her Speedy, I had assumed she meant in a poor or other shallow water, my comment was meant as a humorous one relating to shallow water! Obviously this attempt at humour failed 😞.

Don’t worry, I’ll stick to the day job.

By the way, was the Speedmaster “built for space travel”? My understanding was that it was initially intended for motor racing enthusiasts and that it was then chosen later on for space travel, not built for it!

In another thread relating to the NASA tests. I asked how those tests actually relate to what the watch and astronauts experience during space travel, I wouldn’t mind talking about what actually happens in space if anyone has any info or knowledge.

[anonymousmoose]

Originally Posted by DCheeta

I can go hiking in dress shoes if I want to, but why would I when I have a pair of good hiking boots at home?

Exactly my point too. Great analogy.

I guess if someone only has a Speedmaster and is going for a swim but wants to wear it for the day, it's gonna be fine. I wouldn't be wearing specifically for swimming, especially if I've got watches with a higher resistance.

Or just this this - 150m full size Speedmaster :-P

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

If you're panicking and nervous, well that's just you, it's not the watch's capabilities, let's not confuse the two.

Yes and no. Many people (I used to be one of them) assume that 100m water resistance means you are all good doing anything in the water at a depth of < 100m. That's way deeper than I dive or swim or anything like that so I always figured 200m was a pointless increase, and 300m was just showing off!

The problem is, these are static pressure ratings and do not account for dynamic pressure of hitting the water. A 100m rated watch can be compromised just diving off the high dive at your local pool, even though you may never reach a depth of more than 10'. 200m is the minimum rating to be safe for "high impact" water sports.

Just last week I jumped off a pontoon boat (from the deck, not the roof) with my IP68 phone in my pocket. I immediately realized it and was back on the boat within 30 seconds. Phone was completely destroyed and powered off, with visible water behind the glass. It's rated for 30 minutes at 5' but this was worthless against the impact of me hitting the water.

So I think someone using a watch which lacks a screw-down crown and which has a modest WR while swimming should be "cautious" at least. I, for example, suck at swimming and probably smack my wrists against the water much harder than necessary. Even with my water wings on, regular swimming likely counts as high impact for me ;)

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Yes and no. Many people (I used to be one of them) assume that 100m water resistance means you are all good doing anything in the water at a depth of < 100m. That's way deeper than I dive or swim or anything like that so I always figured 200m was a pointless increase, and 300m was just showing off!

The problem is, these are static pressure ratings and do not account for dynamic pressure of hitting the water. A 100m rated watch can be compromised just diving off the high dive at your local pool, even though you may never reach a depth of more than 10'. 200m is the minimum rating to be safe for "high impact" water sports.

Just last week I jumped off a pontoon boat (from the deck, not the roof) with my IP68 phone in my pocket. I immediately realized it and was back on the boat within 30 seconds. Phone was completely destroyed and powered off, with visible water behind the glass. It's rated for 30 minutes at 5' but this was worthless against the impact of me hitting the water.

So I think someone using a watch which lacks a screw-down crown and which has a modest WR while swimming should be "cautious" at least. I, for example, suck at swimming and probably smack my wrists against the water much harder than necessary. Even with my water wings on, regular swimming likely counts as high impact for me ;)

Okay here we go, I’m kind of bored so I’ll just have us a little long winded chat.

Yes I've been around long enough to know about about how dynamic water pressure may affect a watch but let’s understand for a minute that these aren’t dollar store watches. The swiss have been at this for well over a hundred years perfecting their trade. These are large watch companies and brands in todays world of internet savvy public that moves at light speed to take someone to court.

Manufacturers, reputable brands, static test watches yes but dynamic pressures are hugely exxagerated. If Omega says and tells “NASA” this watch is “waterproof” to 50m which is a wopping 164ft, I really have a hard time thinking that a person couldn’t take a splash in the 6ft deep hotel pool to cool off from sunbathing. Comparing an iPhone to a swiss watch is a huge stretch. People always go to extremes online in an effort to prove a point. Omega doesn't say the Speedmaster is a dive watch and no one here is saying you can go diving, snorkeling or that you should play water polo with your Speedmaster on.
Because Omega says the watch is waterproof to 164ft, I’m gonna have to side with the manufacturer on this and not the internet’s anectodal claims of fear.
I mean people hear say, well I won’t swim or get in the water with my Speedy because I have a leather band on it, now what does that even have to do with the watch lols.

We are not talking about a vintage 60’s Ed White and we’re not talking about going 70ft to do underwater repair on oil pipelines, or to use it to time your iron man competition two mile open water swim. We are NOT talking about extremes, we are talking about washing your hands, showering, going in the 4ft deep hotel pool, walking out to the beach in Dom Republic to cool off for five minutes while your wife is repeatedly telling you “to be careful” with swells, currents, sunscreen, jellyfish, wild kids, soft sand and that you’re not 16 anymore, etc. I refuse to believe that a Speedmaster can’t handle your vacation on the coast, unless your vacation on the coast consists of saturation diving wrecks or scuba diving in Cozumel….but guess what Omega doesn’t say the Speedy is qualified for that, it says you can take it to space and because astronauts usually land in water up to this point, that they will be all right with their Speedy provided they don’t land below about 160 whole feet of ocean water, or lets be modest, astronauts probably don’t want to land 60 feet below the surface of the ocean because their Speedmaster might accidentally for some reason the internet says get infiltrated by water.

My brother has a wedding in Jamaica in November, already decided the Speedmaster is coming with me. Now if I had a brand new 2022 Ed White 321, would I take that watch on vacation like I did my Deepsea a couple years ago and did everything water related I could without worry(my so had on a Datejust), no, I wouldn't, and I won’t be doing any of that with my Speedy in Jamaica either, because it’s not the right tool for the job and because replacing a damaged, lost, stolen or repairing an Ed White is a huge pita. But you’ll definitely catch me chilling by and in the pool(meaning a body of water consisting of at max 5ft at most hotels) making memories with my Speedy.


Here’s a great Hodinkee article on the subject:

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/wh...can-trust-them

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Okay here we go, I’m kind of bored so I’ll just have us a little long winded chat.

Yes I've been around long enough to know about about how dynamic water pressure may affect a watch but let’s understand for a minute that these aren’t dollar store watches. The swiss have been at this for well over a hundred years perfecting their trade. These are large watch companies and brands in todays world of internet savvy public that moves at light speed to take someone to court.

Manufacturers, reputable brands, static test watches yes but dynamic pressures are hugely exxagerated. If Omega says and tells “NASA” this watch is “waterproof” to 50m which is a wopping 164ft, I really have a hard time thinking that a person couldn’t take a splash in the 6ft deep hotel pool to cool off from sunbathing. Comparing an iPhone to a swiss watch is a huge stretch. People always go to extremes online in an effort to prove a point. Omega doesn't say the Speedmaster is a dive watch and no one here is saying you can go diving, snorkeling or that you should play water polo with your Speedmaster on.
Because Omega says the watch is waterproof to 164ft, I’m gonna have to side with the manufacturer on this and not the internet’s anectodal claims of fear.
I mean people hear say, well I won’t swim or get in the water with my Speedy because I have a leather band on it, now what does that even have to do with the watch lols.

We are not talking about a vintage 60’s Ed White and we’re not talking about going 70ft to do underwater repair on oil pipelines, or to use it to time your iron man competition two mile open water swim. We are NOT talking about extremes, we are talking about washing your hands, showering, going in the 4ft deep hotel pool, walking out to the beach in Dom Republic to cool off for five minutes while your wife is repeatedly telling you “to be careful” with swells, currents, sunscreen, jellyfish, wild kids, soft sand and that you’re not 16 anymore, etc. I refuse to believe that a Speedmaster can’t handle your vacation on the coast, unless your vacation on the coast consists of saturation diving wrecks or scuba diving in Cozumel….but guess what Omega doesn’t say the Speedy is qualified for that, it says you can take it to space and because astronauts usually land in water up to this point, that they will be all right with their Speedy provided they don’t land below about 160 whole feet of ocean water, or lets be modest, astronauts probably don’t want to land 60 feet below the surface of the ocean because their Speedmaster might accidentally for some reason the internet says get infiltrated by water.

My brother has a wedding in Jamaica in November, already decided the Speedmaster is coming with me. Now if I had a brand new 2022 Ed White 321, would I take that watch on vacation like I did my Deepsea a couple years ago and did everything water related I could without worry(my so had on a Datejust), no, I wouldn't, and I won’t be doing any of that with my Speedy in Jamaica either, because it’s not the right tool for the job and because replacing a damaged, lost, stolen or repairing an Ed White is a huge pita. But you’ll definitely catch me chilling by and in the pool(meaning a body of water consisting of at max 5ft at most hotels) making memories with my Speedy.


Here’s a great Hodinkee article on the subject:

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/wh...can-trust-them

First, this wasn't meant to get contentious. My primary point is that after 10+ years of a being a "watch nerd" I had never bothered to really read up on WR ratings. When I did, it was eye opening. I'm sure I'm not alone. It is simply wrong to think that a 100m WR watch implies you are good as long as you aren't more than 100m below the surface. I'm not suggesting you believe this, but many people do.

A few other points:

Cost or brand don't really come into play here. My phone didn't come from a dollar store either, but it died immediately.

Omega isn't telling NASA, or anybody, that any of their watches are "waterproof". In fact it's not even legal to describe a watch as anything more than water resistant. So there's not going to be any litigation over a failed watch either.

Yes, the Swiss make a decent product. But my Speedy Pro arrived new to the AD with a massive flake of metal on the dial that had to be removed. My 2020 Submariner has a bad movement. These things aren't perfect, not by a long shot.

So what's the bottom line? Can you take a brand new Speedy and go splish splash in the kiddie pool? Most likely, sure. But I wouldn't go tubing with it even if you never go more than 5' below the surface. There's a real possibility that it will be compromised if you hit the water hard.

This is a good read (written by a 40+ year watchmaker specializing in repairs of high end watches, who specifically says 50m is not suitable for swimming):

https://blog.watchdoctor.biz/2018/09...-in-watches-2/

[Andad]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Yes and no. Many people (I used to be one of them) assume that 100m water resistance means you are all good doing anything in the water at a depth of < 100m. That's way deeper than I dive or swim or anything like that so I always figured 200m was a pointless increase, and 300m was just showing off!

The problem is, these are static pressure ratings and do not account for dynamic pressure of hitting the water. A 100m rated watch can be compromised just diving off the high dive at your local pool, even though you may never reach a depth of more than 10'. 200m is the minimum rating to be safe for "high impact" water sports.

Just last week I jumped off a pontoon boat (from the deck, not the roof) with my IP68 phone in my pocket. I immediately realized it and was back on the boat within 30 seconds. Phone was completely destroyed and powered off, with visible water behind the glass. It's rated for 30 minutes at 5' but this was worthless against the impact of me hitting the water.

So I think someone using a watch which lacks a screw-down crown and which has a modest WR while swimming should be "cautious" at least. I, for example, suck at swimming and probably smack my wrists against the water much harder than necessary. Even with my water wings on, regular swimming likely counts as high impact for me ;)

I disagree with your dynamic pressure and water impact statement regarding watches.

Unless you can cite references?

I can only go by my own experience and have had no issues with my 14060M when diving from 10 metres.
Or even when really waving my arms quickly under water in the pool.

Think about your watch as being a strong metal case with seals that are well protected.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Andad

I disagree with your dynamic pressure and water impact statement regarding watches.



Unless you can cite references?



I can only go by my own experience and have had no issues with my 14060M when diving from 10 metres.

Or even when really waving my arms quickly under water in the pool.



Think about your watch as being a strong metal case with seals that are well protected.

There's a reference in the post right above yours. None of this is my opinion. I'm simply relaying information from a lifelong watchmaker. Feel free to ignore :)

Also, nobody is questioning whether it's safe to swim with a submariner, how is that a relevant datapoint?

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Okay here we go, I’m kind of bored so I’ll just have us a little long winded chat.

Yes I've been around long enough to know about about how dynamic water pressure may affect a watch but let’s understand for a minute that these aren’t dollar store watches. The swiss have been at this for well over a hundred years perfecting their trade. These are large watch companies and brands in todays world of internet savvy public that moves at light speed to take someone to court.

Manufacturers, reputable brands, static test watches yes but dynamic pressures are hugely exxagerated. If Omega says and tells “NASA” this watch is “waterproof” to 50m which is a wopping 164ft, I really have a hard time thinking that a person couldn’t take a splash in the 6ft deep hotel pool to cool off from sunbathing. Comparing an iPhone to a swiss watch is a huge stretch. People always go to extremes online in an effort to prove a point. Omega doesn't say the Speedmaster is a dive watch and no one here is saying you can go diving, snorkeling or that you should play water polo with your Speedmaster on.
Because Omega says the watch is waterproof to 164ft, I’m gonna have to side with the manufacturer on this and not the internet’s anectodal claims of fear.
I mean people hear say, well I won’t swim or get in the water with my Speedy because I have a leather band on it, now what does that even have to do with the watch lols.

We are not talking about a vintage 60’s Ed White and we’re not talking about going 70ft to do underwater repair on oil pipelines, or to use it to time your iron man competition two mile open water swim. We are NOT talking about extremes, we are talking about washing your hands, showering, going in the 4ft deep hotel pool, walking out to the beach in Dom Republic to cool off for five minutes while your wife is repeatedly telling you “to be careful” with swells, currents, sunscreen, jellyfish, wild kids, soft sand and that you’re not 16 anymore, etc. I refuse to believe that a Speedmaster can’t handle your vacation on the coast, unless your vacation on the coast consists of saturation diving wrecks or scuba diving in Cozumel….but guess what Omega doesn’t say the Speedy is qualified for that, it says you can take it to space and because astronauts usually land in water up to this point, that they will be all right with their Speedy provided they don’t land below about 160 whole feet of ocean water, or lets be modest, astronauts probably don’t want to land 60 feet below the surface of the ocean because their Speedmaster might accidentally for some reason the internet says get infiltrated by water.

My brother has a wedding in Jamaica in November, already decided the Speedmaster is coming with me. Now if I had a brand new 2022 Ed White 321, would I take that watch on vacation like I did my Deepsea a couple years ago and did everything water related I could without worry(my so had on a Datejust), no, I wouldn't, and I won’t be doing any of that with my Speedy in Jamaica either, because it’s not the right tool for the job and because replacing a damaged, lost, stolen or repairing an Ed White is a huge pita. But you’ll definitely catch me chilling by and in the pool(meaning a body of water consisting of at max 5ft at most hotels) making memories with my Speedy.


Here’s a great Hodinkee article on the subject:

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/wh...can-trust-them

I agree with this.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by ratty

I agree with this.

The question is why, or based on what? We know there are many who "believe" it will be ok. A quick search of watch maker and watch manufacturer sites produces many variations of a table which all indicate 50m is not for swimming:

WR2.jpg

WR4.png

WR1.jpg

WR3.jpg

Now to be fair, there are some other sources which say 50m is ok. Interestingly, some of those indicate that while 50m is ok for swimming it is not ok for bathing. Water temp is a factor as well

WR5.jpg

And then of course there is the topic of the current quality of your seals. My Speedy is 10 years old. It's timekeeping and amplitude are still perfect. But could its seals be less effective than the factory spec at this point? Absolutely. Even a 200m watch that is 10 years without a service could have an issue.

This last point is perhaps the most important for the cavalier among us. A 50m rating is - at best - marginal protection for swimming. If your watch isn't brand new, or freshly tested, then you really should be concerned about whether it even has that level of protection anymore.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

The question is why, or based on what? We know there are many who "believe" it will be ok. A quick search of watch maker and watch manufacturer sites produces many variations of a table which all indicate 50m is not for swimming:

Attachment 1313632

Attachment 1313633

Attachment 1313634

Attachment 1313635

Now to be fair, there are some other sources which say 50m is ok. Interestingly, some of those indicate that while 50m is ok for swimming it is not ok for bathing. Water temp is a factor as well

Attachment 1313637

And then of course there is the topic of the current quality of your seals. My Speedy is 10 years old. It's timekeeping and amplitude are still perfect. But could its seals be less effective than the factory spec at this point? Absolutely. Even a 200m watch that is 10 years without a service could have an issue.

This last point is perhaps the most important for the cavalier among us. A 50m rating is - at best - marginal protection for swimming. If your watch isn't brand new, or freshly tested, then you really should be concerned about whether it even has that level of protection anymore.

This is a perfect example of why you can't believe anything you see on the internet. Who are the sources of these graphs that disagree with one another. Any person with a powerpoint program could have made those.
It is frankly laughable. Before taking any of those as legitimate, I would need the source's origin. I will chock these up wholly in the anecdotal column until the reputable sources are cited. I find it hard to believe that a reputable diving or testing institute would write "duh" on legitimate source material.

And as I said above let's not use extremes, we're not talking about decade old watches, or watches with unknown service history. We are talking about functioning well maintained modern watches for which you follow the manufacturers recommended guidance on water resistance. If dynamic pressure was SUCH A BIG DEAL you would bet that one watch manufacturer would refer to this in their statements regarding waterproof and resistance, you will find zero, none, mention this, but on the internet a bunch of experts are always pushing this. Did you read the Hodinkee article and the collected data on dynamic pressures, that is not anecdotal. We also already know that most if not all reputable brands test their dive watches to 30% more than the rating especially if it's within ISO standards.

Rolex for example states it's watches are "waterproof".
More on this later.

[gnuyork]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

This is a good read (written by a 40+ year watchmaker specializing in repairs of high end watches, who specifically says 50m is not suitable for swimming):

https://blog.watchdoctor.biz/2018/09...-in-watches-2/

From what I understand and what most people believe regarding water resistance, 50 meters is generally thought of for most watches to not be actually 50 meters... as your charts suggest.

BUT...also, I understand that Omega is different (as I have read from at least one well regarded Omega watchmaker who agrees)... 50 meters means 50 meters (according to Omega)...pressure tested in water to the depth rating spec of every watch... And somewhere I think it says even their leather straps are OK to get wet. So if you fear swimming with your Speedmaster, it's not the watch, it's your perception of what it can handle, which is skewed...and I'm not referring to you specifically, Hi Boost, but overall I think people fear getting their Speedmaster wet, and it's unfounded. As long as the seals are good, and the pushers aren't activated underwater, it should be just fine, according to Omega. I really do think Omega loses sales of the Speedmaster because there are those that feel 50 meters isn't enough... it's plenty.

Originally Posted by HiBoost

And then of course there is the topic of the current quality of your seals. My Speedy is 10 years old. It's timekeeping and amplitude are still perfect. But could its seals be less effective than the factory spec at this point? Absolutely. Even a 200m watch that is 10 years without a service could have an issue.

Omega recommends having seals checked once a year. So in that case I wouldn't risk it if your Speedmaster is 10 years old and you haven't done so. But that's on you, not the lack of capabilities of the watch.

I have swum in the ocean plenty of times, and body surfed, (when I lived on the coast) with my 50 meters rated Hamilton Khaki, no screw-down crown... guess what... no issues, and it's not even an Omega.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

This is a perfect example of why you can't believe anything you see on the internet. Who are the sources of these graphs that disagree with one another. Any person with a powerpoint program could have made those.
It is frankly laughable. Before taking any of those as legitimate, I would need the source's origin. I will chock these up wholly in the anecdotal column until the reputable sources are cited. I find it hard to believe that a reputable diving or testing institute would write "duh" on legitimate source material.

I provided a link, to a watchmaker who has been in the business for 45 years and repairs 1000 Rolex watches a year. His site has multiple articles on water resistance and includes this chart:

WR3.jpg

There's nothing in my knowledge base that trumps the level of experience that this guy has. What about you? What are your watchmaking credentials? You have provided zero proof of anything. So just keep on telling me how laughable I am, that's super convincing. Or maybe call the watch doctor tomorrow and tell him he's an idiot too. That would only seem fair as he's the source. As I already said multiple times, none of what I've posted are my opinions or based on my testing (that should be obvious). But my thoughts also don't come from random anonymous people on forums. I'm relaying info from a professional in the field. Please cite something from a similarly experienced professional who says the opposite and then we'll have a real conversation on our hands. It's always my goal, on any topic, to know the right answer, even if it wasn't the answer I started with. So by all means, prove something to me. Barring any such updates, this has grown tiresome so I'll move along.

[gnuyork]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I provided a link, to a watchmaker who has been in the business for 45 years and repairs 1000 Rolex watches a year. His site has multiple articles on water resistance and includes this chart:

Attachment 1313695

There's nothing in my knowledge base that trumps the level of experience that this guy has. What about you? What are your watchmaking credentials? You have provided zero proof of anything. So just keep on telling me how laughable I am, that's super convincing. Or maybe call the watch doctor tomorrow and tell him he's an idiot too. That would only seem fair as he's the source. As I already said multiple times, none of what I've posted are my opinions or based on my testing (that should be obvious). But my thoughts also don't come from random anonymous people on forums. I'm relaying info from a professional in the field. Please cite something from a similarly experienced professional who says the opposite and then we'll have a real conversation on our hands. It's always my goal, on any topic, to know the right answer, even if it wasn't the answer I started with. So by all means, prove something to me. Barring any such updates, this has grown tiresome so I'll move along.

Are you ignoring Omega's very own chart?

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I provided a link, to a watchmaker who has been in the business for 45 years and repairs 1000 Rolex watches a year. His site has multiple articles on water resistance and includes this chart:

Attachment 1313695

There's nothing in my knowledge base that trumps the level of experience that this guy has. What about you? What are your watchmaking credentials?

I feel my credentials do trump him, they are the manufacturer Omega, METAS and NASA who tested the watch.
Respectfully, I feel these three organizations trump any one opinion of a watchmaker. Whether five or 45 years. I will however take into consideration his opinion as information. These entities have way more budget, facilities and expertise, and reputation certifying and justifying that 50m means 50m, it literally does. And two of these individuals are legally liable for this claim, the watchmaker, not so much. Also, If you take the internet experts at face value, dynamic pressures at 12 feet of water won't diminish 164ft of water resistance.
Also, this idea of swimming....there's swimming, the kind where you're in open water or pool lane with or without flailing people next to you while you battle currents and chops to complete a timed long distance swim. Then there's the kind of swimming a 30-60 year dad does where he gets out of his comfy chair, and goes in and does a ten meter dip in the water and comes back out to his comfy chair. I would feel very confident in saying that 95% of the people here fall into the later category.

You want to believe a watch maker, cool. But I will go with my three sources cited, and enjoy my watch worry free for casual water activities. As stated above, if you have an inherent fear or lack of confidence in your modern well maintained Speedmaster, it is you, not the watch.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

I feel my credentials do trump him, they are the manufacturer Omega, METAS and NASA who tested the watch.
Respectfully, I feel these three organizations trump any one opinion of a watchmaker. Whether five or 45 years. I will however take into consideration his opinion as information. These entities have way more budget, facilities and expertise, and reputation certifying and justifying that 50m means 50m, it literally does. And two of these individuals are legally liable for this claim, the watchmaker, not so much. Also, If you take the internet experts at face value, dynamic pressures at 12 feet of water won't diminish 164ft of water resistance.
Also, this idea of swimming....there's swimming, the kind where you're in open water or pool lane with or without flailing people next to you while you battle currents and chops to complete a timed long distance swim. Then there's the kind of swimming a 30-60 year dad does where he gets out of his comfy chair, and goes in and does a ten meter dip in the water and comes back out to his comfy chair. I would feel very confident in saying that 95% of the people here fall into the later category.

At the very least I feel like we are loosely drifting in the same direction. Perhaps mankind has some hope. I would only add the following...

There is no debate as to what 50m static pressure is. This is agreed upon by all organizations worldwide. There is no such thing as "50 Omega meters" versus "50 Rolex meters". There's just the simple fact that a 50m column of water produces a static pressure of 71 psi/4.9 bar. I think (hope) you and I are good there. We can also agree that a piece of test equipment can give a go/no-go result as to whether a watch case leaks at this pressure level.

What is not so black and white, and which I believe very easily explains the differing opinions between industry professionals on which real world conditions are acceptable, is what is the exact pressure (not depth) number for swimming? Using your own example, there are many things which could fall under this umbrella. Perhaps your "type 2" swimming generates 40psi of pressure and thus a "50m" watch is good. But maybe your "type 1" swimming is closer to 80psi and thus it's likely to leak. And maybe one brand whose caseback says "50m" actually knows that the watch leaks at 75psi, so this really is a hard limit. Whereas another brand knows their watch is good to 100psi but thinks "70m" looks weird and is using a conservative "50m" rating.

In all these scenarios, though, the depth rating is kind of an arbitrary number that I would argue can mislead people into thinking they "must" be safe (e.g. "the pool was only 12' deep, how could my 50m watch possibly have leaked??"). That was really the main point I tried to make here. Depending on the activity and the specifics, a "100m" WR watch might fail at 5m and a "50m" WR watch might be just fine at 10m. Agree?


Side question: The only NASA testing specifics I have seen are the Ragan ones from 1964 calling for 50ft (not meters) of water resistance. Have you found a source showing NASA verified 50m of pressure on a Speedy?

[amanbra]

Just to add to this thread on a tangent, so I thought I could wear my speedy into a pool and work it to a mate's house party (which had a pool), yeah nah... when it actually came down to it i took the watch off and left it safe away from the pool...

[Cougar1968]

I wear my 3861 in the pool all the time. I wouldn’t do any water sports with it besides snorkeling but that’s more for fear of a spring bar breaking etc. which could happen to any watch. I will definitely get it pressure tested once a year as Omega recommends. This chart is directly from Omega.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Just to add to this thread on a tangent, so I thought I could wear my speedy into a pool and work it to a mate's house party (which had a pool), yeah nah... when it actually came down to it i took the watch off and left it safe away from the pool...

Nothing wrong with that. I always err on the side of caution when ever available.