Swimming w/ AP RO Chrono

[superdog]

Anyone ever done it?

Does AP have a stance on how well their 50m rating holds up?

Lots of data one way or another on the inter webs.

Curious about real world experience.

Thanks.

[walds11]

I plan on doing it soon, when I acquire my AP RO 15450ST (50 meter water resistance).

Swim with it no worries buddy.

Check out FAQ #2

https://www.audemarspiguet.com/en/se...life-and-care/

Can I swim with my watch?

Yes, if your watch is water-resistant. We encourage you to test its water-resistance on a yearly basis at our repair centers or boutiques. This control is complimentary.

[superdog]

This is awesome.

Thank you!!

[P2725TMB]

I wouldn't risk it personally. 50m water resistance is actually very little and if you're thrashing your arms around in water I suspect the localised pressure could exceed it. May well be fine, but I wouldn't with any of mine. Happy to clean them in water etc, no problem, but I wouldn't swim with them - if it does leak you'll have a big bill!

[singe89]

Don’t have a ROC but I do with all my offshores as well as my 15400. The 15305 is the only one that hasn’t been in the pool but that’s because it’s on a leather strap.

[Rolex addict]

While new and the seals are good, go for it. As with any watch, once the seals age and there is higher potential for water getting into the watch, I would not swim with it. Remember, pools are filled with chemicals that will severely corrode the inner parts of a watch quickly. Most public pools are dosed even higher because of all the little rug rags peeing in it.

[wach16]

I have gone swimming with my ROC. As long as you aren't diving deep and the seals have been checked recently you are good!

[Big Green]

The water wouldn’t be the issue for me. Scratching it on the way out or hanging by the edge of the pool would be my personal issue.

[RHIII]

I’ve honestly never swam with my ROC - only AP I’ve put in the water is the Diver and only Rolex have been Subs and SDs...lol.

Usually when on vacation and snorkeling or diving etc. if I’m just in the swimming pool - I’m always sans wristwatch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SMD]

Done it with RO and ROC. No issues.

[Chary]

Originally Posted by SMD

Done it with RO and ROC. No issues.

Not w my RO but yes with my ROO 44’s and 42’s...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grnvette65]

No prob

[tyler1980]

the original submariner was 100m WR and one of the first dive watches was the 50 fathoms which translates into 91m. So 50m is fine for a pool. Coming to any other conclusion makes zero sense.

[mnl]

I think 50m rating is more than enough for swimming. A few weeks ago I saw a video (or maybe it was a post I read) explaining the math behind this very well. Can’t seem to be able to find it again, but I was able to find this other post that basically says the same thing:

“The fact is, there is no discernible increase in water pressure on a watch’s gaskets no matter how hard you swing your arms. You’d have to move your arm 32 miles per hour in order to raise the pressure on your watch by one atmosphere of pressure.” Link: https://www.ausbt.com.au/seven-dive-...myths-debunked

I’ll keep searching for the other one I mentioned that actually has the math/proof and if I find it I’ll post it here.

[robbonds]

don't they actually test these watches much deeper than their rating? im 95% sure I heard that about Rolex..doubt much diff for AP

[bayerische]

Done it many times, no problems.

[dchang81]

AP reassured me that it is completely safe swimming. I've done it when traveling with my jumbo, even though many would cringe doing that. as long as you regularly pressure check it I don't see an issue.

[AK797]

100m to be safe, 50m if you like living on the edge...

[dchang81]

Originally Posted by AK797

100m to be safe, 50m if you like living on the edge...

how is it living on the edge when its rating is supposed to cover swimming.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by dchang81

how is it living on the edge when its rating is supposed to cover swimming.

Many instances where 50m is vulnerable, I wouldn't risk it, plenty of other watches where there is no doubt.

[harrymai22]

Originally Posted by P2725TMB

I wouldn't risk it personally. 50m water resistance is actually very little and if you're thrashing your arms around in water I suspect the localised pressure could exceed it.

You sir, either are an extreme thrasher or failed high school physics.

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by P2725TMB

I wouldn't risk it personally. 50m water resistance is actually very little and if you're thrashing your arms around in water I suspect the localised pressure could exceed it. May well be fine, but I wouldn't with any of mine. Happy to clean them in water etc, no problem, but I wouldn't swim with them - if it does leak you'll have a big bill!

Not how water pressure works.

[P2725TMB]

Originally Posted by harrymai22

You sir, either are an extreme thrasher or failed high school physics.

That's fine, I truly don't care any more. By all means take your 50m watches into the water and swim vigorously with them. I wouldn't, and mentioned that fact. I'm starting to get fed up with some people's attitudes when all I tried to do is raise a possible, and I don't think unreasonable, doubt. But hey, ignore me, go do what you want, it won't worry me...

[AshAP]

Originally Posted by harrymai22

You sir, either are an extreme thrasher or failed high school physics.

I know Chris personally and I can assure you that he is only being helpful to you and others on the forum and whilst comments like this may seem funny when you think them up they can actually backfire and make you look foolish.

In Swiss watch terms 50m water resistance doesn’t mean what most people think, I suspect Chris is aware of this and simply offering friendly advice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by AshAP

I know Chris personally and I can assure you that he is only being helpful to you and others on the forum and whilst comments like this may seem funny when you think them up they can actually backfire and make you look foolish.

In Swiss watch terms 50m water resistance doesn’t mean what most people think, I suspect Chris is aware of this and simply offering friendly advice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i still dont believe this. My earlier comment on a original sub or 50 fathoms would then not be dive watches.

I think its a case of watches being engineered better and therefore people have a new definition of what can enter the water since many watches now are capable of depths no human can even go. 50 years ago 100m (or 91m for the FF) was a dive watch. Today 100m is a snorkeling watch. People constantly say a GMT is not suitable for diving despite a WR the same as the first sub (which isn't even suitable for ocean swimming?). What has changed is the real question.

People are more worried today no doubt and need an ever increasing safety margin. I dont swim with my watches, but if i did i wouldn't be worried. I did use to be in the no swim camp with 50m though, but not so much anymore.

some good info here.https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/se...ths-deep-sixed

[lapince]

Originally Posted by P2725TMB

I wouldn't risk it personally. 50m water resistance is actually very little and if you're thrashing your arms around in water I suspect the localised pressure could exceed it. May well be fine, but I wouldn't with any of mine. Happy to clean them in water etc, no problem, but I wouldn't swim with them - if it does leak you'll have a big bill!

+1 I still remember one member here with an AP diver, 300 meter WR, who had checked pressure 6 months before, but still got water in it, had a serious bill after, I am fine to swim with a 6k Rolex, even if the bill might still be around 2k in case of water going in, but would never swim with any watches worth more than 8k, might be fine but might not be. Some charts say that under 100 you shouldn’t, I think they exaggerate a little and in theory 50 should be fine, but are you ready to take that risk? Me not with my 5712 which is 60m, so except if you don’t mind paying a few k in case something goes wrong I wouldn’t, or get a Rolex or Omega for water activities

D295358F-9524-4AFE-99DB-0286DBE5B157.jpeg

[AshAP]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i still dont believe this. My earlier comment on a original sub or 50 fathoms would then not be dive watches.

I think its a case of watches being engineered better and therefore people have a new definition of what can enter the water since many watches now are capable of depths no human can even go. 50 years ago 100m (or 91m for the FF) was a dive watch. Today 100m is a snorkeling watch. People constantly say a GMT is not suitable for diving despite a WR the same as the first sub (which isn't even suitable for ocean swimming?). What has changed is the real question.

People are more worried today no doubt and need an ever increasing safety margin. I dont swim with my watches, but if i did i wouldn't be worried. I did use to be in the no swim camp with 50m though, but not so much anymore.

some good info here.https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/se...ths-deep-sixed

This article is focused specifically on dive watches so in my opinion not the best source of info to base a £25,000 decision on. Just my opinion, personally I wouldn’t wear a RO Chrono into the shower, let alone a swimming pool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tomas Eriksson]

My AD accidentally pressure tested my 15400 at 10ATM last summer when I dropped it of for a pressure test and it passed like a champ.
Since then I have used my 15400 multiple times in water. I rather "risk" it in the water then from theft while traveling.

My divers goes into the pool/ocean as well. Maybe Im wreckless but I try to use my watches to the fullest.

[dchang81]

I get not wanting to swim with a 20k watch that is not a dive watch but audemars themselves state that their 50m rating of the Royal oak is perfectly fine for swimming. there's a large caveat that it needs to be tested and serviced regularly. my brother had his Omega seamaster get water in the case and my old breitling diver had condensation despite those being "dive" watches. but to say that a 50m AP is not capable of swimming is untrue. Patek states the same for the 5712 with its 60m resistance.

[SC11]

Everyone one has their opinion and so do different articles!
https://www.ablogtowatch.com/ask-wat...-ratings-mean/

Personally I’d want 100m WR plus to go swimming and then again it would be based on much I’d be willing to risk!

At the end of the day I’ve seen very few brands hold their hand up and cover water ingest so my view is regardless of WR I’d only be happy to take any watch past washing my hand in the sink if I’d be comfortable with the repair bill should it fail.

So based on that no I wouldn't take any RO for a swim, not to mention the chance of giving it a good knock getting in and out of the pool, just buy a Sub or PO from that, plus if my RO had water ingest the cost to service would be a nice chuck off one of these so a no brainer to me.