Have always wondered about this

[Atl]

All,
The Submariner has the extra gaskets in it's crown and stem tube, and I always wanted to know if you left the crown unscrewed, is it still water resistant? And if so, how resistant? A few feet of water?

[deserted]

From my understanding it's not good to leave the crown unscrewed, but then again i don't swim with my watch on , i just wear it......Someone will be along with your answer shortly.

[suziedog]

Originally Posted by Atl

All,
The Submariner has the extra gaskets in it's crown and stem tube, and I always wanted to know if you left the crown unscrewed, is it still water resistant? And if so, how resistant? A few feet of water?

Never leave the crown unscrewed on any Rolex watch, you are asking for trouble.

[mailman]

Originally Posted by Atl

All,
The Submariner has the extra gaskets in it's crown and stem tube, and I always wanted to know if you left the crown unscrewed, is it still water resistant? And if so, how resistant? A few feet of water?

If the crown happened to pop out, then yes it's still water resistant. A former member had an Exp II which has a twinlock pop out in the pool. When he realized it he screwed it back in and the watch was fine.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Atl

All,
The Submariner has the extra gaskets in it's crown and stem tube, and I always wanted to know if you left the crown unscrewed, is it still water resistant? And if so, how resistant? A few feet of water?

If the crown is unscrewed, any Oyster Rolex is still water resistant.......... just not to the same pressures..

A Twinlock has a main O-ring inside the tube, around the stem, and a Triplock has 2 O-rings inside the tube around the stem.. These O-rings are the main water barrier in your watch and the crown is simply a lid over the top..

Here is where all the o-rings to keep out water are located.. The tube is on the left with a cross section of the o-rings, and the stem is on the right.

RolexCrownP01.jpg

[watchmaker]

While it is always best to keep it screwed down, water resistane does not come from the screw down crowns. It is purely the gaskets. The screw down feature is there as a fail safe, incase you pull the crown out under water.

When water testing with a Witschi ALC2000, perhaps the industry standard dry tester. Watches are tested with the crown unscrewed.

Now think of an Omega SMP. The crown is essentially a twin lock. No outer gasket. So it is safe to say that even on a Submariner the outer gasket provides little more than 'extra protection' rather than being fundamental to the water resistance.

[Lamone]

In a twinlock (ie: 1675), where are the O-rings located?

[Alcan]

Originally Posted by Lamone

In a twinlock (ie: 1675), where are the O-rings located?

Here.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

While it is always best to keep it screwed down, water resistane does not come from the screw down crowns. It is purely the gaskets. The screw down feature is there as a fail safe, incase you pull the crown out under water.

When water testing with a Witschi ALC2000, perhaps the industry standard dry tester. Watches are tested with the crown unscrewed.

Now think of an Omega SMP. The crown is essentially a twin lock. No outer gasket. So it is safe to say that even on a Submariner the outer gasket provides little more than 'extra protection' rather than being fundamental to the water resistance.

Sorry Scott, I don't agree that the triplock is rated to 500 bar with the crown unscrewed? Others have indicated that 25 metres is about the max depth with crown unscrewed on a serviced triplock Rolex.

If you are correct why would it be a problem to unscrew an SD crown at say 1220 metres of pressure. I am also a bit confused about 'water testing' with a 'dry tester'? Can you give me details of this test?

The Witschi ALC2000 has a vacuum/pressure range of -0.8 bar vacuum to 10 bar pressure.
The 10 bar might be enough to test my Pepsi but how does it test an SD (for example) to >122 bar?

Eddie

[unclesallie]

amazing watches, those subs! thanks to all of you for the technical information/reminders.

[mgm]

Originally Posted by unclesallie

amazing watches, those subs! thanks to all of you for the technical information/reminders.

Thanks indeed. It is good to know that the watch can be left hacking without asking water in, and it is a great reinforcement not to screw the crown down beyond snug.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by directioneng

Sorry Scott, I don't agree that the triplock is rated to 500 bar with the crown unscrewed? Others have indicated that 25 metres is about the max depth with crown unscrewed on a serviced triplock Rolex.

If you are correct why would it be a problem to unscrew an SD crown at say 1220 metres of pressure. I am also a bit confused about 'water testing' with a 'dry tester'? Can you give me details of this test?

The Witschi ALC2000 has a vacuum/pressure range of -0.8 bar vacuum to 10 bar pressure.
The 10 bar might be enough to test my Pepsi but how does it test an SD (for example) to >122 bar?

Eddie

I said water test, as a generic term for the procedure. AND, I am aware that an ALC2000 has a test range of -0.8 +10 bar. If a submariner, properly serviced, and seals changed, passes at -0.8 and 10bar, it will not fail in the water (wet test) at 30 bar. The greater the pressure (provided the case is designed to take it, and the sub is) the more water resistant the watch is. ie, if it is going to leak, it will leak in the first 2 feet.

Now, first and foremost, I did say that so long as the crown is unscrewed but NOT pulled out, there should be no ill effect (provided new seals). I would not recommend this, and the crown should always be screwed down. But, screwing the crown down is a safety measure, to stop you pulling the crown out. It does not provide the water resistance. Take the HEV on the SD or DeepSea. It relies on gaskets, not a thread lock.

And to finish off, the reason I am so certain is because a) I do this for a living, and b) I also wondered the same question once, and having access to my own watches, and wet pressure testers that can dole out 125bar, I put to the test my personal SD, Sub, and SMP.

Now like I said, I did this with my watches, and I do this professionally. I want to stress that I dont and wont post hear say. If I cant do it/have not done it, I wont say it can be done. Theres enough bad information on the net as it is.

[Brushpup]

Experts are here for a reason and it's not to argue with those of us who never opened up a fine watch. I've seen true experts leave other types of forums over this very thing and I don't blame them. I think we are damn lucky to have them posting here and freely sharing their knowledge and experience for NOTHING but being nice.

[Andad]

Well Patrick, you are entitled to your opinion as am I.

It seemed that I was being asked to accept that a watch that passes a dry pressure test at 10 bar will pass a wet test at 30 bar.
Sorry, I don't accept that, even from an expert because that is asking me to believe that air pressure is 3 times greater than the same water pressure???
As for saying that there is a difference between 'the crown being unscrewed - and the crown being unscrewed but NOT pulled out' again I don't accept that either.
I would agree that at depths of 300m, 1200m & 3900m the crown could be hard to pull out.

I have now been advised by watchmaker and I quote that:
"if it is going to leak, it will leak in the first 2 feet".
That statement doesn't leave any room for error or misunderstanding.

I don't believe it. I don't believe that this applies to all Rolex watches and if it does then why not just test them all to 3 ft?
Am I expected to believe that a Rolex Sub for example will just change from fully sealed and tested at 300m to leaking at 2 feet. Of course it doesn't. and maybe that is not what watchmaker meant?
As for the HEV on the SD or DeepSea. It relies on gaskets, not a thread lock. I agree but this is a 'one way' valve and the efficiency of this seal improves as the watch goes deeper and deeper.
I wasn't rude to watchmaker and I apologise if he thinks I was. I simply indicated my disagreement and asked for more details.
If any of the mods have a problem with that then I would expect they would tell me.

Why would Rolex bother making one of these?

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ht=dssd+tester

[Nods]

I have now been advised by watchmaker and I quote that:
"if it is going to leak, it will leak in the first 2 feet".
That statement doesn't leave any room for error or misunderstanding.


I agree with this statement to a point. If a watch is going to leak it will do so as soon as it is under water. As we get deeper though pressure not water leaking in is the problem. There comes a depth (pressure) at which the materials fail. This is true of a submarine or a watch. Therefor Submarines and divers watches have safe dive depths which are way before the designed structural fail of the bulkhead, casing or crystal.

[watchmaker]

Dont worry, I dont think your being rude. I just doubt you understand exactly my point. It is difficult to explain properly in a forum.

As simple as I can;

Every watch I service is dry tested in the ALC2000 (for Rolex that is -0.8 +10 bar)
And wet tested to 125% the rated depth.

In my experience, and that of my colleagues, I have NEVER known a watch that passed the dry test to fail in the water. And I mean never.

I am not for one second implying that a dry 10bar=a wet 30bar. All I am saying is that no watch of mine has ever failed in the wet tester after passing the dry 10bar -0.8bar.

And secondly, I have told that I have tested my own watches crown unscrewed, to 125% pressure with no water penetration.

Feel free to agree or disagree. As was mentioned by Brushpup, I am sharing with you for free, my own experience from working as a watchmaker. What you take from my information is up to the individual.

Oh, and as for my statement about a watch failing in 2 feet of water. I did not mean (or say) that a watch that passes at 300m will fail at 2 feet. If a watch will fail AT ALL, it will leak as soon as it hits the water. AND, a watch that fails at 2feet, could go on to pass at 300m, as the pressure creates a better seal.

[Rikki]

Also dry testing at first is the corect way because if an errror has been made in assembly putting it directly into a 4000 foot wet test could be a disaster. The first pump of the handle will flood the watch movement and all. Also any watch that I have tested to 10 bars has never failed a 125 wet test. Also I think air is thinner than water and more apt to penetrate a seal that water would be I'm thinking. Rik

[R.mojo]

What i heard from my AD, there is gasket that still blocks the water from comming in to a certain pressaure.
but for your own peace of mind i should always screw it in.