5712 vs 5726 water rating?

[debner4]

Anyone know why the 5712 is only 60m waterproof instead of 120m, which according to its own manual is due to the two pushers for the moon phase and date corrections. But the 5726 is rated to 120m even though it has four pushers to correct the day, month, date and moon phase?

Does this have something to do with the 240 movement in disguise? Other than that, it makes no sense.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? I believe the 5712 is the only Nautilus rated below 120m. I also think it is the only Nautilus with a 240 movement. Even the Aquanaut 5164 has a 120m rating even with a corrector pusher for the date and the two large pushers for the time function. Weird.

Any thoughts?

[Hollister]

I have Rolex for swimming, and I wouldn't swim with any PP, so irrelevant for me.

[Passionata]

Originally Posted by debner4

ther than that, it makes no sense.







Any thoughts?

5712 has snapback caseback the other modern Nautiluses are all screwback ,since all models are consist 3pcs cases instead of the original monoblocque case I doubt these watches are the best tools for any kind of water activity ,enjoying them with a Lady on your left and a cocktail on your right next to the pool will likely not damage any of these great references you have mentioned but for watersports rather take a Sub or an SMP.

[debner4]

I wouldn't swim with them either, but you never know when you will fall off a yacht...

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by debner4

I wouldn't swim with them either, but you never know when you will fall off a yacht...

[topcat30093]

Good question OP
I to have often wonder that
Thanks George for an interesting answer.

Originally Posted by Hollister

I have Rolex for swimming, and I wouldn't swim with any PP, so irrelevant for me.

I assume that you are referring to either the Sub or one of the SD models?
As the majority of the other Rolex models are only water resistant to 100M.
I agree that they are not a dive watch.
But let's give the watch some credit.
Personally, I have worn both the 5711A and 5167A swimming as well as snorkelling and surprisingly they didn't let any water in!

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by Passionata

5712 has snapback caseback the other modern Nautiluses are all screwback ,since all models are consist 3pcs cases instead of the original monoblocque case I doubt these watches are the best tools for any kind of water activity ,enjoying them with a Lady on your left and a cocktail on your right next to the pool will likely not damage any of these great references you have mentioned but for watersports rather take a Sub or an SMP.

Can't see the new 3 part case is any less waterproof than the original 2 piece case - clearly deep sea diving is not recommended! No problem wearing my Daytona rated at 100m or 5711 rated at 120m for any normal water sports.

3712 which used the 240 movement was also rated at a reduced 60m so I guess the difference is something to do with the pushers and the 240 movement rather than case design?

[lapince]

I wouldn't take the risk, but 5712 is 60m, and 5726 120 meters if I am not mistaken

[slashd0t]

I'm pretty sure you can take a dip with a 5712 and you'll be fine (as long as it has been water tested regularly), but I just got back from Maui and I took my 5712 for evening adventures and my Sub for daily snorkelling, pool and floating around in the ocean.

My Sub I don't even think about in the water - I'd be constantly worried about it with my 5712.

[Passionata]

Originally Posted by Russell996

Can't see the new 3 part case is any less waterproof than the original 2 piece case - clearly deep sea diving is not recommended! No problem wearing my Daytona rated at 100m or 5711 rated at 120m for any normal water sports.

3712 which used the 240 movement was also rated at a reduced 60m so I guess the difference is something to do with the pushers and the 240 movement rather than case design?

I really doubt the movement itself the issue since 5726 has pushers too and its WR 120m but still PP blames the pushers I blame the case-design other blaming the weather :-)
I think the moral of the story if a 30k watch deserves the risk of getting water damaged.