100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
StrappedUp
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 2575
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 2:14 pm
CW-watches: 0
Location: South Wales

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by StrappedUp »

Bungle-ator wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:24 amIt's no more or less water resistant to 150m than a watch with a screw down crown.
Unless that watch was 'waterproof' to 150m :lol:
Ryan

For sale
Nomos Tangente 139
Blackdog
Senior
Senior
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:47 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Netherlands

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Blackdog »

JymKhana wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:01 am I just realized that their calculations are off by 1 atm although clearly they don't mean that 30 meters should be taken to 30 meters. It should be noted that at 30 meters of water you are at 4 atm, not 3. :lol:
Technically, you're right. at 30m down there are 4 bars of absolute pressure, but the subject of the WR is overpressure.

Just like it happens with your lungs when you dive, inside the watch thee is not vaccum, it's filled with air at sea-level pressure (i.e. 1bar). So at sea-level the pressures inside and outside of the watch are equalized.

Then, when you take it down to 30m it is subjected to 3bars of overpressure. This is what the WR is related to.
Blackdog
Senior
Senior
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:47 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Netherlands

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Blackdog »

Bungle-ator wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:24 am
johncolescarr wrote: Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:57 pm I’ll admit to being a bit scared of taking my C65 GMT with 150m water resistance swimming, this is mostly because of the lack of screw down crown
That's just daft. It's no more or less water resistant to 150m than a watch with a screw down crown.
True, but a screw-down crown adds a level of mechanical protection too. Ensuring that the crown will not move underwater, making the stem wiggle against the seals in the tube.

Personally, I only felt confident with the WR of the Dartmouth when they transitioned to the screw-down crown. As a matter of fact I was diving with mine a couple of weeks ago.

But you're right: swimming should not be an issue.
Bungle-ator
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 2:17 pm

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Bungle-ator »

Blackdog wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:02 am
Bungle-ator wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:24 am
johncolescarr wrote: Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:57 pm I’ll admit to being a bit scared of taking my C65 GMT with 150m water resistance swimming, this is mostly because of the lack of screw down crown
That's just daft. It's no more or less water resistant to 150m than a watch with a screw down crown.
True, but a screw-down crown adds a level of mechanical protection too. Ensuring that the crown will not move underwater, making the stem wiggle against the seals in the tube.

Personally, I only felt confident with the WR of the Dartmouth when they transitioned to the screw-down crown. As a matter of fact I was diving with mine a couple of weeks ago.

But you're right: swimming should not be an issue.
I'm going to respectfully disagree here. The pressure from water will press a push down crown towards the watch, not away from it.
User avatar
rkovars
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 7:56 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: New England, US

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by rkovars »

Bungle-ator wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 1:15 pm
Blackdog wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:02 am
Bungle-ator wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:24 am

That's just daft. It's no more or less water resistant to 150m than a watch with a screw down crown.
True, but a screw-down crown adds a level of mechanical protection too. Ensuring that the crown will not move underwater, making the stem wiggle against the seals in the tube.

Personally, I only felt confident with the WR of the Dartmouth when they transitioned to the screw-down crown. As a matter of fact I was diving with mine a couple of weeks ago.

But you're right: swimming should not be an issue.
I'm going to respectfully disagree here. The pressure from water will press a push down crown towards the watch, not away from it.
I don't think he is inferring the water pressure does it rather the user does inadvertently by either knocking it or putting pressure on it with the back of your hand.
Current CW = C65 Trident Vintage GMT, C65 Dartmouth, C60 Trident Ombré COSC LE, C65 Super Compressor

In Review:

2 More CW's on the short list! (This is pretty much a lie - I have at least 17 CW Tabs open at the moment!)
User avatar
TigerChris
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:51 pm
CW-watches: 1

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by TigerChris »

I’m just gonna put out there that smart watches, Apple watches etc… with a WR of 50m are advertised as being able to be used to swim and track lengths whilst swimming. I do think people try to over complicate things at times.
Bungle-ator
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 2:17 pm

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Bungle-ator »

[/quote]

I don't think he is inferring the water pressure does it rather the user does inadvertently by either knocking it or putting pressure on it with the back of your hand.
[/quote]

I'm not sure how often you or him have done that but I've never experienced it before.
User avatar
rkovars
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 7:56 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: New England, US

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by rkovars »

I have had a couple watches pressure test just fine but get water ingress (and know people that also have too). The only conclusion is that the crown was pulled. Now, I'm not arguing that you shouldn't take them in the water. Far from it. I am in the camp that the WR is the same regardless of the crown function (screw down or not). It is just the point that a screw down crown cannot be disengaged as easily as a push pull in use. Would this happen just swimming? I doubt it. I have had a crown pulled just taking my hand out of my pocket many times though. I can see how it could happen rough housing around in the surf or when diving having it get levered open on a piece of equipment. It is a piece of mind thing.

I am in the habit of getting my watches that get wet tested pretty much every year. I am also in the habit of giving the crown a push/ or twist before getting in.
Current CW = C65 Trident Vintage GMT, C65 Dartmouth, C60 Trident Ombré COSC LE, C65 Super Compressor

In Review:

2 More CW's on the short list! (This is pretty much a lie - I have at least 17 CW Tabs open at the moment!)
User avatar
rkovars
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 7:56 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: New England, US

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by rkovars »

TigerChris wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:51 pm I’m just gonna put out there that smart watches, Apple watches etc… with a WR of 50m are advertised as being able to be used to swim and track lengths whilst swimming. I do think people try to over complicate things at times.
Apple watches are pretty well sealed. You can't pull out the crown either. I wonder if the limiting factor on WR for the Apple watch is the external speakers. Seems like enough pressure would damage the cones.

Two great videos that show how watches fail at depth:




This one just came out a couple of days ago:

Current CW = C65 Trident Vintage GMT, C65 Dartmouth, C60 Trident Ombré COSC LE, C65 Super Compressor

In Review:

2 More CW's on the short list! (This is pretty much a lie - I have at least 17 CW Tabs open at the moment!)
Blackdog
Senior
Senior
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:47 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Netherlands

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Blackdog »

Bungle-ator wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:57 pm
I don't think he is inferring the water pressure does it rather the user does inadvertently by either knocking it or putting pressure on it with the back of your hand.
[/quote]

I'm not sure how often you or him have done that but I've never experienced it before.
[/quote]
Happens. Specially if you're wearing the watch over a wetsuit.
Blackdog
Senior
Senior
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:47 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Netherlands

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Blackdog »

rkovars wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:34 pm I don't think he is inferring the water pressure does it rather the user does inadvertently by either knocking it or putting pressure on it with the back of your hand.
Correct. With the back of the hand, or rubbing against a wetsuit (I wear the watches on my right wrist).
Blackdog
Senior
Senior
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:47 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Netherlands

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Blackdog »

rkovars wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:34 pm I don't think he is inferring the water pressure does it rather the user does inadvertently by either knocking it or putting pressure on it with the back of your hand.
Correct. With the back of the hand, or rubbing against a wetsuit (I wear the watches on my right wrist).

Got a Steinhart Ocean 1 flooded as the crown became unscrewed by rubbing against a wetsuit, and the stem wiggled in place.
User avatar
rkovars
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 7:56 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: New England, US

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by rkovars »

Blackdog wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 4:09 pm
rkovars wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:34 pm I don't think he is inferring the water pressure does it rather the user does inadvertently by either knocking it or putting pressure on it with the back of your hand.
Correct. With the back of the hand, or rubbing against a wetsuit (I wear the watches on my right wrist).

Got a Steinhart Ocean 1 flooded as the crown became unscrewed by rubbing against a wetsuit, and the stem wiggled in place.
I can totally see that happening especially with the crown pointed toward the forearm. The new Serica 5303 allows you to select the crown direction at order time (3 or 9 o'clock). Nice little touch.
Current CW = C65 Trident Vintage GMT, C65 Dartmouth, C60 Trident Ombré COSC LE, C65 Super Compressor

In Review:

2 More CW's on the short list! (This is pretty much a lie - I have at least 17 CW Tabs open at the moment!)
User avatar
nbg
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 9951
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:43 pm
CW-watches: 12
Location: UK

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by nbg »

My key takeaway from this is to determine which watch to wear swimming is: :)

- Wear a watch that is stated as waterproof, providing it has been serviced within the past 10 years, or
- Wear a watch stated as water resistant to at least 100m, providing it has had a pressure test within the previous 2 years, or
- Wear a Casio F-91W

Neil
Other watch forums of interest:
TZ-UK
Blackdog
Senior
Senior
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:47 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Netherlands

Re: 100M waterproof vs 150M water resistant?

Post by Blackdog »

rkovars wrote: Tue Aug 31, 2021 4:13 pm I can totally see that happening especially with the crown pointed toward the forearm. The new Serica 5303 allows you to select the crown direction at order time (3 or 9 o'clock). Nice little touch.
Those Serica's are nice !

In fact any ETA/Sellita based non-date can be easily converted to "crown@9".
Post Reply