- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
hotwheels
·You can, your not listening. It’s just that they are not going to say you can use it for diving.
Flooded Seamaster Planet Ocean Chrono
- Posts
- 29,671
- Likes
- 76,830
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerMy point from the start is that the industry use wording which I believe is misleading, so if I want to dive to 100m would my watch be waterproof at that depth if it says 100m, yes? But other factors would mean it may fail. And if I can’t dive to 100m how else would I be taking it 100m down......misleading
You are confusing water resistance, which is a stand alone property of a case design, with suitability for a specific activity such as scuba diving.
"But other factors would mean it may fail" makes no sense at all in this context. It means it might not be suitable for the task, so you may run out of air, but your watch won't leak unless you take it deeper than the rating...
I am giving you the opinion of a normal consumer, who will be mislead into buying a watch to dive in
If someone buys an AT rated to 150 m to dive in, then they probably shouldn't be going diving...
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
hotwheels
·No one (apart from @Hotwheelbill) is saying it will fail. The watch will be fine at 100m. The issue is it can't be labelled as suitable for scuba as it doesn't have a uni directional bezel as required by ISO 6425.
One thing I'll partially agree with you on however, is the free diving section. I'm not sure why they separate it from simple immersion in water (down to specified depth rating).
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
hotwheels
·You are confusing water resistance, which is a stand alone property of a case design, with suitability for a specific activity such as scuba diving.
"But other factors would mean it may fail" makes no sense at all in this context. It means it might not be suitable for the task, so you may run out of air, but your watch won't leak unless you take it deeper than the rating...
If someone buys an AT rated to 150 m to dive in, then they probably shouldn't be going diving...
- Posts
- 29,671
- Likes
- 76,830
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerWhat else would I use the watch for at 100m down? I’m not confused as above would I be covered by the warranty?
If you had an Omega that's rated for 100m on your wrist while you were diving (assuming a dive computer on the other wrist to keep you alive) and the Omega failed at anything less than 100 meters, then yes I would expect Omega to cover it under warranty provided it had been properly checked and maintained.
That doesn't make the Omega suitable as a dive, watch, and it doesn't make the depth rating misleading in any way...you can take it down that far, but not use it as a dive watch.
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
hotwheels
·My view is you would not be covered by warranty looking at the above chart, which brings me back to my original point, using depth to promote the watch is definitely misleading, if it’s not a dive watch fair enough so why do they put the 100m on?? to cover me if I drop it in the sea and it falls that deep? Of course not. Why use the depth and water resistance to help sell a watch which clearly can’t be used under warranty for that purpose...................
- Posts
- 5,522
- Likes
- 9,437
BlackTalon
··This Space for RentChange ID to 'spinningwheels'? 😁
This topic has been discussed many time in the past, in numerous threads on OF you can read. Your take on that chart is contrary to how it really works (which Archer has already covered). Your opinion on what it means and what would happen 'in court' does not reflect how it really works.
This topic has been discussed many time in the past, in numerous threads on OF you can read. Your take on that chart is contrary to how it really works (which Archer has already covered). Your opinion on what it means and what would happen 'in court' does not reflect how it really works.
- Posts
- 29,671
- Likes
- 76,830
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerMy view is you would not be covered by warranty looking at the above chart,
If you are going to just decide this for yourself and ignore all the facts, that's up to you. The good thing is you don't decide Omega's warranty claims...
if it’s not a dive watch fair enough so why do they put the 100m on??
Because as has been said many times, it's capable of going to that depth without leaking. If they simply left it blank with no depth rating, would that be better for you? If so, then how would you even know if it was okay for hand washing or to go swimming with it? It's simply information that lets you know what the watch is capable of.
But feel free to contact Jesse Ventura and get him on the case...
- Posts
- 13,199
- Likes
- 22,953
Davidt
·Well several people, including an Omega certified watchmaker are telling you otherwise, but you clearly have your own opinion and aren't interested in arguments/evidence to the contrary.
- Posts
- 18,202
- Likes
- 27,530
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...No one (apart from @Hotwheelbill) is saying it will fail. The watch will be fine at 100m. The issue is it can't be labelled as suitable for scuba as it doesn't have a uni directional bezel as required by ISO 6425.
One thing I'll partially agree with you on however, is the free diving section. I'm not sure why they separate it from simple immersion in water (down to specified depth rating).
A few things actually movement might fail from temp or become inaccurate from temp below freezing. Pressure may cause impingement on hands and stop the watch.
Both of these are maintaining water resistance but the watch would fail.
- Posts
- 2,043
- Likes
- 5,505
Mouse_at_Large
·I think the whole diving thing is a bit moot, because unless you are a really dedicated free diver, then you are never going to dive to those depths without specialised equipment. Even with specialised equipment, there are limits - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_diving
That having been said, and as Archer has pointed out, the depth rating is the depth to which you can take the watch and expect it to maintain water resistance. However, it does not mean it's a dive watch, as these must have certain characteristics and undergo specific testing and certification under ISO 6425.
That having been said, and as Archer has pointed out, the depth rating is the depth to which you can take the watch and expect it to maintain water resistance. However, it does not mean it's a dive watch, as these must have certain characteristics and undergo specific testing and certification under ISO 6425.
- Posts
- 18,202
- Likes
- 27,530
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...I am listening, and I do understand, I am giving you the opinion of a normal consumer, who will be mislead into buying a watch to dive in as the industry throw around depth figures that unless you look into more closely will come unstuck, how do you think you would get on in court if your watch failed reading the chart above..........good for 100m yes, but you can’t dive to that depth as some other factor may come into play as you have clearly stated, then why oh why use the depth to sell the watch, the only way your getting that deep is diving !!! Sorry your not listening.
No your not. From a resistance standpoint it works. From a legal standpoint it is unsuitable for the purpose.
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
hotwheels
·Change ID to 'spinningwheels'? 😁
This topic has been discussed many time in the past, in numerous threads on OF you can read. Your take on that chart is contrary to how it really works (which Archer has already covered). Your opinion on what it means and what would happen 'in court' does not reflect how it really works.
Ok I haven’t seen those threads and your average consumer wouldn’t have either. spinningwheels I like that,
Well several people, including an Omega certified watchmaker are telling you otherwise, but you clearly have your own opinion and aren't interested in arguments/evidence to the contrary.
This is not just about Omega, it’s the whole watch industry, I love Omega and my Planet Ocean for example, and I’m sure they are all good for what most people buy them for, what I’m not so sure about is a very grey area that you have all side stepped (not spun like me) ......
Don’t use 100m use 10m and warranty it, most will probably go no deeper than that, just like most range rovers don’t leave the tarmac.......
But if your going to use depth as a big thing then warranty it and give it all the components required to do that job.
Water resistance is not waterproof, then make it waterproof and then warranty it,
Some are, so no problems with those it’s the 30m to 100m range for example I’m not sure about,
A luxury watch is a significant investment so whilst of course I understand all of the points and experts here what you are missing is if there is an issue with the watch a less reputable manufacturer than say omega may point you to their terms and not repair or refund your watch and I don’t think you would do well in court ................but I could be wrong? Lol
Edited:
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
- Posts
- 18,202
- Likes
- 27,530
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...Then why use those terms to promote something that is not warranted
- Posts
- 13,199
- Likes
- 22,953
Davidt
·"A manufacturer may point you to their terms", "I don't think you'd do well in court".
Is this the basis for your concern/argument or do you have anything more substantial. People are presenting you with facts, and expert opinions and your counter argument is basically "no, I don't think that's true".
Is this the basis for your concern/argument or do you have anything more substantial. People are presenting you with facts, and expert opinions and your counter argument is basically "no, I don't think that's true".
- Posts
- 29,671
- Likes
- 76,830
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerBut if your going to use depth as a big thing then warranty it and give it all the components required to do that job.
So you want a rotating bezel on the AT? In addition to being happy you don't decide the warranty claims, I'm also glad you are not in their design department...
I think the stance you are taking can be summarized by "I wanna complain!"
- Posts
- 13,199
- Likes
- 22,953
Davidt
·A few things actually movement might fail from temp or become inaccurate from temp below freezing. Pressure may cause impingement on hands and stop the watch.
Both of these are maintaining water resistance but the watch would fail.
Surely that's not correct? A watch being rated to 100m must surely be able to withstand not just water ingress, but also the associated changes in pressure and temperature.
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
hotwheels
·"A manufacturer may point you to their terms", "I don't think you'd do well in court".
Is this the basis for your concern/argument or do you have anything more substantial. People are presenting you with facts, and expert opinions and your counter argument is basically "no, I don't think that's true".[/QUOTE
What could be more of a concern than loosing thousands of pounds falling foul of misleading advertising and a misleading warranty?
Answer the question if you can, if not don’t attempt to put words into my mouth there are plenty there already,
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 1,222
Similar threads
- Posts
- 65
- Views
- 3K
- Posts
- 0
- Views
- 56
- Posts
- 1
- Views
- 1K
- Posts
- 0
- Views
- 44
