Real world water resistance Speedmaster

Archer · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
I can only take your lack of a genuine reply as telling me all I need to know, You were called out and have failed to hold your hand up when presented with the evidence.

As jcmartinez98 succinctly put it, I was referencing the stereotypical person who believes dive watches are not as prone to leakage as other watches are, and who believe that you must have a 100m rated watch to even consider getting it wet, as I've already explained at length in previous post answering you.

Your unwillingness to accept that answer doesn't make it untrue.

Stufflers Mom · Jan 3, 2019

Archer
As jcmartinez98 succinctly put it, I was referencing the stereotypical person who believes dive watches are not as prone to leakage as other watches are, and who believe that you must have a 100m rated watch to even consider getting it wet, as I've already explained at length in previous post answering you.

Your unwillingness to accept that answer doesn't make it untrue.

We both know that's not true, you reference exactly what I wrote, denied you directly referenced me and then when challenged that it was perhaps a coincidence you went on to deny that as well, I suppose tomorrow won't be Friday either.

Foo2rama · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
We both know that's not true, you reference exactly what I wrote, denied you directly referenced me and then when challenged that it was perhaps a coincidence you went on to deny that as well, I suppose tomorrow won't be Friday either.

Stufflers Mom · Jan 3, 2019

Foo2rama

That's somewhat unfair, I took exception to what Archer wrote and have called him out on BS, how is that trolling?

Archer · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
We both know that's not true, you reference exactly what I wrote, denied you directly referenced me and then when challenged that it was perhaps a coincidence you went on to deny that as well, I suppose tomorrow won't be Friday either.

You have done a masterful job at deflecting away any attention from the incorrect assertions you have made in this thread with regards to water resistance, and now want to make it into something else. I've explained myself adequately, so I invite you to have the last word because I know you'll want it.

Cheers, Al

Mouse_at_Large · Jan 3, 2019

What we can take from this is:-

a) Water resistance is not the same as waterproof.

b) Water resistance is generally tested conservatively in new watches i.e. it will be the minimum that it will tolerate. It will probably be OK to greater depths, but why take the risk?

c) As a watch ages, the water resistance will generally decrease as the components that maintain it degrade. Hence regular servicing and testing are recommended to ensure continued functionality.

d) There will always be outliers and the only way you'll really know if the watch is no longer water resistant is if it fails (or you are totally OCD and pressure test it every time before wearing 😲). Refer to c) above.

e) Dynamic pressure (and some other stuff) - read this https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/sigh-myth-busting-again-610734.html

ScubaPro · Jan 3, 2019

I have only heard anecdotally, going back many years, that Speedmasters and regular exposure to water aren't very compatible. Archer's point is as always very important as he sees these things regularly and knows that when properly maintained the watch can be safe as long as you have seals serviced at regular intervals. What I do know is this: I've been diving with Rolex and Tudor dive watches many years and still do, and my current program with a modern watch (like my Submariner ceramic) is service by Rolex every 5 years. I just did this with my LV, and while Rolex will only change the seals as part of a full overhaul it's worth the expense to me (As an aside, even with the cost of service the watch is stilll worth more than I paid for it back in 2013. Amazing, really). Anyway, If I had a Speedmaster and wore it daily and it was submerged or soaked on a regular basis, I wouldn't go longer than 3 years between overhauls. Splashed occasionally, 5 years. But it's really simple: like wiper blades on your car, seals wear out, get stiff, etc. over time. I get my dive watches pressure checked annually because my AD does it in about ten minutes, but my 5 year service interval remains, even if it passed the last pressure test because especially with the pressure cycles associated with diving the seals have a limited service life. It's the best way to keep the watch safe, and therefore your peace of mind.

Stufflers Mom · Jan 3, 2019

Archer
You have done a masterful job at deflecting away any attention from the incorrect assertions you have made in this thread with regards to water resistance, and now want to make it into something else. I've explained myself adequately, so I invite you to have the last word because I know you'll want it.

Cheers, Al

If my reasoning not to wear a Speedmaster in water due to concerns that I've little confidence in wearing a 50WR chronograph in this manner doesn't fit your experience then I can only offer an apology. That said you did reference my comments and have let yourself down by the repeated denials.

ac106 · Jan 3, 2019

Archer
You have done a masterful job at deflecting away any attention from the incorrect assertions you have made in this thread with regards to water resistance, and now want to make it into something else. I've explained myself adequately, so I invite you to have the last word because I know you'll want it.

Cheers, Al

Don’t steal my line!

(JK)

Df13 · Jan 3, 2019

Mouse_at_Large
What we can take from this is:-

a) Water resistance is not the same as waterproof.

b) Water resistance is generally tested conservatively in new watches i.e. it will be the minimum that it will tolerate. It will probably be OK to greater depths, but why take the risk?

c) As a watch ages, the water resistance will generally decrease as the components that maintain it degrade. Hence regular servicing and testing are recommended to ensure continued functionality.

d) There will always be outliers and the only way you'll really know if the watch is no longer water resistant is if it fails (or you are totally OCD and pressure test it every time before wearing 😲). Refer to c) above.

e) Dynamic pressure (and some other stuff) - read this https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/sigh-myth-busting-again-610734.html

f) Seals around high usage areas, like chrono pushers and manual winding crowns, will likely fail earlier than the seal around an auto's crown that is generally used less.

Since I don't take my watch off for the pool, ocean, showering, etc., that's what makes me a bit nervous in owning a Speedy.

dennisthemenace · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
We both know that's not true, you reference exactly what I wrote, denied you directly referenced me and then when challenged that it was perhaps a coincidence you went on to deny that as well, I suppose tomorrow won't be Friday either.

blufinz52 · Jan 3, 2019

dennisthemenace

Not even close imo.

gostang9 · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
If my reasoning not to wear a Speedmaster in water due to concerns that I've little confidence in wearing a 50WR chronograph in this manner doesn't fit your experience then I can only offer an apology.

Do you even read his posts? He has said over and over and over again that what you choose to do is up to you and he doesn't care.

Stufflers Mom
That said you did reference my comments and have let yourself down by the repeated denials.

The only thing you seem to have read from him is something the rest of us didn't read... maybe time to drop it? If he quoted you (as you insist he has, he has denied -- and I didn't believe he did) then why on earth would you be offended even if he had inadvertently referred to you?

He referenced a clear stereotype of a person who automatically assumes a diver is safe to wear to the beach while a chronograph is not.

He has explained very well that both diver and chrono have a seal that protects water ingress at the crown (with chrono having addition of pushers as well). He has explained that if water gets into a watch it is because of improper maintenance or actual damage, and that either/or can occur with both diver and chrono.

Anyhow, to now repeat what many others have already said, I also am out and will let you have the last word...

JimInOz · Jan 3, 2019

Foo2rama · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
That's somewhat unfair, I took exception to what Archer wrote and have called him out on BS, how is that trolling?

Because you’ve had multiple chances to de escalate this issue, and you continue to escalate the issue in a way no one else is.

blufinz52 · Jan 3, 2019

I have the highest regard and respect for Archer. An absolute wealth of knowledge as a watchmaker and one of the top contributors to this great forum. But IMO, he did use Stufflers' own words in one of his responses and I felt he was specifically addressing one of Stufflers' posts to make a point on the topic at hand. It seems that Stufflers Mom took it as an attack against him personally, and I can see why he did so.

dennisthemenace · Jan 3, 2019

Hopefully Stufflers Mom is not related to that prick Mike Stuffler that moderates the Omega forum at WUS.
Mind you , the more she whines the more convinced I am that she is. 😗

gostang9 · Jan 3, 2019

blufinz52
...But IMO, he did use Stufflers' own words in one of his responses and I felt he was specifically addressing one of Stufflers' posts to make a point on the topic at hand. It seems that Stufflers Mom took it as an attack against him personally, and I can see why he did so.

Archer quoted and responded to someone else, and he said "the guy" which I understood as clearly referencing the stereotype "guy".

Also I guess on some level when I read "mom" in a username I mentally connect it to female and when someone references "the guy" I mentally connect it to male... silly mental association but it's one I made and another reason I didn't see it as a distinct reference to a specific user (even it the thoughts and phrases were used by that user at some point in this thread).

Reddy_Kilowatt · Jan 3, 2019

Stufflers Mom
That's somewhat unfair, I took exception to what Archer wrote and have called him out on BS, how is that trolling?

Oh, FFS.

Duckie · Jan 3, 2019

blufinz52
I have the highest regard and respect for Archer. An absolute wealth of knowledge as a watchmaker and one of the top contributors to this great forum. But IMO, he did use Stufflers' own words in one of his responses and I felt he was specifically addressing one of Stufflers' posts to make a point on the topic at hand. It seems that Stufflers Mom took it as an attack against him personally, and I can see why he did so.

Agreed.
Now if only they could take a step back from the keyboard over this issue.
Perhaps it will simmer down.
Better still, acknowledgement of the others opinion with a commitment to stop will be best.
I think.

I think we simply need to observe the industry standards with regard to depth ratings and the guidelines associated with them.
If someone chooses to be more conservative. Then that's all well and good.

Real world water resistance Speedmaster

Archer

Stufflers Mom

Foo2rama

Stufflers Mom

Archer

Mouse_at_Large

ScubaPro

Stufflers Mom

ac106

Df13

dennisthemenace

blufinz52

gostang9

JimInOz

Foo2rama

blufinz52

dennisthemenace

gostang9

Reddy_Kilowatt

Duckie

Similar threads

Omega 300 - Restoring Water Resistance

Seamaster 2551.80 Water resistance

Annual water resistance test questions

Is there a type of water resistant gasket that fails more than others?

Why do people dismiss all vintage watches as non-water resistant

Speedmaster-like watch with better water resistance (no chronograph?)