Forums Latest Auctions Members
  1. Tritium

    Tritium May 22, 2013

    Posts
    1,178
    Likes
    1,500
    I have a doubt about vintage dressier seamasters from 50/60's and the possibility of wearing them in the swiming pool or having a shower. I've heard is not recomended.
    I wonder if by changing crown and back gasket won't be enough. Assuming that the case has no damage, and the crystal is original or correct replacement.
    If they were originally water resist, which are the factors that made them non wr after 40/50 years?
     
  2. cicindela

    cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member May 22, 2013

    Posts
    14,442
    Likes
    21,145
    Al could give an authoritative response to this, but one factor is the integrity of the case itself. The case and or back can actually get imperceptibly twisted or bent out specification. This can affect the ability of the gasket/O-ring and crystal to maintain an even water tight seal. Also the case edges can be corroded (yes even stainless) and not make an even tight seal.
     
  3. ulackfocus

    ulackfocus May 22, 2013

    Posts
    26,179
    Likes
    26,631
    My 40+ year old 18ct Longines Ultra-Chron passed the 30m water resistance test. ;)
     
  4. Privateday7

    Privateday7 quotes Miss Universe May 22, 2013

    Posts
    5,701
    Likes
    2,732
    I wouldn't take risk with any Seamaster more than 20 years old age. Period.
     
  5. cicindela

    cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member May 22, 2013

    Posts
    14,442
    Likes
    21,145
    But you never know when it is going to let go. (why he takes the $200 Seiko when he goes fishing :p )
     
  6. ulackfocus

    ulackfocus May 22, 2013

    Posts
    26,179
    Likes
    26,631
    Bingo!
     
  7. Privateday7

    Privateday7 quotes Miss Universe May 22, 2013

    Posts
    5,701
    Likes
    2,732
    $ 200? I thought it was $140..........
     
  8. ulackfocus

    ulackfocus May 22, 2013

    Posts
    26,179
    Likes
    26,631
    Add in the extra bracelet. Didn't like the Jubilee style it came with so I grabbed a President style.
     
  9. cicindela

    cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member May 22, 2013

    Posts
    14,442
    Likes
    21,145
    You gotta keep track of these things around here. :D
     
  10. Privateday7

    Privateday7 quotes Miss Universe May 23, 2013

    Posts
    5,701
    Likes
    2,732
    From this ....................................................................................To this
    [​IMG] [​IMG]

    for USD 60......OK.......reasonable :p
     
  11. Tritium

    Tritium May 23, 2013

    Posts
    1,178
    Likes
    1,500
    Thanks for your replies,
    Let´s hope Al extend this information,
    but I think Steve is right with the possibly imperceptibly twisted or bent case reason.
    Does it apply the same on vintage divers?
     
  12. watchyouwant

    watchyouwant ΩF Clairvoyant May 23, 2013

    Posts
    1,981
    Likes
    2,225
    water resistance with vintage watches is quite good, if you don`t go near water..... kind regards. achim
     
    Stas, Larry S, Privateday7 and 3 others like this.
  13. Tritium

    Tritium May 23, 2013

    Posts
    1,178
    Likes
    1,500
    This is by far the best explanation I´ve heard... lol;)
    Seriously, i´m not intended to take them near the water, just want to know the real reason why is not recomended.
     
  14. dsio

    dsio Ash @ ΩF Staff Member May 23, 2013

    Posts
    18,566
    Likes
    14,841
    The biggest reason is vintage watches are a single shot, with a modern Planet Ocean if it leaks, you get it serviced and they can replace the dial, service the movement and its as good as new. With vintage, if you soak a '67 Seamaster 300 big triangle, that's the end of it, you can install a new superluminova dial and hands if you want but the original watch is dead.
     
  15. Archer

    Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker May 23, 2013

    Posts
    15,174
    Likes
    30,518
    There are many factors that can affect water resistance in an older watch. The crystal must seat well, not be cracked or crazed, the case back seal should be new, and yes the crown too if you are interested in any serious water resistance. Even with replacing all those parts, some watches still won't pass the water resistance testing I do here. The condition of all the sealing surfaces of the case are important, so when I scrape out that old case back gasket that has been in there for decades and has turned to black goo, and find pitting where it seats, then there will likely be problems sealing the case. The same goes for the area where the crystal seats, as there is no gasket there with an armored tension ring crystal for example. Lastly there's the case tube that the crown seats on - if it is worn then the watch won't seal even with a new crown, unless the tube is replaced.

    I try to get watches to seal if I can, but sometimes it's just not possible. Most people are fine with this and understand these are not dive watches.

    Now a watch passing to 30m using a pressure test is fine, but will it pass a vacuum test? That to me is the most difficult test to get these old watches to pass. Watch testing is a funny thing - pressure on the outside of the watch can actually help it seal by compressing the parts more, so the vacuum test can be a telling test to do on a watch. One of my pressure testing machines uses vacuum and pressure to test a watch (no water is involved by the way - it's a completely dry test), and often watches will fail the vacuum test, and pass the pressure test. In vintage watch like the type being discussed here, the vacuum test is a more useful test. The reason why is that most people are not going to take their watch to 30 m depth, but they will get splashes on it while washing their hands and getting caught in the rain. The vacuum test is what tests the watch for conditions where it gets wet and is not under pressure - pressure that might help seal the watch during a pressure test and possibly give a false sense of security.

    Usually even if a watch passes both tests in my testing machine (the program I use for these watches tests with -0.4 bar vacuum, and then +3 bar pressure) I recommend not to intentionally get the watch wet. As has been said, it's a one shot deal. Better safe than sorry.

    Cheers, Al
     
  16. Tritium

    Tritium May 23, 2013

    Posts
    1,178
    Likes
    1,500
    Thanks Al:thumbsup:
    Very useful information.

    Now I understand perfectly all the factors that can affect water resistance.
    As I said before, I was not intended to swim with them, I'm agree with they're a single shot.

    As allways, it's a pleasure to ask something on this forum and get the correct and clear answers, and many times instantly. This is far the best place in internet for sharing knowlege I found in many years.
    Thanks all;)
     
  17. Privateday7

    Privateday7 quotes Miss Universe May 23, 2013

    Posts
    5,701
    Likes
    2,732
    This is new to me. Now I really have to keep away all vintages from drops of water, especially during washing hands.
    Oh ....also keep it in sporran during rain. (I think I am the only native Jakarta who know sporran)
     
  18. dsio

    dsio Ash @ ΩF Staff Member May 23, 2013

    Posts
    18,566
    Likes
    14,841
    I guess a lot of the problems related to the Naiad crowns are related to this, watertight at depth, leaky when there's no pressure
     
  19. ulackfocus

    ulackfocus May 23, 2013

    Posts
    26,179
    Likes
    26,631
    Pretty much why they stopped using that system so quickly. Good on paper ≠ good in the real world.
     
  20. CanberraOmega

    CanberraOmega Rabbitohs and Whisky Supporter May 23, 2013

    Posts
    5,454
    Likes
    5,739
    very interesting, thanks.