Vintage & Waterproof

Posts

2,710

Likes

17,410

jaguar11

·Oct 26, 2020

A reasealed watch with appropriate new parts to bring it to specification and assuming the condition is within original tolerance without damage the watch should perform to standard as designed and tested for. Whether you choose to wear it in water because of its value could be relative to your own means and is entirely for the owner to decide. You could try a more modern vintage with a sapphire crystal/more modern case architecture if you want more assurance. Or on the other hand if you are never going to wear it why not (as suggested) get something new. Personally I have no issues wearing mine for swimming. I have had them for so long and paid so little the value of enjoyment is worth more. However, each to his or her own!

 

Posts

8,355

Likes

68,609

Spruce

·Oct 26, 2020·Sunburst dial fan

S.H.

Mine came to me like this, generic plexi and the crown 😲 :

Might as well do the full monty in this case. Even if I don't intend to get it wet.

Look forward to seeing the finished article

 

Posts

1,616

Likes

3,857

S.H.

·Oct 26, 2020

Spruce

Look forward to seeing the finished article

 

Posts

9,596

Likes

27,692

ConElPueblo

·Oct 26, 2020

S.H.

Not to be a spoil sport, but shouldn't this one have a scalloped crown? No matter what it should have, it is a beautiful watch 😀

janice&fred

Well I know from experience in the tropics that bakelite bezels don't fare well when subjected to moisture.

I've had several vintage watches serviced and tested waterproof and I'd wear a 30M WR Constellation washing hands and take off the 100M WR Seamaster 300. Moisture might not affect the movement etc, but it can still ruin the bezel inlay.

 

Posts

1,616

Likes

3,857

S.H.

·Oct 26, 2020

ConElPueblo

Not to be a spoil sport, but shouldn't this one have a scalloped crown?

I don't know. I have seen other 2975s with the four leaf crown, and back then when I asked, nobody said it was wrong, so I went on with this model. I welcome any further input though...

 

Posts

9,596

Likes

27,692

ConElPueblo

·Oct 26, 2020

S.H.

I don't know. I have seen other 2975s with the four leaf crown, and back then when I asked, nobody said it was wrong, so I went on with this model. I welcome any further input though...

No input from here, I was only curious 😀

 

Posts

8,355

Likes

68,609

Spruce

·Oct 26, 2020·Sunburst dial fan

S.H.

Very nice

 

Posts

23,480

Likes

52,196

Dan S

·Oct 26, 2020

I don't submerge any of my vintage watches, but in the context of incidental exposure to moisture, I do make distinctions between my watches with basic water-resistant features, such as old divers and sport watches, and watches that completely lack water resistance. The latter I will remove before washing my hands and I will take them off my wrist and put them in my pocket if it's raining. I don't worry as much about incidental exposure with the vintage divers, especially if they have been tested.

 

Posts

212

Likes

423

Verdi

·Oct 28, 2020

I had a “friendly debate” on this subject, on the forum regarding this subject.

My approach to any vintage watch is keep them away from water. Im saying this despite the fact that I service almost every watch I buy as 99% of them need one. Some of them come back to me with a pressure test pass as per the watch specs.

But I take no risks as I hunt for years to find good condition dial for a model that I am after. While it may have passed a 3 or 5 atm test....there is no guarantee imo that the watch shall be ok on the long run.

To answer your question, yes, it may be ok if it is accidentally splashed providing that it has been serviced.

Having said that I am very careful for any water/moisture exposure.
I lived many years in a desert area where the humidity is extremly high during summer....because of this I avoided wearing my vintage pieces for months at a time.
The exceptions were: vintage Rolex or a vintage diver that have been serviced. Mainly due to screw crown and the superiority of the oyster case/diver case.

Edited: Oct 28, 2020

 

Posts

29,244

Likes

75,635

Archer

·Oct 28, 2020·Omega Qualified Watchmaker

Verdi

I had a “friendly debate” on this subject, on the forum regarding this subject.

https://omegaforums.net/threads/newbie-servicing-vintage-c-case-constellation-waterproofing.106355/

And I'll repeat what I said in that thread and in this thread - if the case is in good condition, and the appropriate parts are replaced, then there's typically no reason that original spec water resistance can't be achieved. How people choose to use that is another thing entirely...

 

Posts

212

Likes

423

Verdi

·Oct 28, 2020

Archer

https://omegaforums.net/threads/newbie-servicing-vintage-c-case-constellation-waterproofing.106355/

And I'll repeat what I said in that thread and in this thread - if the case is in good condition, and the appropriate parts are replaced, then there's typically no reason that original spec water resistance can't be achieved. How people choose to use that is another thing entirely...

Yes and, of course, I respect your opinion!
What you say makes sense technically but I am not willing to take any risks....and I explained why!

Edited: Oct 29, 2020

 

Posts

85

Likes

156

nobbylon

·Oct 28, 2020

What is the point of a watch tnat resists water if you have to pick and choose the circumstances it is worn? Same with lume actually. For me, any watch I wear needs to be waterproof and have working lume and do the job it was designed for. The vintage watches that don’t fulfill this need to be left in a display case. I’ve worn Rolex dive watches for over 30 years and never had to worry about where they were used. One of the reasons I said yes to getting a Speedmaster Pro is that it’s waterproof to 50m. More than enough to swim with. One of the main reasons that vintage watches are said to be at risk is the plastic crystal that gets brittle over time. If banged under water then possibly a risk of crack or shatter instead of the flexibility of it when new. Replace old crystals and gaskets and there is no reason it is any different from new. Age did not modify it’s mechanics.

 

Posts

1,616

Likes

3,857

S.H.

·Oct 29, 2020

nobbylon

Age did not modify it’s mechanics.

Yes it does: corrosion, worn tubes for example.

 

Posts

85

Likes

156

nobbylon

·Oct 29, 2020

Corrosion has already been mentioned. Tubes? you’ll have to be doing a hell of a lot of rubbing rubber against steel to cause wear. Total nonsense. Think of a crankshaft in an engine running at 1000’s of rpm against rubber seals fore and aft. It takes 1000’s of hours before any signs of wear and in most cases it’s just polished by the rubber. If a watch is 50m/ 100m/ 500m in the 1960’s then as Archer says, provided no corrosion, if you replace perishable seals and as I said a crystal then it’s exactly the same now as it was then! Rolex replace tubes for worn threads and not worn surfaces.

Edited: Oct 29, 2020

 

Posts

29,244

Likes

75,635

Archer

·Oct 29, 2020·Omega Qualified Watchmaker

nobbylon

Corrosion has already been mentioned. Tubes? you’ll have to be doing a hell of a lot of rubbing rubber against steel to cause wear. Total nonsense.

Not really nonsense, but case tubes are consumables, so should be treated like a crown or a case back seal. Often they don't need replacing if the watch has been well cared for, but sometimes they certainly do. In the example watch I showed earlier from 1958, the old case tube was quite worn as you can see here:



The diameter right near the case has been reduced significantly, so even with a new crown this would not seal. Here is the new tube installed:



Yes, it's just a nitrile seal, but it gets dirt embedded in it over time that is abrasive. Also the seals harden, and over time this causes wear.

But this isn't what I personally refer to when I talk about case condition - tubes are for the most part easily replaced in a few minutes, so about the same time it takes to replace a crown. My concern with the case would be the groove where the O-ring sits in the case, the surface the case back O-ring seals on for the case back, and in some cases the surface where the crystal mounts to. Those are not nearly as easily repaired as the few minutes it takes to swap a case tube on a watch like this.

Cheers, Al

 

Posts

1,616

Likes

3,857

S.H.

·Oct 29, 2020

nobbylon

Total nonsense.

yeah sure.

 

Posts

85

Likes

156

nobbylon

·Oct 29, 2020

thx Al, indeed put the watch mechanically the same as it was when new therefore why should it leak? When this is done I do get why people wont get them wet (value) but that doesn’t mean they can’t get wet.

 

Posts

85

Likes

156

nobbylon

·Oct 29, 2020

S.H.

yeah sure.

Instead of that response please tell us all why not. Plenty of people buying into the myth that old watches cannot be made waterproof, plenty of armchair expertise being thrown around but not offering valid reasons as I have above. Al gave some good insight.

 

Posts

4,593

Likes

10,806

janice&fred

·Oct 29, 2020

No one seems wrong in their opinions so far and of course from a purely technical standpoint a properly restored vintage watch should be able to endure moisture up to it's original ratings, but this is a hobby involving passion so from that standpoint it involves a bit of emotion and personal preference, and of course some sensibilities as to how much these vintage watches are now worth and whether "using them as they were intended" still makes sense.
A vintage 427 cobra should be able to run the 1/4 mile drag strip in X amount of time, but should a properly serviced example have it's clutch side-stepped on the starting line with the gas pedal matted to the floor and power-shifted down the track merely because the original specs were published by Shelby? Is there a need to do that?

 

Posts

23,480

Likes

52,196

Dan S

·Oct 29, 2020

nobbylon

Instead of that response please tell us all why not. Plenty of people buying into the myth that old watches cannot be made waterproof, plenty of armchair expertise being thrown around but not offering valid reasons as I have above. Al gave some good insight.

Based on your responses, I have to question whether you have much practical experience with vintage watches. You are making a lot of hypothetical and theoretical comments based on idealized assumptions that are not consistent with the first-hand experience of people who have actually owned and/or serviced many vintage watches.

It is simply a fact that not all vintage watches from the 50s, 60s, and 70s, even high quality dive watches, can be made waterproof to their original specs, or even close. Sealing surfaces have often degraded over time, crown seals have hardened (and new crowns are not available for all brands), aftermarket gaskets are not always perfect fits or good quality, etc. There are many reasons. But I can tell you from personal experience, that often a watch will not pass a pressure test to its original specifications, or even to a significantly lower pressure. In a few cases, I have gone the extra mile to attempt to restore a watch to a high level of water resistance; it has involved additional expense and a willingness to replace some original parts (decreasing the collectible value). And it was not always totally successful. However, as I mentioned earlier, a vintage dive watch, even with mediocre seals, is often able to survive incidental moisture. But it is a risk.