The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Although with the new ISO ratings the watch companies are going to have to move to real world numbers rather than static (unrealistic) pressure claims.

Again, thanks to all for your input. All very interesting

That said (and I did say that, too, in so many words), is there any possible real-world situation where a person would subject a watch to the equivalent of 3900m of static pressure? If so, what are the odds the average DSSD owner would be in such a situation?

True but it does depend on which ISO they are going to use. If it's ISO 2281 (which it will be for all mass producers) then it's not a whole lot more "real world" that the standard WR rating - certainly a bit more real, but not a guarantee of water resistance to the stated depth for any length of time. However, if it's the ISO 6425 Diver's watch rating, then that really is a real world rating. To be rated under ISO 6425 every single watch in a batch is tested, not just a sample...... which makes it very expensive for volume manufacturers. Plus they are tested in water to 125% of the rating. i.e. if it's going to be rated to 400m it will actually be tested to 500m. It's a very rigorous test and only watches that ISO 6425 can have the designation "Diver's Watch" on the case back. That wording means you really can trust a watch to operate at the stated depth.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

So there may be interesting developments in the WR ratings in the future.

personally i enjoy the kiddie pool no more that 3 foot deep water for me.

And what about the Seawolf Roff?


EDIT: reacted too quickly, didn't see your next post!

_________________


- This is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by. - Negative Ghost Rider. The pattern is full.

The 3000m/10000ft on the dial of the SeaWolf is one of the main reasons I bought it. That's just crazy to think about and a very cool piece of engineering. ...and fun to talk about to those that ask about the watch.

_________________
Collection is changing too quickly to keep up on...

I agree, marketing gimmick or not it's great that companies are willing to spend money developing over engineered and utterly impractical things, just to show that they can.

Of course there is a habit of the consumer to just buy based upon big numbers and ignore many other factors that together complete something, but the world would be a pretty boring place if watches (and any other products, especially luxury goods) were never built for any more than the average punter is going to need on a daily basis.