The Breitling Watch Source Forums

I was thinking more about this comment. Generally, I prefer color-matched date wheels, too. On designs like the Sub, GMT and DSSD, however, I think the white wheel makes sense, since it is in place of a lume marker in the 3:00 position. You might say it matches the markers, rather than the dial, and it helps keep a degree of symmetry in the marker pattern, although admittedly not as much as the non-date configurations.

it looks kind of ridiculous but impressive...for me its nonsense to have one of those to swim in the bath tub heheheeh

the normal sea dweller is much pretier than this "thing"

_________________
Breitling Chrono Avenger Black Dial whit Pro II Ti, Diver Pro I
Breitling BlackBird Big Date brushed whit SS Bracelet, brown croco
Breitling BlackBird Blacksteel 528/2000 Whit Dp2 Deployment
Omega Planet Ocean Chrono 9300 Co-axial Ceramic on SS bracelet

So here's my question has any one found any documentation or video of this watch when it returned to the surface in working condition ,I have tried and can't find anything ! only that the watch that went on the deepsea challenge in 1960 worked fine upon its return to the surface. The watch Cameron wore inside the submersible worked fine (big whoop).

I would appreciate anything confirming the watch is still working .

_________________
Veni, vidi, vici

The watch that Cameron wore inside was a DSSD, this piece was strapped to the outside - http://blog.perpetuelle.com/dive-watche ... -on-earth/

Thank you Roffensian I checked the link.

The Photos of the Rolex Deepsea Challenge Affixed to the DEEPSEA CHALLENGER nice but the artical did not anwser if this watch is still working. It did show that the watch did not implode . Thats a step in the right direction perhaps we have to wait untill next year for the NG special to come out or is it out later this summer ?

_________________
Veni, vidi, vici

A valid point. I had not taken this into consideration before, and will in the future; Thanks!

I'm still trying to figure out what the point is of developing a wristwatch with this level of water resistance, if a person isn't actually going to wear it on his wrist. It's an impressive level of WR, to be sure, but if the only way to really put it to the test is to strap it to the outside of the submersible, that just demonstrates that it is utterly unnecessary in a wristwatch that someone will actually wear.

Yes, but so many things in watchmaking are unnecessary if you boil it down to the essentials. 99% of people don't need WR rating over 100m. Probably 80% of people don't need or use a chronograph. The tourbillon is a pretty pointless thing as it doesn't actually offer any greater accuracy in real terms, despite that being it's raison d'etre. In fact mechanical watches as a whole are somewhat pointless these days in the age of quartz, and atomic timekeeping and even the mobile phone.

To me this Rolex is a technical tour de force in the same vein as the tourbillon. A "shop window" to say, look what we can do. I think it's a brilliant thing.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

Agreed and very well said Driver. Similar to cars, you don't need a V12 1,000 horsepower (or whatever) Ferrari when a 4 cylinder car will do just fine. Apart from the obvious fact that cars and watches are different, the technology for the sake of technology is pretty cool.

_________________
Happines is Good Health and a Bad Memory.
"Ingrid Bergman"

All fair points. However, virtually every "unnecessary" thing you've listed can be enjoyed to a greater or lesser extent by the person wearing the watch. Tourbillons are very nice to look at, as is the sweep of a mechanical watch's second hand, or the movement itself through a DB. WR certainly fills a function as well, although it's hard to justify WR in excess of 300m for all but a small selection of wearers. Going with Tim S's Ferrari example, a Ferrari offers all kinds of impractical enjoyments to the person driving it.

The Challenge is something altogether different: a wristwatch made for the sole purpose of not being worn on any wrist, to display technical prowess no human could ever, nor would ever need to, utilize in a wristwatch. To wit: the watch Cameron actually did wear - the DSSD - is only rated to a depth 3,900 meters, when the dive itself was 10,898 meters. The protection of the submersible obviated the need for a WR rating equal to the depth of the actual dive. To demonstrate the Challenge's abilities, it had to be strapped to the submersible, rather than to the person in it.

Maybe I just don't have the "vision" of a true watch enthusiast, but it seems to me that advancements in wristwatch technology that can only be of use under circumstances that would actually kill the person wearing it are rather pointless. With that in mind, here are some other theoretical advancements I hope no watch company actually bothers to achieve:

- A wristwatch capable of making a trip into outer space and surviving reentry into the earth's atmosphere, while strapped to the outside of a space shuttle

- A wristwatch capable of surviving a nuclear blast

- A wristwatch that can survive a trip to the earth's core

- A wristwatch that can function as a drill bit on an oil rig

- A wristwatch that can double as a trailer hitch

In writing this list, it occurred to me that some people no doubt would seek out such watches. I guess that just separates the true watch geeks from the rest of us.

I buy a watch if I like the overall package and if I feel that for me it represents good value. Whether it is hugely overengineered is irrelevant to me - I buy with the heart, not the head. I would much rather that it was more than capable than less than capable and the technical achievement adds to my appreciation of it.

Who cares whether it's practical - it's not practical to have a mechanical watch that is incapable of maintaining the same level of accuracy as a $10 quartz!

I can somewhat understand your sentiment Jackson... But pieces that endure such feats are just plain cool... No?

_________________
"I don't got the bright watch I got the right watch" -Jay Z

I think the dive itself is very cool, and the technology that went into making that dive a reality is impressive. I can also appreciate the technology that went into the DS Challenge. I just am lukewarm about it as an achievement as a wristwatch, per se, since at those depths it doesn't function as a wristwatch.

More steel and sapphire..

Here I try to be magnanimous, and I get my own reasoning thrown back at me.