Dispelling Old Wive's Tales - Misconceptions about Watches

[Scottish Steve]

But still, swimming 100m on the surface of a pool is not a big deal like diving 30m. Anyway what ever is the truth i wouldn't swim with me 30m rated watch just to be safe

Firstly, yes, I wouldn't take any chances either. You have no recourse if there is a gasket-failure and there have been instances of watch companies simply refusing to accept a customer's statement of events

But

If this whole "static pressure" thing is to be believed, swimming would be totally unsuitable for this rating.

and

according to all the links, 30m is only suitable for washing the dishes anyway. Even the official line is self-contradictory.

As I said, I think it likely that WR has been systematically downgraded, regardless of the metre rating, in accordance with the new rules which have nothing to do with fact and more to do with selling us more for less, in the same way printed dials are apparently becoming more common in expensive pieces.

[mikeynd]

Mechanicals have souls??
Chinese movements are just as good as the Swiss movements.

[WnS]

One of my favourites is that Swiss watches are handmade and wonderful examples of craftsmanship. Truth is, all but a select few are made by machinery. More like craftmachineship.

[aladin_sane]

My favorite is the old dynamic pressure myth. You know the one about your arm moving around while under water generating additional pressure on a watch so that you need a 200 meter watch to get to the bottom of the deep end of the local swimming pool.

[Scottish Steve]

No-one's mentioned the classic.
Wearing an expensive watch proves you're a man to be taken seriously.

[Perseus]

So are you claiming that the static pressure equals the actual pressure while using watch underwater?

I wasn't the best in physics class, but I do believe the static pressure is much, much lower than the actual.

Otherwise why would watches be certified to 1000m and beyond. Heard of anyone diving that deep?
Sent from my VS840 4G using Tapatalk 2

Here we go again...I think this thread will at least give us a break from this myth today.

Sigh, Myth Busting.... again

[aladin_sane]

And there it is. I love that old myth and it's ardent believers.

[samael_6978]

I keep forgetting that this was a conspiracy by the watch companies to make us buy 100m WR watches in case we have to wash the dishes :rolleyes:

Feel free to snorkel or dive in a dress watch. Not my money.

Sent from my VS840 4G using Tapatalk 2

[Raza]

Misconception- Acrylic Crystals/Hesalite should be avoided at all costs

Why its not true- Sure they scratch more readily than sapphire but they are so easy to polish up to look as good as new- just get some polywatch. It does not smudge as easily as sapphire. It will not shatter and will handle harder hits than anything else. Its is super cheap to replace if you really have to and gives off a beautiful hue.

Why do many believe acrylic should be avoided?- they are told that Sapphire crystals are the be all and end all and are told acrylic crystals are scratch magnets.

I actually prefer hesalite to sapphire.

Owning both, I have to say that acrylic is frustrating to own. My two most expensive watches have acrylic crystals and it's not an easy task to keep them from getting scratches. Polywatch was a revelation. When I scratched my Monaco, I thought the only course of action I had was to change the crystal.

Speaking of, what do you guys use to apply Polywatch? I read "cotton wool", but I don't know what that means. I thought things were either cotton or wool.

[Citizen V]

Well they are businesses and they want our money :).