WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

Thinnest legit dive watch

140K views 104 replies 64 participants last post by  @marruciic 
#1 · (Edited)
I'm on a thin watch kick. Recently bought a vintage handwind Longines and it upended my whole view of watch thinness as THE spec for me.

But it's tough with a dive watch, obvs.

So, what are the thinnest legit dive watches (and by legit, I mean at least 300m -- Edit: okay, fine, 200M, see below) WR)?

Some other ground rules (although this is really meant as more of a pile-on list thread, not a recommendations thread):

1. Automatic (obviously)
2. Current or recent production
3. Assume price is no object, just for fun ;-)
4. No limits on provenance -- Asian, Japanese, Swiss, British, Italian, whatever
5. To re-iterate, 300m WR minimum (more is obviously better).

Here are some starters - can we beat them?

1. Longines HydroConquest - 39mm

Some sources put the 39mm version of the HydroConquest at 11.85mm, which is pretty darn thin. But it's not a current model and I can't find an official spec, so I'm a little skeptical.


2. Sinn EZM3

500m WR, and only 12.3mm



3. Hamilton Khaki Frogman - 42mm

According to Amazon, anyway, the new 42mm Frogman gets down to an even 12mm. Hamilton doesn't seem to publish the spec, and we all know how reliable Amazon spec sheets can be for watches. It looks pretty chunky in general, so again, I'm skeptical.



4. Crepas Cayman 3000

Just kidding. :p (17mm plus crystal, baby!)



What else we got? :)
 
See less See more
4
#4 ·
NTH and older Omega's are both really thin (I know, Omega's not an affordable, but you can get the older ones for less than $1500 in great shape). The newer Omegas have gotten a little thicker. 12mm seems to me to be to my "thin cutoff".

I prefer thin watches, because I wear them ALL to work. I know I'm breaking some sort of "dress watch code", but I prefer divers. I need to be able to see them at night, because I'm frequently working at 3am, and the lume is incredibly useful. I also spend a lot of time in the water, so divers work well for me. Every single one of my watches has been at least 10 feet under water (sorry, none of them made 300m), and NONE have ever leaked...
 
#5 ·
Apart from silicon filled there are old vintage watches that were very thin compared to today's watches, like Trafalgar, Titus, Doyle, Baylor, Mordaine, Kingston, Royce, Tressi, Margi, Wagner, Mirarmar, Exactus, Cauny, Damas, Orvin, and so on, the list is gargantuan, problem with THIN is the material thickness used might hinder getting one at 300m or more, not impossible to find a modern diver of course but the super thin could limit you to what you might find and availability, same with Vintage really, they are there but it is researching them and finding them.

GOOD LUCK IN YOUR SEARCH, hope you find that perfect watch that fits the bill.
 
#7 ·
Re: 300m vs 200m -- just an arbitrary number! I wanted to set the bar high enough to rule out the abundant 100m "round watch with external rotating bezel" that some might call a "dive watch." And this being F74, I guess that I have a preconceived idea that the crowd generally favors a higher spec as required for a "true" or "legit" dive watch.

I don't have a personal desire for a 300m vs a 200m watch. Like I said, I'm not looking for recommendations as much as I'm interested in hearing about what's out there, as my WIS-dom isn't as strong in the dive watch space.

So if you think a 200m watch should be mentioned, say so. :)

Case in point: Zenith Elite Diver - 200m WR, only 9mm thick.

(photo courtesy @huntershooter)
 
#20 · (Edited)
+1...40mm SharkDiver on 7.5"wrist...
 

Attachments

#10 ·
I think I measured my 41mm HydroConquest right at 12mm, my Oris Aquis Date 40mm at 12.2mm, and the Aquis Date 43mm at 12.6mm. Omega SMPc is right around there as well, as was the prior SMP model with the 2500 movement. Like @dmjonez said, I think the pre-2500 SMP came in under 12mm. NTH is the thinnest 300m diver I've owned.

Pictures make every thread better:









 
#13 ·
My old Tag 1500 midsize must be about 36mm diameter x 8mm thick, but it's 200m, and quartz. They pop up on the used market occasionally, and a minty one shouldn't cost you much over, what...maybe $250? But the lume will likely be pretty much dead by now. I know mine is. :(
 
#15 ·
I have the Omega 2531 and an NTH. Much to Doc's chagrine, the margin of error in my digital caliper (provenance: china) is greater than the apparent size difference of the two. Either way, they're both under 12mm, and both are 300M.

What else is that thin? Not the OWC, not the Rolex. Not the Black Bay... And so on.

That Zenith is quite the looker, @jakejd, but those endlinks aren't doing it for me. I like 'em squeaky tight. That looks like a poor fitting aftermarket!
 
#22 ·
I thought the 2254.50 was 12mm. Still - that's a sleek profile!
 
#31 ·
Omega automatic 200M pre-Bond Seamaster. 8.85 mm in the full size; 8.7 mm in the mid-size.

A few decades back when I acquired mine, the hallmark of a high quality watch (even a dive watch) was that it was thin.

While a dive watch doesn't need to be any thicker than 9 mm, some people prefer it if the knobs go up to 11. Hence the corpulent Omega Planet Oceans at 14-18 mm thick.
 
#35 ·
#42 ·
"I own an Ahoi. Not a true diver, but a great sport watch with 200m WR that looks good in both a suit and sandals. On the included perlon it can fit under any cuff." Not a diver. But proof that you can easily make a 200M automatic that is under 11 mm. And putting a dive bezel onto the case doesn't need to make it any thicker. NTH's subs are 11.5 mm and 300 M, while their super compressor type divers are 12 mm and 200M.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top