Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

Thread: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Lost in LA
    Posts
    63

    Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    Hey folks, when I hold and examine the U1 and U2, the two cases look pretty much identical. Too chicken to open them up, so does anyone know what specifically allows the U2 an extra 1000 m rating? Is it extra gaskets? I know the domed crystal of the U2 likely has something to do with it, versus the flat one on the U1.

    On a related topic, what allows the U1 an extra 700 m of water resistance over the Damasko DSub series? On a superficial level, the two sub steel cases look similar at first glance.

    Appreciate any education on this!
    -Leon

  2. #2
    Member umarrajs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Chicago, Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    2,910

    Re: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    Sapphire thickness is one-3.5mm for U1 Vs 4.6 mm for U2
    Different gaskets?
    " Two mighty torches of flame like the wings of a yellow bird of fire flew over a field, covered a field with a brilliant yellow bloomings of flame, and in the midst of it, white as a ghost, white as the white of Melville's Moby Dick, white as the shrine of the Madonna in half the churches of the world, this slim angelic mysterious ship of stages rose without sound out of its incarnantion of flame and began to ascend slowly into the sky, slow as Melville's Leviathan might swim, slowly as we might swim upward in a dream looking for the air............."

    Norman Mailer describing the lift-off of Apollo 11.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    277

    Re: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    My U2 and U1000 are both filled with AR gas. U2 is rated for 2000 meters whereas the U1000 is rated for "only" 1000 meters, however the U1000 is a chronograph which can be operated down to 1000 meters.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Lost in LA
    Posts
    63

    Re: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    Crystal thickness makes sense - thanks for the dimensions! I guess the curvature of the sapphire on the U2 allows the 1.1 mm difference at the center of the crystal face.

    Crowns, caseback, case of both U1/U2 otherwise seem identical. Also, Snakeman's inject of the U1000 also begs the question of why the U1000 is only 1000m when it appears significantly more "chunky" compared to the U2? Just looking at the U1000 seems like it would be more over-engineered than the U2!

    Thanks!
    -Leon

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    480

    Re: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    Quote Originally Posted by kusaioyaji View Post
    Also, Snakeman's inject of the U1000 also begs the question of why the U1000 is only 1000m when it appears significantly more "chunky" compared to the U2? Just looking at the U1000 seems like it would be more over-engineered than the U2!

    Thanks!
    -Leon
    The chrono buttons of the U1000 can be pushed underwater down to a depth of 1000m. Think about that for a moment... that's insane!! Almost no other chronos out there can be operated underwater, let alone down to 1000m. So it makes plenty of sense that a chrono that can be operated underwater wouldn't be rated to withstand the same pressure as the U2 which has no buttons that can be pushed underwater.

  7. #6
    Member umarrajs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Chicago, Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    2,910

    Re: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    Quote Originally Posted by kusaioyaji View Post
    Crystal thickness makes sense - thanks for the dimensions! I guess the curvature of the sapphire on the U2 allows the 1.1 mm difference at the center of the crystal face.

    Crowns, caseback, case of both U1/U2 otherwise seem identical. Also, Snakeman's inject of the U1000 also begs the question of why the U1000 is only 1000m when it appears significantly more "chunky" compared to the U2? Just looking at the U1000 seems like it would be more over-engineered than the U2!

    Thanks!
    -Leon
    U1000 is chunky (thicker) compared to U2 to accommodate the Valjoux/SZ movement.....which is double the thickness of a 2893..........8mm vs 4mm

  8. #7
    Member Camguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Arlington VA
    Posts
    5,682

    Re: Design differences that allow for 1000 m delta between U1 & U2?

    Quote Originally Posted by egwatchfan View Post
    The chrono buttons of the U1000 can be pushed underwater down to a depth of 1000m. Think about that for a moment... that's insane!! Almost no other chronos out there can be operated underwater, let alone down to 1000m. So it makes plenty of sense that a chrono that can be operated underwater wouldn't be rated to withstand the same pressure as the U2 which has no buttons that can be pushed underwater.
    It is amazing technology indeed. The pushers on the EZM13 are similarly constructed, but only rated to 200M. Sinn tells me that's solely due to the stiffness of the springs under the pushers. The EZM13's are not as robust as the U100's. That makes for a more "subtle" activation, but the water pressure below 200M would overwhelm the springs and prevent the pushes from popping back out into their original places. The U1000's are stiff enough to overcome the pressure.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •