My thoughts on water resistance

It's one of the more important variables to me! Simply because I am constantly dunking my hand in or near water. We have an almost 3 year old, a large Huntaway/Rottie, and loads and loads of washing and cleaning that needs doing around the house. So to me, having 100m just helps to confirm a watches 'ruggedness' and ability to withstand some of the more common dangers in my house/lifestyle. I'd rather have a watch that can handle it, than a watch where I'd have to think about it before I actually go do an activity.

Now, having said that, you're right with the first few variables. The most important things to me are still the aesthetics, and then for and function. 😊 Hope this has given you a different perspective to ponder?

Also, love the Steeldive you've pictured. But it's a big beasty!!!

25000m…that’s twice as deep as the Mariana’s Trench. Seems a little bit overkill, but technically brilliant

If you’re Aquaman, would you even wear a watch?

No problem at all. I wear watches of all sizes but I’ll admit it’s a Big Beefy Boy lol

Water Resistance .... How important is it? Watches have either a tiny wind up motor or they run on a battery. Water is a big problem for either type of watch. Yep, water resistance is important. Current manufacturing technology is available to provide 100m water resistance and a screw down crown at any price point. Why do we settle for spec standards that are 60 years old instead of expecting something better?

I think WR is overvalued in terms of specs assuming you are not purchasing a diver, field watch or GADA. Some watches are not meant to be submerged. Buy and use accordingly.

Now I’d really like knowing if they actually tested the watch to such an equivalent depth (is that even possible?) or if they just wrote the number for a wow factor knowing that nobody will care testing the watch beyond 200 m.

Also, you can go as deep as you want with this watch, but without a lume pip in the bezel you might want to be extra careful when monitoring your dive times.

So, loads of pressure tests have been done on watches with 50,100,200 etc.. wr and they all out perform their ratings. 100m watches tested to 300m before breaking etc.. having said that , it doesnt take into account the possible water ingress from actually diving down and using the watch deep underwater. So for me its simple, if you want a watch that you dont have to think about or take off, just get one with at least 100m wr. You can wake up and go to the beach, pool, river, lake, sailing, diving, jumping off rocks, padel boarding, car washing etc.. wihout worrying. Remember its not just the pressure on the case at depth, its also how easily water can get past the crown and case back. Watches with Push in crowns rated to 100m should be good as they have or are meant to have double gaskets to keep water out. My C.Ward has 600m wr but I got it for the looks, its also quite small considering, 40mm and height 13 ish, doesn’t really look like a dive watch either. Anyway, if you like the watch buy it but check measurements , might be quite big and awkward to wear ……on dry land.

I'm especially boggled by how this becomes a factor for "luxury" watches. How luxurious is your life if your wrist is in danger of being drowned or you can't find a dry place to put said watch when taking your bath?

It's just checklist comparison thinking. And neuroticism. Lots of people have this same lunacy with having a lifted all-wheel-drive vehicle because it snows an inch or so a few times a year.

I wish I new how many years that watch with the missing winding stem has been running. At least three. It was an open hole in the case. It's fine.

Not sure we are talking about luxury watches just watches in general. Careful or we’ll have to define ‘luxury’ ;) as case in point , my watch is wr to 600m but I would have bought it if it was say 100m. And yes buying a giant off roader to drive your kids to school in the city doesnt make sense. I guess its up to everyone to make there own mind up but being a bit over the top is fun.

Wait a second! Rated to 25,000m (meters)? Really?

That is over twice the depth of the Mariana Trench depth and the current depth record!

Color me skeptical.

Unless I plan on using it as a pure dress watch I won't go below 100m. I come into contact with water all the time having kids and pets and also occasionally jumping in the water to have a swim so I don't want to have to worry about the watch having issues on a daily basis.

30M is plenty for me for day-to-day activities. Personally, water resistance doesn't factor into my watch buying decisions. I think most people over exaggerate the need for high water resistance.

To me, WR is the only spec to determine the functionality and build quality of the case. There are plenty of metrics to measure and compare in the movement.

Standard case specs like diameter, length and L2L are simple measurements but don’t tell you how well the case was designed and built. Water exerts serious pressure and a watch designed to withstand that pressure is objectively stronger than one with minimal WR specs.

It’s not a primary factor for me but it gives an idea of how durable the watch will be.

DEEP FREE DIVE RECORDS:

Men: 156 meters (512 feet) deep. Performed by Alexey Molchanov of Russia in 2023. Women: 130 meters (427 feet) deep. Performed by Nanja Van Den Broek of the Netherlands in 2015.

DEEP SCUBA DIVE RECORD:

PADI® Instructor Ahmed Gabr holds the world record for deepest scuba dive. Gabr trained for four years before the attempt, which culminated in a dive to 332.35 meters (1090 feet).

Thus, for most people, 100-200m WR will suffice for anything they do resembling swimming in a lake, pool, or the shallows of the beach. Windsurfing, jet skiing, and other watersports are also included.

People who SCUBA dive might want to get 200-300m WR watches.

Anything else is overkill. Heck, since 99.999% of all watch wearers will be swimming in very shallow water, 100m is probably overkill.

However, there is a certain "cool factor" that watches like the HydroMax have; the feeling from wearing that monster, as it sits a full 3/4-of-an-inch above your wrist, weighing you down like a boat anchor, as you announce: "If I backhand someone with this thing on, it will probably knock them out! And this thing is water resistant to 1,000 meters! RAWR!!" 🤣🤣

Water resistance is a factor in decision making for me but anything from 100m is fine by me. I say this, as I had a new Speedmaster with 50m water resistance fog up after minimal contact with water.

I mainly collect dive watches, both modern and vintage and don't let the vintage ones anywhere near water. I have several Squale's with 1,000m plus and a Deepsea at 4,000m water resistance.

The H20 Kalmar on which the Steeldive is based, has a 25,000m rating and according to their website, was pressure tested and achieved that rating, failing just past that depth. I rather like the H20 but as it is massive, thought I'd get the Steeldive to see if it would suit me. It is very thick but actually reasonably comfortable, even in steel, when the H2O is titanium. So far it is tempting me to save up for the H2O, although I'm sceptical that it would survive a pressure test anywhere near 25,000m.

A couple of photos on my 7.25 inch wrist:

That’s look awesome