# Watch of the Devil?

Alan N.
Alan N.

It has the number of the Beest. I wonder if this was a sort of joke on the part of the watch designers. Could have easily put down 650 feet, with no loss of status as a deep-water diver.

Joined: May 8th, 2005, 11:38 am
Yes, using exactly 666 feet is a little strange because according to my calculations:

666 feet of water ( at 4 °C) = 19.6468627 atmospheres (standard)

If the watch's seals were water resistant to an even 20 atmospheres, then, to be exact, they could have used a depth rating of 678 feet.

Rather than assuming the dial designer was a satanic cult member, I think that there is another simpler explanation that makes more sense. The depth rating of 666 feet is also almost exactly 2/3 of 1000 feet and has all of its numerals the same. This is a nice "symmetrical" number and looks better on the dial that something like 678. Also, I think I've seen that depth rating of 666 feet used on other watches too.

I'm not into skin diving, but going down to a depth of 666 feet seems like an awefully deep dive to me. Does anybody really need a diving watch rated to that depth?

technoguy

RonD.
RonD.
"... does anybody really need a diving watch rated to that depth?"

And does anyone really trust a watches depth rating? I don't. I have a friend who fixes Breitlings and Rolexes, and he just says to never get a watch wet no matter the rating. Why risk ruining the watch?

Ron

rltbod
rltbod
666 feet = 200 metres

most watches these days are rated in metres but you still see some that use feet or both (Rolex for example)

You can now get 1000M 2000M and I think 3000M though of course your body couldn't take the pressure at 3 clicks (KM's) down.

The 200M rating doesn't mean that the watch will be safe at that depth though. This is the static reading ie the watch not moving, moving the watch affects the way the pressure reacts on the seals.

most of the guys I know who dive would only go a max of half the depth rating the watch states it can handle.

Not like the old days when they got away eith putting watherproof on the dial!

Joined: May 8th, 2005, 11:38 am
666 feet = 202.9968 meters

But I'm in agreement with your other observations. Regardless of the water resistancy rating on a watch, I would even be hesitant to take a shower or go swimming with it UNLESS it had a screw down crown on it and it was a NEW watch with fresh seals from a major manufacturer. The watch I purchased last week is rated to 50 meters which is about 164.042 feet, however, since it does not have a screw down crown, but just a regular crown and an extra pusher button on the case, I've decided that I will remove it when swimming.

I saw an interesting watch advertised a few years ago which I have never seen again. It was called the "Marianna Trench" watch, but I do not recall the manufacturer. This watch was rated water resistant to a depth of, I think, 20,000 feet! How they did it was interesting. It had a quartz analog movement which was, literally, flooded with a transparent liquid INSIDE of the watch case so that the hands actually moved through the liquid. The idea was that since liquids are virtually incompressible compared to gases like air, the watch case would not be crushed by the enormous pressures at that depth. There was no mention of how they tested the watch, but I had images in my mind of one of their watches being lowered down by an almost 4 mile long fishing line until it hit the bottom of the trench. Then it would have been hauled up again to show that it was still ticking away!

In reality this watch was probably tested in some sort of pressure chamber. It might be technically possible to construct a special suit that would permit a diver to go down to such a depth, but in that case a clock would probably be placed inside the suit's helmet for continuous monitoring rather than placed outside and attached to the wrist.

technoguy

Scott
Scott
I always though they had some sort of hydraulic cylinder to pressure test things in-yes,and pressure ratings are static-moving around changes things. I've gone swimming with my watch on-in the ocean,pools, ponds-and the occassional river. Never had any leaks or major corrosion problems.
IIRC, few divers go below 200 feet or so...

rltbod
rltbod
666 feet = 202.9968 meters

But I'm in agreement with your other observations. Regardless of the water resistancy rating on a watch, I would even be hesitant to take a shower or go swimming with it UNLESS it had a screw down crown on it and it was a NEW watch with fresh seals from a major manufacturer. The watch I purchased last week is rated to 50 meters which is about 164.042 feet, however, since it does not have a screw down crown, but just a regular crown and an extra pusher button on the case, I've decided that I will remove it when swimming.

I saw an interesting watch advertised a few years ago which I have never seen again. It was called the "Marianna Trench" watch, but I do not recall the manufacturer. This watch was rated water resistant to a depth of, I think, 20,000 feet! How they did it was interesting. It had a quartz analog movement which was, literally, flooded with a transparent liquid INSIDE of the watch case so that the hands actually moved through the liquid. The idea was that since liquids are virtually incompressible compared to gases like air, the watch case would not be crushed by the enormous pressures at that depth. There was no mention of how they tested the watch, but I had images in my mind of one of their watches being lowered down by an almost 4 mile long fishing line until it hit the bottom of the trench. Then it would have been hauled up again to show that it was still ticking away!

In reality this watch was probably tested in some sort of pressure chamber. It might be technically possible to construct a special suit that would permit a diver to go down to such a depth, but in that case a clock would probably be placed inside the suit's helmet for continuous monitoring rather than placed outside and attached to the wrist.

technoguy
whats a couple of feet between friends?

I too have seen reports on liquid filled watches can't remember where now.

I wear a good quality 200M diver when I swim with no problems.

Joined: May 8th, 2005, 11:38 am
I assume that "quality" diver you wear while swimming does have a screw down crown on it. I would only consider a watch with such a crown to be trustworthy for actual diving. Yet, I am surprised to see "diving" watches being offered that do NOT have a screw down crown on them, yet they, too, have deep depth ratings. Is it possible, that seal technology has advanced to the point where a screw down crown is no longer necessary for maximum water resistancy?

technoguy

RonD.
RonD.
whats a couple of feet between friends?

I too have seen reports on liquid filled watches can't remember where now.

I wear a good quality 200M diver when I swim with no problems.
My Rolex had helium in it when it came from the factory, but I have had it serviced a few times since then and I am sure that they didn't bother to put the helium back in (for \$300 everytime you get one of these serviced, that is the least they should do!!!). What would the helium do anyway?

Ron

technoguy
technoguy
I've heard that a lot of high-end dive watches are now being "pressurized" with helium before leaving the factory. This is a new technique and the high pressure helium inside of the watch case is intended to provide a counter pressure against the inside of the crystal which will allow the watch to go down to the maximum depth for which it is rated. If you have the watch serviced and they do not replace the helium at the correct pressure, then the water resistancy of the watch may fail before it reaches its maximum rated depth! Because of this, I have heard several manufacturers of such watches recommend that they only be serviced at their factories. IF the place you took your Rolex to for servicing sent it back to the factory, then it would have been repressurized there. However, if it was serviced locally by a watchmaker who did not have the correct equipment for the repressurization, then it probably does not now have the helium in it. Maybe you should specifically inquire from the people who serviced it whether or not the repressurization was done on it.

technoguy