[Guest]

I'm curious, what does water resistance REALLY mean? I have a Tissot PRS516 Automatic which says "50 meters".
I'm assuming this means I can go under water to a depth of no more than 50 meters.
Does this also mean that I can wear my Tissot in the shower? In a Sauna?
I also had the watch pressure checked for water resistance and it was sealed from water.
I'd appreciate responses....thank you.

 

[AAWATCHES]

Hope this helps:Water resistance ratingSuitabilityRemarksWater Resistant 30 m or 50 mSuitable for water related work and fishing.NOT suitable for swimming or diving.Water Resistant 100 mSuitable for recreational surfing, swimming, snorkeling, sailing and water sports.NOT suitable for diving.Water Resistant 200 mSuitable for professional marine activity and serious surface water sports.NOT suitable for diving.Diver's 100 mMinimum ISO standard (ISO 6425) for scuba diving at depths NOT requiring helium gas.Diver's 100 m and 150 m watches are generally old(er) watches.Diver's 200 m or 300 mSuitable for scuba diving at depths NOT requiring helium gas.Typical ratings for contemporary diver's watches.Diver's 300+ m for mixed-gas divingSuitable for saturation diving (helium enriched environment).Watches designed for mixed-gas diving will have the DIVER'S WATCH L M FOR MIXED-GAS DIVING

 

[watch-man7777]

Water resistance is a pressure rating, and really, has nothing to do with how far down you can swim with it. There are multiple threads on this topic, some of which are pretty heated, do a search and you will find them.

 

[Isthmus]

Hope this helps:Water resistance ratingSuitabilityRemarksWater Resistant 30 m or 50 mSuitable for water related work and fishing.NOT suitable for swimming or diving.Water Resistant 100 mSuitable for recreational surfing, swimming, snorkeling, sailing and water sports.NOT suitable for diving.Water Resistant 200 mSuitable for professional marine activity and serious surface water sports.NOT suitable for diving.Diver's 100 mMinimum ISO standard (ISO 6425) for scuba diving at depths NOT requiring helium gas.Diver's 100 m and 150 m watches are generally old(er) watches.Diver's 200 m or 300 mSuitable for scuba diving at depths NOT requiring helium gas.Typical ratings for contemporary diver's watches.Diver's 300+ m for mixed-gas divingSuitable for saturation diving (helium enriched environment).Watches designed for mixed-gas diving will have the DIVER'S WATCH L M FOR MIXED-GAS DIVING

You are generally accurate, but your descriptions are overly conservative. a 50m rated watch is perfectly suitable for swiming. Also there is no depth rating specifically associated with helium or mixed gas diving. watches that are exposed to those environments meet the exact same minimum depth rating of 100m.

The Original poster would be well served to read these threads:

Water Resistance - Myth VS Reality...

and

How is Water Resistance Tested

and

Difference Between "Water Proof" & "Water Resist"...

and especially this one:

Text of ISO 6425/1996 Minimum Standards For Dive Watches...

 

[stripe]

Do NOT dive with this watch, or even wear it in the shower. It is not meant for that. 50M basically means it can withstand occasional splashes from rain, washing dishes, etc. Do not submerge this watch into water or swim with it.

 

[Isthmus]

Do NOT dive with this watch, or even wear it in the shower. It is not meant for that. 50M basically means it can withstand occasional splashes from rain, washing dishes, etc. Do not submerge this watch into water or swim with it.

with all due respect, that is nonsense. I can see this advice beeing given for something with maybe a 3 atm rating, but 50m, com on, let's not be overly cautious here. if seals are in proper working order 50m is more than adequate. There are tons of sportwatches (especially digitals specifically made for sports and designed to get wet) with these kinds of resistance ratings. Heck I have a digital starter dive computer with a 50m rating, and yes, it works perfectly even at the bottom of a 12m pool. Read the links Posted below, you guys might find them interesting reads.

 

[AAWATCHES]

My original post is a reprint from Wikipedia. This is a guide line and i believe fairly accurate. i have worn inexpensive watches that have little or no water resistance ratings while swimming with no problem. I have also worn a several thousand dollar watch with several thousand feet of water Resistance ratings that worked well at 200 feet until the anchor chain the crystal.:-( As i said these are guidelines. Something else to consider is the force of moving your arm through the water, if stationary at 50 feet you would be OK while moving your arm as in swimming forcefully may increase the force to the watch. I am not an engineer, but when dealing with watches especially an expensive one i would want to err on the side of safety.:think:

 

[Isthmus]

My original post is a reprint from Wikipedia. This is a guide line and i believe fairly accurate. i have worn inexpensive watches that have little or no water resistance ratings while swimming with no problem. I have also worn a several thousand dollar watch with several thousand feet of water Resistance ratings that worked well at 200 feet until the anchor chain the crystal.:-( As i said these are guidelines. Something else to consider is the force of moving your arm through the water, if stationary at 50 feet you would be OK while moving your arm as in swimming forcefully may increase the force to the watch. I am not an engineer, but when dealing with watches especially an expensive one i would want to err on the side of safety.:think:

Not to be obnoxious, but you are repeating several watch collecting myths that have been discussed at great lengths (and disproven) several times in the past. Also wikipedia is not a reliable information source. use it as a guideline by which to direct a search, but not as your final information source. You are right in sawying that these are guidlines, but my point is that what you were saying is overly cautious and not acqurate in real world conditions and applications.

Try giving the links I posted a read, and concentrate on the actual text of the ISO minimum dive watch ratings. You will find that you will be seeing that wikipedia article in a completely different light after you are done.

 

[AAWATCHES]

Not to be obnoxious, but you are repeating several watch collecting myths that have been discussed at great lengths (and disproven) several times in the past. Also wikipedia is not a reliable information source. use it as a guideline by which to direct a search, but not as your final information source. You are right in sawying that these are guidlines, but my point is that what you were saying is overly cautious and not acqurate in real world conditions and applications.

As i said these are guidelines, i do not wish to argue the point however i have seen this same set of guidelines printed in official watch manufacturers literature, I just looked on a Seiko company web page and it says the same thing and frankly i would believe that the manufacturer of a product probably knows more about their product than the average person.

 

[HilltopMichael]

To the original poster - enjoy your watch and don't worry about getting it wet. Everyone has a different opinion about the numbers etched on the case. Some wouldn't look at water unless it says 1000 feet while others will scuba dive with just about any watch. What's important is that your watch has been tested. It's always possible that a watch wasn't assembled correctly or a seal has failed. Since you had your watch tested and it passed, don't worry about getting it wet.

I personally test all of my watches yearly or before a trip (easy for me to say as I have a pressure tester). I've gone swimming and diving with most of my watches, including those that are *only* rated to 3 atm (100 feet) and don't have screw down crowns. Never had any problems.

 

[Isthmus]

As i said these are guidelines, i do not wish to argue the point however i have seen this same set of guidelines printed in official watch manufacturers literature, I just looked on a Seiko company web page and it says the same thing and frankly i would believe that the manufacturer of a product probably knows more about their product than the average person.

I agree, however, I'm a huge seiko collector, and I think that I'm pretty well versed in their practices. The flyer you are referring to (and it is only one flyer) has been argued about on this forum. Seiko is notorious for being over conservative on their specs and recommendations, and this flyer is one of them. It is worth noting that they don't use this flyer any more. Still don't assume that everyone is the average person, there are a lot of extremely knowledgable individuals here. Also take the time to read the articles posted (which you seem to be avoiding), and especially the actual ISO ratings. You will find that your guidelines are just plain wrong. take the time to read it.

 

[lysanderxiii]

What Does Water Resistance Really mean?

It means the manufacture will not accept a warrenty return if the watch is subjected to more than 50 atm water-overpressure and leaks.

 

[AAWATCHES]

I agree, however, I'm a huge seiko collector, and I think that I'm pretty well versed in their practices. The flyer you are referring to (and it is only one flyer) has been argued about on this forum. Seiko is notorious for being over conservative on their specs and recommendations, and this flyer is one of them. It is worth noting that they don't use this flyer any more. Still don't assume that everyone is the average person, there are a lot of extremely knowledgable individuals here. Also take the time to read the articles posted (which you seem to be avoiding), and especially the actual ISO ratings. You will find that your guidelines are just plain wrong. take the time to read it.

Hi, i have read the article you refer to and you keep missing the fact that i keep saying IT IS ONLY A GUIDELINE. I think that lydersanderxiii hit the nail on the head the manufacture will not honor warranty when a watch is subjected to any possible pressure that would exceed its limitations. I also said that if it were me i would err on the side of safety. we all have opinions whether we are correct or not that is another question. A fellow wis asked what it meant regarding his own watch. you might be 150% correct but as a responsible person when someone asks advice, i think that the advice one should give should be to protect his watch not give him controversial information that may damage his watch. By the way those guidelines are also used by several other watch manufacturers.

 

[stripe]

A fellow wis asked what it meant regarding his own watch. you might be 150% correct but as a responsible person when someone asks advice, i think that the advice one should give should be to protect his watch not give him controversial information that may damage his watch.

Exactly.

And this is precisely what I have done too. Err on the side of caution, which, in the case of the Op's 50M watch, is to not dive or swim with it. That should be reserved to watches with a 100M+ rating.

 

[ELDRAW]

Exactly.

And this is precisely what I have done too. Err on the side of caution, which, in the case of the Op's 50M watch, is to not dive or swim with it. That should be reserved to watches with a 100M+ rating.

Call me paranoid but i prefer not to swim with a watch less than 200m, rather be safe than sorry.

 

[NutellaBear]

A subject probably beaten to death. But heck, let's bounce the rubble one more time just to make sure! ;-)

I think the main thing to remember is that all the pressure ratings mean squat if you don't regularly have the seals maintained and the watch retested -- what is it, I think the standard is every two years? I think most failures are due to inadequate maintenance causing gasket failure, failure to screw down crowns, and doing things like operating the chrono functions while exposed to water. A 1000M dive watch with dry cracked seals is unprotected probably even in high humidity.

-T

 

[hpark21]

Call me paranoid but i prefer not to swim with a watch less than 200m, rather be safe than sorry.

You are paranoid.

I do not believe at most of the water dipping that we do 50m, 100m, 200m or 300m matters.

Of course, if you actually start doing serious diving, it would be another story, but for wading in the pools or swimming in the ocean (probably 15ft cannonball into the pool TOPS = 5m = 0.5BAR) that most of us do and use watches for 99.99% of the time, it would not be the water pressure that does in your watch, but it would be faulty gaskets in your back of the watch or (more likely in case of non-screw in crowns) crown gaskets.

If it is either of those cases, 100m or even having 1000m water protection would not matter.

 

[dnslater]

What Does Water Resistance Really mean?

It means the manufacture will not accept a warrenty return if the watch is subjected to more than 50 atm water-overpressure and leaks.

I think this hit the nail on the head. Most manufacturer's likely give very conservative ratings and guidelines in their instruction books to ensure that no one takes there watches to the limit. If a Seiko or Citizen was tested and leaked at 110 meters, they would likely give it a 30 or 40 meter rating just to be safe, not 100. This is generally how engineering works in most fields. You always figure in a factor of safety.

 

[lysanderxiii]

That being said, I have swam and showered with watches rated at just 3 atm with no ill affects (An O&W M65, an Alpha PO, one made from a Otto Frei case).

If the watch actually passes a pressure test, it should be OK.

Remember, ISO 2281 (Water Resistant) watches are not 100% pressure tested, only a relatively small sample of each lot are pressure tested.

 

[scm64]

Water resistance is a pressure rating, and really, has nothing to do with how far down you can swim with it. There are multiple threads on this topic, some of which are pretty heated, do a search and you will find them.

+1 b-)

you will find more than you ever want to know on this subject.