341 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 17, 2006Tustin, California,
United States
I am knee deep in a project and therefore way behind in all the great posts this week!!! While I have a few minutes...
I am not sure if this was already discussed, but can we expect to dive with the "new" Aquatimer or do we need to leave that to the current models? The display back somewhat implies that it is not meant for diving but I am curious what the IWC stance on this model is, if known.
54 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 6, 2007
MF - New Vintage Aquatimer and diving
It seems like the self sealing internal bezel control allows it to be used for diving. Unlike so many of these dive watches with a screw down crown for the internal bezel - rendering it dodgy (at best) for diving, this one seems like it may actually fit the bill for recreational diving.
I too am interested in hearing the answer to your question, but am cautiously optimistic.
I'm not a diver but also I've never understood water resistance.
The Vintage Collection Aquatimer is rated to 12 bar, which is 120 meters. Now I realize that's not very deep compared to most diving watches. But we should keep in mind that IWC's Deep One was designed to be water resistant to a depth of 100 meters. At the time that watch debuted, I was told that it was recommended that amateur divers not descend more than 30 to 40 meters (and in fact the depth gauge on the Deep One only shows depths of up to 45 meters).
I've always considered watches with 1000 or 2000 meters water resistance as owning bragging rights, and any diving near those depths would cause death to amateur divers. Not that the water resistance isn't nice to have, but I don't know how useful it is at those depths.
So --I think the new watch is fine for diving, depending on how deep you might dive.
Regards, Michael P.S. Divers are welcome to correct me --but please, no arguments that your motion in the water affects depth. I've never seen any scientific support of that.
341 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 17, 2006Tustin, California,
United States
120 meters is plenty...
That's about three times the depth I would ever go and is about the same rating as my split minute, which is of course meant as a true dive watch.
I think if IWC is good with it working to 12 bars of pressure then it's all good with me. If they mean a working depth of 120 meters, then I am more than good to go.
604 Discussions and CommentsMember since Oct. 10, 2005Obertshausen,
Germany
120 meters is plenty...
...for recreational Divers anyway. But I would like to make a point here with all the discussions about the technical features about the new collection. We have to admit that the major "point of sale" ist design and lifestyle. Where as the originals were made by the old designers guideline "form follows function" There use to be major selling arguments in technical features like a water resitance from 200m to 300m or even 1000m down to 2000m. The "Ingenieur" had to have magnetic shield protection. Even the Pilot watches used to have those features along with a special technic to hold the glas within heavy flight movements. Only because of one reason: the given name!! Today as IWC is no longer offical supplier to the Luftwaffe,Kriegsmarine and Bundeswehr the structure of the customer has also changed. Despite all the facts that the new collection are technical very well high `level` standart a few features "dropped the line", because they are not necessary for the aimed customer. just my 2 cents
It's true, of course, that IWC has made timekeeping devices for the Luftwaffe ,Kriegsmarine and Bundeswehr, among others. But frankly the importance of that has been hugely exaggerated --just by a different kind of marketing. These aren't IWC's profile customer except from the perspective of revisionist history developed perhaps by marketing in the 1980s and 1990s.
IWC produced 1000 B-Uhr for the Luftwaffe, and none more to my knowledge. If IWC produced well over a million watches by 1940, that's just a small fraction of its production. I don't have an exact count of K.M. watches but I doubt if there were a few hundred made. And I don't have a count of Ocean 2000 Bunds, but I doubt there were a 1000.
The fact is, IWC's profile "customer" was not these government units --at least not more than a needle in a haystack.
You can add to this the Briitsh military, where we know of the 6000 W.W.W.'s and well more than 7200 Mark 11s. That's more significant, but really these government contracts (like most) were just ways to sell a lot of watches in bulk and for relatively little money. I need to look up the water resistance of the Mark 11 --was it 10 meters? Until the revival of IWC's advertsiing and marketing of military-style watches to civilians (starting in the late1980s), these watches were selling for a pittance --because their "value" wasn't considered much.
I personally like IWC's history but we needn't make more out of it than it is.
Yes, I understand the desire for antimagnetic pilot's watches and Ingenieurs --but if thse models aren't right for you, then I submit 3 others in the new line might be. Plus another half dozen models in the regular line. And I say that from the perspective of someone wearing today the Ref. 5002 Big Pilot's Watch with its anti-magnetic cage --which frankly I'll never use (despite having worn it on commercial airlines and even on a JU-52).
724 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 22, 2001
A depth rating of 120 meters will be . . .
more than enough unless you are engaged in very deep sea construction work in saturation diving or in deepdiving to wrecks, etc, such as the Andrea Doria, where you would be engaged in technical diving using multiple gas mixes for different stages of the dive.
If you are diving on compressed air only, 120 meters will be more than sufficient for any of your needs. Diving using higher oxygen content mixes like Nitrox will keep you even shallower, and 100% oxygen rebreathers would keep you well under 10 meters.
I am not sure if this was already discussed, but can we expect to dive with the "new" Aquatimer or do we need to leave that to the current models? The display back somewhat implies that it is not meant for diving but I am curious what the IWC stance on this model is, if known.
Thanks,
Michael
It seems like the self sealing internal bezel control allows it to be used for diving. Unlike so many of these dive watches with a screw down crown for the internal bezel - rendering it dodgy (at best) for diving, this one seems like it may actually fit the bill for recreational diving.
I too am interested in hearing the answer to your question, but am cautiously optimistic.
Hi Michael,
I'm not a diver but also I've never understood water resistance.
The Vintage Collection Aquatimer is rated to 12 bar, which is 120 meters. Now I realize that's not very deep compared to most diving watches. But we should keep in mind that IWC's Deep One was designed to be water resistant to a depth of 100 meters. At the time that watch debuted, I was told that it was recommended that amateur divers not descend more than 30 to 40 meters (and in fact the depth gauge on the Deep One only shows depths of up to 45 meters).
I've always considered watches with 1000 or 2000 meters water resistance as owning bragging rights, and any diving near those depths would cause death to amateur divers. Not that the water resistance isn't nice to have, but I don't know how useful it is at those depths.
So --I think the new watch is fine for diving, depending on how deep you might dive.
Regards,
Michael
P.S. Divers are welcome to correct me --but please, no arguments that your motion in the water affects depth. I've never seen any scientific support of that.
Regards, Michael
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Last edited: 5 April, 2012 - 19:53
That's about three times the depth I would ever go and is about the same rating as my split minute, which is of course meant as a true dive watch.
I think if IWC is good with it working to 12 bars of pressure then it's all good with me. If they mean a working depth of 120 meters, then I am more than good to go.
Thanks!
Michael
...for recreational Divers anyway.
But I would like to make a point here with all the discussions about the technical features about the new collection.
We have to admit that the major "point of sale" ist design and lifestyle.
Where as the originals were made by the old designers guideline
"form follows function"
There use to be major selling arguments in technical features like a water resitance from 200m to 300m or even 1000m down to 2000m.
The "Ingenieur" had to have magnetic shield protection.
Even the Pilot watches used to have those features along with a special technic to hold the glas within heavy flight movements.
Only because of one reason: the given name!!
Today as IWC is no longer offical supplier to the Luftwaffe,Kriegsmarine and Bundeswehr the structure of the customer has also changed.
Despite all the facts that the new collection are technical very well high `level` standart a few features "dropped the line", because they are not necessary for the aimed customer.
just my 2 cents
JHF
It's true, of course, that IWC has made timekeeping devices for the Luftwaffe ,Kriegsmarine and Bundeswehr, among others. But frankly the importance of that has been hugely exaggerated --just by a different kind of marketing. These aren't IWC's profile customer except from the perspective of revisionist history developed perhaps by marketing in the 1980s and 1990s.
IWC produced 1000 B-Uhr for the Luftwaffe, and none more to my knowledge. If IWC produced well over a million watches by 1940, that's just a small fraction of its production. I don't have an exact count of K.M. watches but I doubt if there were a few hundred made. And I don't have a count of Ocean 2000 Bunds, but I doubt there were a 1000.
The fact is, IWC's profile "customer" was not these government units --at least not more than a needle in a haystack.
You can add to this the Briitsh military, where we know of the 6000 W.W.W.'s and well more than 7200 Mark 11s. That's more significant, but really these government contracts (like most) were just ways to sell a lot of watches in bulk and for relatively little money. I need to look up the water resistance of the Mark 11 --was it 10 meters? Until the revival of IWC's advertsiing and marketing of military-style watches to civilians (starting in the late1980s), these watches were selling for a pittance --because their "value" wasn't considered much.
I personally like IWC's history but we needn't make more out of it than it is.
Yes, I understand the desire for antimagnetic pilot's watches and Ingenieurs --but if thse models aren't right for you, then I submit 3 others in the new line might be. Plus another half dozen models in the regular line. And I say that from the perspective of someone wearing today the Ref. 5002 Big Pilot's Watch with its anti-magnetic cage --which frankly I'll never use (despite having worn it on commercial airlines and even on a JU-52).
Regards,
Michael
Regards, Michael
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Last edited: 5 April, 2012 - 19:53
more than enough unless you are engaged in very deep sea construction work in saturation diving or in deepdiving to wrecks, etc, such as the Andrea Doria, where you would be engaged in technical diving using multiple gas mixes for different stages of the dive.
If you are diving on compressed air only, 120 meters will be more than sufficient for any of your needs. Diving using higher oxygen content mixes like Nitrox will keep you even shallower, and 100% oxygen rebreathers would keep you well under 10 meters.
Not an issue.
Last edited: 2 March, 2011 - 18:26
I can not help asking what is a Crewdog doing at 120 metres???
;-)
--
Isobars.
and has been doing it deeper since 1974.
Last edited: 2 March, 2011 - 18:26