# Best Dive Watch



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Seiko SLR001P. I have quite a few divers from the Orient,007's 009 among others.Quitea few Citizen ones too. The SLR beats the rest, hands down. It's a perp' calendar so quite accurate, looks great on it's dedicated bracelet, the lume is superb and at 46mm diameter, is just about the right size!

Peter


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Hi Peter

I do like the case on those, very original and functional. I don't understand why the plastic watch back is there, what does it do?

I don't think whether a watch has a perpetual calendar or not has any bearing on its accuracy.

I think my vote has to go for the Sea Dweller. Or some Sub variants... beautiful yet functional.

Got a great link here to another forum (if Roy doesn't mind - I think it will get the discussion going here) which involves a commercial diver who used to work for Comex, a well known operation. Comex incidentally issued Sea Dwellers to all their divers and eventually Rolex made an SD incorporating a pressure release valve especially for them. I think James Dowling has one.

Anyway, this guy is talking about good dive watches and his faves - you might need to negotiate your way around the thread to get to the good parts but a couple of his posts are very informative and he is not out to sell anything.

I reckon he speaks from experience and a big part of my liking for divers is that these things are, or should be, tools.

Here is the link: Diver Debate


----------



## Guest (May 12, 2003)

Rolex Submariner,

The first dive watch and the greatest (and obviously the SD a later deeper variant of the sub)

All these other dive watches have taken the original recipe (screw down crown, moveable bezel etc) from the company that originated them and copied them for their own use.

Original is best. (and best looking!)

Thats why I'm on the look out for one!

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

The Sub is my favourite dive watch too (although I must add I've never been diving). My 5513 is the watch I enjoy wearing the most. I also like the Seadweller - tough as old boots. Which model Sub are you considering going for, Neil ?? Vintage or a more modern sapphire crystal variant ?

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Guest (May 12, 2003)

Foggy

I had a 5513 a couple of years ago and sold it.

I consider that model the classic vintage Sub but actually whatever I can get the best deal on will be the one I eventually buy!









(Although I've not had a sapphire model)

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

The Rolex Sub is one of my faves to but is it STILL the best diver or is it's reputation among enthusiasts based on it's pioneering past.

Anyway I reckon the only people qualified to answer this question are divers themselves.

Do we have any here.

If not it might make an interesting project to find out what the boys and girls in the know actually use.

I think the answer might surprise us all.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

I have a copy of IWW where they go to great lengths on this subject. See if I can dig it out. General opinion I've seen is the vote is with Rolex or Panerai. Read an article a bit ago. Interesting - I learnt what it means to actually get the Bends. Very nasty. Anyhow a guy was buying this, & commented that it has seen some action. It had belonged to friend of seller. They worked for Comex, & his mate was decapitated in a decompression chamber. To cap this guy's grief his wife made him sell the watch. I know what I would have said.

Paul


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Simon,

regarding perpetual calendars. Most of the Seiko perps' that I own have the higher frequency quartz fitted to them so they are more accurate.

As for the Rolex sub, as I stated on the old forums my friend has been a professional diver in the oil industry( also worked on the Titanic!) for quite a number of years.

Now he owns a Sub' which he wears for normal everyday wear. I did ask him, "Alistair do you wear it for work?" His reply was to the effect for me not to be silly. It wasn't reliable enough and that he and all his colleagues invariably wore Casios.

I think if we had a poll around the world we would find that Seiko and Citizen divers rule, not because of price although I suspect that does come into it, but more importantly their watches do what they are supposed to, first time out, without any fuss nor modification, without any customer having to undergo the testing for the company, at their own expense, unlike Rolex crystals when first subjected to the real world of diving

Peter


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi guys

I have no idea what MOST divers use, but I have read lots of articles about saturation divers and, for what it's worth, most of those went with the Seadweller.

Regards

Foggy


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

And I stand by what I say. That is, most divers and here I include recreational and professional, around the world, would probably use Citizen and Seiko.

Peter


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Peter

That's fine - I am merely reporting what I have read. I was also quite careful to mention that this was relative only to saturation divers - a very specialist area of diving. Maybe you could carry out your poll ?? That way we would have more of a definitive answer on what all the other types of divers use.

Regards

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

I suspect if you were to poll *currently working* industry divers you might find that most use recently developed Suunto or similar dive computers, in which timekeeping and display of time are secondary to specialised dive functions relating to decompression. You can download data to a PC later etc.

But I think there is a slightly older group who would have been more likely to use the watches we are talking about.

Each type will have its fans. But I have seen enough anecdotal evidence to keep me convinced about the Sub. And over and above doing the job it was designed for, the Rolex does so much more than all the Casios and Citizens put together.


----------



## Guest (May 12, 2003)

Hello all,

These are my current divers watches.

Not as stylish as a nice plastic Casio









But I like them!

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Simon,the Rolex does so much more? You would think that, would you not?

I'm sure that you have a splendid collection of divers. Enlighten us?

Peter


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Neil, the one on the left is reasonably nice, a classic design but I have to say again, I can't really go for it as a watch that I would buy becuase of that ugly crown stuck on the left at ten. the one on the right, well, I've never liked the "skeleton" type hands.

I cannot understand why on earth Omega went with that design and never followed, for example, IWC(NICE!) or even Breitling with it's concealed valve.

Peter

(P.S. got three Casios now! Might even like another. They keep the thousand quids worth of Seiko NX, company.)


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Having a bad day, Peter?

I am sure regular users of the forum will know from my endless ignorant questions that I have only recently begun to be interested in watches, and therefore I am as you point out unlikely to have very many.

I own neither a Sub nor a Sea Dweller. But eventually I will.

When I wrote "over and above" I referred to the way in which the Rolex is so full of character and looks just so right when you handle one. It is so difficult to get all the elements that make a dial look good to come together all at once - and the Sub does it for me.

The only half decent watches I currently own are an Oris (the only diver - not likely to be good for diving as it leaked in a shower







), a Glycine manual in PVD black, an M5. The rest is assorted anonymous 70's 80's Seikos etc.

Didn't realise you had to own a particular watch before you could comment on it in the forum - might be a bit quiet if that was the case.


----------



## Guest (May 12, 2003)

Peter

I afraid don't know what a Seiko NX is. I have no interest in Asian watches.

Why don't you put up some pictures of your watch collection I'm sure everyone here would love to see what you have.

I believe you are the only forum member who hasn't posted a picture yet.

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Simon

Sounds like you have the beginnings of a decent collection to me. Do you plan to specialise, or just buy anything you like ?? I planned to stick with just military, but then it became divers as well, and so on and so forth







Addictive things these watches !!

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Hi Foggy

At present I am still at the very early stages of learning. The whole field of mechanical watches is just fascinating for anyone with any kind of interest in engineering, design, or an appreciation of craftmanship and things made to last or made to be maintained in the future.

In general I am tending towards utilitarian watches and watches designed for extreme environments (divers) or watches designed for a particular role (pilots).

As far as Rolex is concerned I have only ever really admired the Explorers and some Submariner variants. While I admire the craftsmanship some of Rolex's dress watches look pretty awful.

At present I am being pulled in alot of different directions as regards collecting. And as you say it does seem very addictive.

I think I will just keep doing what I am doing and buy a watch or 2 a month and trade in what I have gone off.

I also like earlier chronos like the Britix that have on RLT of late - lovely understated dials.

On the other extreme I like some late 60s / early 70's chrons esp Heuer which are anything but understated in some cases.

Eventually I want to identify something along the lines of your RAF / RN helicopter pilot's Seiko collection. A group of 6 or so variants of a type that are of great interest but still affordable enough so that given tiime a non-dealer type could assemble the complete set. Mechanical though.

I think it may be some time before I have a liitle group of 3 or 4 that would go well in a photo for the forum but I'll get there.

Si


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Simon

Totally agree re Rolex - they do make some pretty hideous looking pieces these days. My Seadweller is modern, but apart from that the current range doesn't do a lot for me. I am, however, a big fan of their older stuff - Subs, GMT-Masters, Explorers etc etc. I did consider just collecting Rolex watches at one point, but realised I wouldn't be satisfied having to wait a couple of years between each watch purchase 

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Initially I resisted the appeal of the Submariner thinking along the lines of "oh those are just clingimg on because they've been aorund so long" or "you are just paying for the brand name there".

But the more I look at them... plus someone in work has one and I get frequent opportunities to look at it!!.... and the more I read about them the more I realise that in some cases a brand's reputation can be a well deserved one.


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

simon_walker said:


> The rest is assorted anonymous 70's 80's Seikos etc.


 Simon

Please elaborate


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Neil

The SM on the right is wonderful. Which slack jawed yokel let you persuade them to part with that?









Paul


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

2 Seiko 5's. Battered.

A Seiko duo dial thing with a digital display in a black face. Doesn't work.

A Citizen Eco Drive Chrono. Works but not well. Too small for me.

Why?


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

And a Vostock Century Time which I paid too much for and which differed markedly from its sales pic. Keeps good time but the bezel together with the crystal keep coming off...

Happy now?


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

Neil

Your expensive Swiss watches are all well and good but in terms of features and functions you cannot really compare them to a modern digital watch.

The Omega SMP'S that you posted are for posers. Not pro's.

Here's one from my own collection and I would like you to show me one watch you have that can beat this for style, function and value for money.

Dream on Toppa


















Simon. I'm just intersted in Japanese watches, particularly Seiko, from the 60's and 70's.


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

I must agree about the hands, I hate the cut out ones, I cannot see the point.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Sorry Andy.

I don't think there's anything of interest for you there.

Though I see that even those 80's Seikos, the first generation to come out with a digital display in the analogue dial, have their followers. It was a good watch actually and if it was in good condition it would be worth keeping.


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Andy

This sort of thing must be right up your street then ??? 

http://hyperphoto.photoloft.com/view/expor...366&w=450&h=600

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Andy

Have you got one of those camera watches, or remote control ones. I used to have the latter, but gave it to my cousin. The amount of times I got p----d in the pub & let people turn the tv over during football, I think it was a good move health wise.

Paul


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

Nah

I'm not really into gadget watches despite my previous post which was supposed to be a joke.

That said I have a bit of a soft spot for those old Seiko LCD's.

When I was a junior recruit in the Army at the tender age of 16 I bought a similar watch to the one Foggy posted from the Naafi.

I used to go in every 2 weeks to pay a little off at a time till eventually it was mine. It was the first item I ever bought with my own money and boy do I wish I could find it.

I mean I know I never sold it or lost it which means it's still knocking around somewhere. I just cannot find it.

I was so proud of that watch and bear in mind it wasn't a real interest of mine back then.

I have a feeling I left it at my parents house when I came home on leave once.

I bet it's still in a box of odds and sods in there attic.


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Hi Simon, me having a bad day? Not at all. Now that you have explained as to why you like the Rolex then I can comprehend. With just a sweeping statement it's hard for anyone to understand as to why Rolex should be, in your estimation, rated above all others.

The mention of Rolex tends to put my hackles up slightly and we have all been through this before, suffice to say that when it is mentioned, other quality manufacturers tend to be forgotten, when in actual fact some of their pieces, quantifiably and objectively, beat the Rolex offerings hands down. I'm not accusing you of this Simon but there tends to be too much snobbery attached to Rolex.

Neil, no I have not posted any pictures of any of my pieces yet. I don't even possess a digital camera yet. Come to think of it, haven't even bothered to find out how to post a picture on here. Rest assured Neil, some time you will see some of my watches and who knows, you may have even bought some of my fine ex-pieces in the past?

As for the Seiko NX, It's a "dive computer", digital and that's why it sits alongside my other fine digitals, the Casios! Far eastern watches, ah! have a look Neil, you might find you get a hard on for some of them!

Or are you asking if in fact I have any of these pieces?

(I'm sure I could dig up a few references for you)

Peter.

P.S. Since Neil raised the subject, if I was to purchase a camera, what would I ask for/need. It would only be for the watches and the wife in the bedroom!

Any ideas or suggestions? I'm not in any shape or form knowlegable about photography.

Thanks.


----------



## pauluspaolo (Feb 24, 2003)

I don't know what the best dive watch would be as there are so many to choose from. I think that most commercial divers tend to use the dive computer thingy (with a watch as a backup maybe), whilst recreational divers probably use watches. As for which watch well that's up to the particular diver isn't it? I think the Seiko automatics have probably bought reliable timekeeping to millions of divers over the years, as you can probably tell I don't really know!!

Regarding collecting. I started out like Foggy, planning to collect just a particular type. In my case Seiko divers seem to be what floats my boat. Just about my first ebay purchase was a Seiko 7002 diver from Australia ... a very nice watch indeed, this was soon followed by a Seiko 6105, 6309, 4205 and 2205 and finally an skx007. I've now decided to call a halt on buying any more Seiko divers as I think I've got just about all the ones I want. I'd love a Marine Master but I've heard that they aren't very comfortable to wear and weigh a ton, plus there's the price issue - Â£1000 is an awful lot to pay for a Seiko. I'd love an example of the original Seiko diver, I can't remember the model number (6159??) but it came out in the 60's and is the grand daddy of them all. However they are rarer than a very, very ,very rare thing and are priced accordingly. So despite the fact that I intended to collect just the divers I seem to have branched out somewhat and now have a couple of 6138 chronographs, quite a few older 5's (with 6119 movements), a few Citizens and many more. I suppose that's why it's called collecting. I will never sell the Seiko divers though, all the others I would be prepared to sell, I wouldn't be particularly happy about it but I would sell them.

Ta for reading this rubbish!

Cheers

Paul


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Peter

I like watches, full stop. That includes Rolex, Seiko, Omega, Casio and so on and so forth. This comment does interest me though



> in actual fact some of their pieces, quantifiably and objectively, beat the Rolex offerings hands down


As an admirer of all brands, I'd be interested to see the articles or tests which showed these results. Can you please post links to them (assuming they are web based).

Thanks

Foggy


----------



## Guest (May 13, 2003)

Roy

The skeleton hands on the normal SMP are really just for design purposes, although I quite like them as it gives the watch a very unique look, different to other divers.

I had an SMP chronograph before and the skeleton hands were very useful if you wanted to read the sub dials whilst they were covered by the main hands.

You could look through them!









I don't know if this was a purposeful design or just a happy coincidence but it worked very well.

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Foggy,

Start with price?

Peter


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Peter

Huh ?? I can buy watches at the local market for Â£1 each brand new. Does that mean they are better than Seiko, Omega, Rolex etc etc. ??? I don't think so, do you ??

Next ??

Regards

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

The trouble is that "best" is very difficult to define as we all see difernet things in a watch.

We aren't going to come up with a definitive answer here, just as I wouldn't expect a definitive answer when I posted "best chrono under Â£500" or similar way back before the old forum blew up.

All I hope for from this thread and similar is that we hear about some personal favourites, some pros and cons, see and read about some interesting watches, and maybe just maybe find another watch worth seeking out.

Hi Peter: re Rolex snobbery. I think I originally felt a little this way about Rolex, but as time goes on I am really starting to believe in them. Yes some people will buy them as a status symbol knowing nothing of how they work. But their image is backed up by a history of great watches and durable well made machines. I don't deny for a moment that many Seiko (for instance) are great value, work well, look good (well the odd one) and so on. And indeed there are quite a few I'd like to own. One of them is even a quartz!

But none fit my *own* idea of "best".


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Simon

Wise words indeed and I wholeheartedly agree.

It is indeed impossible to say which watch is best. We can only say which does if for us as individuals.

When Peter started this thread he entitled it "Best Dive watch" and then announced that his favourite was a Seiko. I hadn't realise that we were being told that this was a fact i.e. that this watch was the best with no differing opinions. I believed the thread to be an invitation to discuss our favourites, and to opine as to why they were our favourites. Others, myself included, stated theirs. Rolex was a fairly common theme. Peter clearly has no time for Rolex, which is fine, but that is no reason to put the brand down. I get satisfaction from wearing anything from a Timex right through to my Rolex watches. However if I was ever in the position where I could only keep one watch, I would choose my 5513. That's simply because it's my personal favourite. It has history, it looks fantastic, it's accurate enough and it's tough & reliable.

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Another seemingly well rated utilitarian watch is the Sinn EZM . They seem to be better known in the US than here. Never seen one in the flesh.

Anyone any experience of these? Some of them are oil filled which would seem a good way of waterproofing a watch. I read reports of difficult repairs though which I can understand.

My local watch shop has quite a few Zeniths on display. Some are superb, well all of them actually, and one is a very Sub-like diver - wonderful but I think it just looks *too* pristine to subject to any actual work. But then I guess a Sub starts off that way too.

I am also surprised that you don't hear of more actual divers (I'm not) using Trasers etc for the illumination.

Another one which given the Kontiki history etc you would think would feature more often: Eterna.

Can any owners comment?


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

been through all this crap about Rolex before. Oh! were you not here then? I really cannot be bothered reiterating all that I have stated in the past about this subject. I will say that Rolex has always followed the keep the supply short and the price high ploy. A con. Just like certain German cars. To manipulate the market and keep profits high. For something that certainly doesn't cost that much to make.

Remember too that Rolex, the company, will and has always refused to take part in independent comparative tests. Why? Something to hide perhaps?

If you like the Rolex because of its style then fine. It's pleasant enough looking. But as a candidate for best diver, hey, that's a laugh.

Peter


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Thanks Peter

You've confirmed what I suspected.

Regards

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Mmmm... well well. Hi Foggy.

Peter I would imagine that Rolex are making watches as fast as they can without affecting the quality of what they produce. The fact that demand outstrips supply is simply the fact that they are desirable worldwide for very good reasons, not all horological, they are a good investment, and that it would be physically inpossible for Rolex as they are to make more.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Bad news Simon, & I have this from a damn good source. Peter is right. They're stalling on distribution. I know of a guy who got his steel Daytona last November having waited over 2 years. It's production date was late 1999ish

Paul


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Simon

You are of course quite correct. However, when one comes up against someone as anti-Rolex as Peter clearly is, there's no point cotinuing the debate, hence my previous post. I will continue to enjoy my Rolex (also happy knowing that they pioneered the dive watch) watches along with my Seiko's, Omega's, Casio's, Timex etc etc etc. Clearly the sat. divers who use Rolex Seadwellers in their work for years on end, and swear by them, haven't got a clue when it comes to watches 

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Hi Paul. If Rolex had taken the order, ie made the sale, to your mate for a watch already manufactured and in their stocks, why would they take 2 years to get it from Switzerland to here?

I am not doubting you or your source by the way, I just don't get the logic of it.

If they were declining *orders* for a watch then than would seem to me to be more like an artificial limit on supply...

Yours







Si


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

I knew somebody who ordered a Sea Dweller. Five years later the shop contacted him and said that they had the watch that he ordered. He had totally forgot about it. The best thing was that they let him have it at the price that they were at the time of ordering.

The thing that annoys me about Rolex is their restrictive parts policy, they will only allow their authorised service centres to obtain parts.


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Roy

100% agree with you on that point - very annoying indeed









Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

Every single part has to be listed and records kept of which part went in which watch. This is to prove to Rolex that they are not selling parts. If they are found to then bang no more Rolex parts for them.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Hi Roy

But are they not essentially well-meaning in doing that - ensuring their watches get repaired by authorised centres therefore keeping their reputation up?

Before anyone says it I know there are expert watchmakers out there who are not Rolex authorised. I do not mean to imply that I think some of them could not look after a Rolex as well as an authorised centre.

I don't mean that at all.

What I mean is from Rolex's point of view surely they are doing what they have to do. If parts were freely available then some* watches would end up being poorly maintained, unreliable and hence harm Rolex.*

*
*

*
That Sea Dweller... do not understand the logic. I would have thought if supplies are limited then you would say to a customer sorry we cannot take orders for this at present. Maybe someone can give me an insight....*


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

That's another good point, Simon.

Servicing is an area where one needs to be careful. The good part is that if you send a watch to Rolex for service, it invariably comes back looking like new. You pay for it of course. Trouble is they are prone to replacing parts with the latest available, so if you're not careful your vintage Sub comes back looking like a new model eg. old style 5513 dial replaced with newer style dial. You have to be very careful to stipulate to them what you do not want replaced when sending in a watch.

Personally, I'd rather the parts were more freely available, and have the choice to be able to send my watch to somebody such as Roy and have him service it.

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

No they are not, Sorry Simon.

Parts should be readily available to any qualified watchmaker.

Say you need a crown for your watch because the threads have gone, nothing else just a crown. The watch works fine, you do not want to spend hundreds on it you just want a bloody crown.

Anbody watchmaker can fix Rolexes , there's nothing special about them.

Most customers would prefer their favorite repairer to do it rather than send it to Rolex.

You would not beleive the requests we get for Rolex parts from just normal people who have them and they just want a crown or similar.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Interesting, was not aware of this parts issue at all. I can see your point of view there Roy. No doubt I would feel the same way if I just needed a crown!

From a watchmakers point of view how do you see Rolex? Do you think there is substance behind their reputation in terms of how well the watches are put together?


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

They are ok , but not my favorite. They have made several bad designs in my opinion.

Like a stupid thin circlip to hold the rotor on. I do not like free sprung balances either.

These have no regulator. There are small screws on the balance, not normal screws ,mind you, special Rolex screws that need a special tool to turn.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Hi Roy

Any movements to be avoided?

Go on then, which would be the watchmakers favourite to work on? From a mechanical/engineering quality point of view?

I realise you are being put on the spot a bit but it is most interesting!


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

All this reminds me why I have no interest in Rolex anymore. You spend years lining their pockets. Then when you get knowledgeable, it becomes obvious they ain't the best by a long chalk

Paul


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Remind me again Roy. What's difference in free sprung balances?

Paul


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Morning all.

Foggy, me "anti Rolex"? No just someone who is perceptive enough to see through the hype and realise they are certainly no better than offerings from other manufacturers.

Any innovation or invention from them of late? Unlike others, even SMH

You will have to fogive me. I am so slow. I didn't realise as to why you have the nickname, "foggy". So apt.

Peter


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Thanks again Peter

I wondered how long it would take before you got to personal attacks. I have tried to remain balanced in the debate, accepting that it is impossible to say which is "best" and acknowledging that all makers have their merits. However, now I must bow to your superior knowledge - the Seiko you own is, of course, the best dive watch ever made. It must be, because YOU say so.

Time for me to move on. There's nothing more I can usefully contribute.

Adios Amigo's

Foggy


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Foggy I think it would be a great pity if you decide not to contribute further. I hope you change your mind.

I think this is a great thread actually and in some ways has been informative.

In fact it could turn out to be a classic thread if we start to really get down to the pros and cons of the choices available to us.

If the title of the thread is read literally as "best dive watch" then it will be short lived because like it or not things have moved on and dive computers are now with us.

But if you understand the thread title to be "best collectors dive watch" (as I do given that it is on a watch collectors site rather than a divers one) then it opens things out a little.

But I must admit I thought there would have a lot more people offering their ideas or favourites. I thought there would be a bit more technical discussion among those who work with watches.

Also I am interested in how watchmakers have over the years approached the problem of making a watch water resistant.

Also this Rolex issue is fascinating for a newbie. Some of you have been here before







but for me as a fan of some of their watches, but still open to argument, it would be an invaluable chance to learn.


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

Foggy. I hope you didn't say what I think you just did









I for one value your opinions highly.

I especially appreciate your obdvious knowledge across the board relating to high end swiss watches and my personal favourite Seiko. Please carry on contributing.


----------



## Guest (May 14, 2003)

Why do I get this feeling of Deja-Vu ? 

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Foggy,

Don't leave the forum. I can assure you that your obvious knowledge and photographic skills on the military type watches in particular, is very interesting, and informative. It would be missed here, and I would like you to stay, as would many of the others, I am sure.

I've had a bit of a humourous dig at Rolex with my M5 quips, but that's just part of the overall banter.

This is a good forum, that is abundant with all kinds of humour and characters, which is largely down to Roy being a good sort of bloke, so don't let our weird sense of humour, or anything else, get you down. Your posts are always particularly interesting, and of real value.

Stick with it!


----------



## chrisb (Feb 26, 2003)

Foggy,

I agree with Griff, (unusual in itself  ), Simon and Andy.

Don't leave the Forum..... we all appreciate and value your input on all subjects and the Forum would be poorer without your contributions.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Foggy

You're doing what Griff did over the issues about guns. You're letting someone else's opinion get the better of you. Stop now.

No offence to Peter, but if you were having a dig at Foggy, not fair. Before we all upset each other & take our bat & balls home, lay your cards on the table.

Peter, how many Rolex you owned? How much you read on them? Have you got a mate who does Roy's job, & sat with him many a time watching him dismantle them, etc?

I can claim all 3. I've seen the insides of others as well. I couldn't begin to service or repair one. However, on what I know & have seen, I am with Foggy all the way. I will explain my side at some point Simon re waiting lists. Don't know whose watching though. I could get people sacked if I say too much.

Paul


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

"If you have been affected at all, by any of the issues here, then please phone our help line...................!"

Our caring sharing, feely touchy, society.

Our "feminised" society.

Need counselling?

Heavens above! I thought most of us here were men, grown up men(the utmost of respect to those members more in touch with their feminine side)

I suppose one lives to see it all.

Peter.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

I don't consider anyone got the better over me about the gun issues, far from it. In hindsight, I enjoyed the debate, and ravished the opportunity to argue my strong beliefs. I admit to being a gun enthusiast. But I do know a lot about them, and have hands on experience. It's good to get the opportunity to express strong views, and try and persuade others.

I didn't feel anyone got the better over me Paul. You're mistaken about that.

I think Foggy should stick with it, and continue with his contributions, which were interesting.

We're all human, whether with or without a feminine side to our nature; and there's nothing wrong with a bit of passion, and emotion. It'd be bloody boring without it, would it not? Our forum is 10 x better for allowing all sorts of discussion, which wouldn't be allowed on that dick head MWR forum!!









Roy's mate Eddie has a similar forum, and I say thank you very much for these great and friendly chat forums. It's always interesting, and a pleasure.

Stick around Foggy.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Well said Griff.

People reading the thread will be able to judge for themselves about the merits of the various opinions...

Foggy, when I read your post I thought you meant you would not contribute further to this thread, bad enough, but your friends here obviously think you mean the forum as a whole which would be a great loss.


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Gentlemen

Thanks for the kind words (Simon, Griff, Paul, Chris, Andy, Neil et al.) - the majority here are indeed decent folk. Every forum will have it's troll and I guess the best thing is to not rise to the bait. Don't get me wrong, I love a bit of constructive banter, but it does need to be constructive. That is something I strive for personally, and believe I have achieved a fair balance throughout my posts. I'm more than happy to continue discussing watches here, but the petty stuff I'll just ignore.

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

I've got the Seiko SKX779

Citizen 200M Eco Drive Divers

Omega SMP

I think the latter is by far the best, AND with the cut out skeleton hands, as the rt. hand one in Neil's pic. Just shows how we all have different tastes. I think those hands are by far the best, and both they, and the dial, look superb in the dark. The edges of the hands are also highly luminous.

The 779 has impressed me greatly, as I have said several times on other threads, particularly with it's amazing time keeping, and the Citizen is surprisingly good I believe for it's case integrity. If I ever find out it's an under the arm Miyota movement though it's going straight in the bin Garry!!!























Seriously, the Omega is the twitcher by a mile, but the O & W M5 is a divers, and I wore it most of the time in India, and it's VERY comfortable to wear.

Best dive watch.........OmegaSMP with cut out hands Roy


----------



## DavidH (Feb 24, 2003)

Yes Griff

I have one of those too, with the skelly hands, but I have went off it a bit. I wish, now, that I had bought the one with black face and solid hands.









I have been thinking about trying to trade it in against a new one but am too scared too ask how much I would loose on what I paid.

Also it is quartz and now I would like a ticker.

"On hindsight we could all be Kings"

David


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

By the way, which one of you pip squeaks wants to argue about guns!?


----------



## mat (Feb 25, 2003)

Griff,

not sure why, but before seeing the pic I imagined you with a moustache









bet you all have images in your heads about what each other look like,

mat


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)




----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Be good to see pics of Roy, Andy, Eric, and many others.

You never know, we might meet one day!?


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Griff

Here's me and the missus last year in Cyprus. I'm not normally this red, but the combination of sun and beers, well you know...









Only real difference nowadays is I've given up the specs and moved on to contact lenses.

Pictured on my wrist is the greaest diver of all time - a Casio G-Shock 










Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

More interstingly Foggy.

Whats that on the Wifes wrist


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

There yuh go.......another face to the name.

C'mon then Mr's Roy, Andy and co. Let's be seein' yuz!!


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

> Whats that on the Wifes wrist


Andy

That's an easy one - it's the *second* best dive watch ever.......









no seriously, I dunno, I think it's some cheapo no name digital we bought to take on hoilday. At home she normally rotates between a Tag F1 and a Seiko quartz diver.

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

Griff all Citizen movements are Miyota's. Miyota is owned by Citizen and the movements are just Citizen ones re-badged. Most Citizen movements have a Miyota counterpart which is exactly the same.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Did yuh hear that clang!?

Citizen Diver just 'it the bottom of the bin!!


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

I was going to start a 'Brave Griff starts the ball rolling' forum & say we should all post pics of ourselves. Paul's mush is coming. Watch this space....

Hang on - Roy, am I ok to post it here? That's why i thought of starting a new topic

Paul


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

Roy said:


> all Citizen movements are Miyota's. Miyota is owned by Citizen.


 Thats Interesting

I was looking at a tasty Accurist the other day that had a Miyota movement, (the watch had a display back and I could see the name engraved).

So does that mean Citizen are supplying movements to one of there competitors.

Or maybe Citizen own Accurist


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Possibly Andy. Though I think i read somewhere Swatch or someone own them both.

Paul


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Now I am playing devil's advocate here a bit but:

When reading about the Omega Seamaster a sentiment that keeps coming up is along the lines of " the Seamaster was the 1st diver to break away from the Submariner in terms of design".

How so? Surely the SM just carried on: big solid case, uni bezel....

Comments?


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Foggy, "troll"?

Be so kind as to explain? I do construe that as being more than a remark bandied in the heat of the moment

Or do you wish to hide behind the wife's skirts all the time?

Peter


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Peter



> "troll"?
> 
> Be so kind as to explain?


Send me your address and I'll send you a mirror - you should have a better idea then.

If you wish to carry on playing being the **** with me, feel at liberty to email me. I'm sure everyone else here is just as bored with you as I am.

Foggy


----------



## Guest (May 15, 2003)

As Foggy posted a pic of him and his wife I thought I'd shove a pic of me and the old page 3 girl (otherwise known as the wife) on for those of you who have not seen me in my drunken glory.

Not as red as Foggy though!!









Sorry about the quality but its been scanned from a photo.

Lets see some more of you ugly freaks!









Pics of wives, girlfriends naked always acceptable!!









Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

I may as well join in with one of me, althoughperhaps we should have started a new thread for these. This is what I look like when it's hot out. Yes that is tobacco in the Hookah!


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Neil,

You did say did you, that your Mrs sisters' are all spoken for!!!!


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

Yeah - before I read the caption I thought that was your daughter!


----------



## peter (Feb 23, 2003)

Ha ha ha! Foggy, is that all you can come up with. Still it's made me laugh.

As regards the mirror, can you not see that you are ACTUALLY as mild and ineffectual as you look?

Thanks again,

Peter


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Good, clear, sharp pics. by the way Sargon(Iain?)

I'm guesing it was at least 3M Pixel camera, and on what resolution for upload to PC? I've had mine on low resolution, but am now going to crank it up to medium, and try uploading that. The Nikon 775 is great to use though. Dead easy.


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

Those were taken with a Toshiba PDR M-4 2.2 megapixle. It's a nice camera, but getting old. I just bought a 4 megapixle Olympus and can't wait for it to be delivered. The only problem with multiple megapixles is that you've got to re-size all your photos for the web.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

How did I miss this thread...?, I've always loved diver style watches. I swim regularly and always wear my watch. I've had mainly Citizen divers and never had a problem, even if they have never been serviced or had the seals changed. Had a few non problem Seiko's as well. I'm trying the Orient 200m diver at the moment and have to say, I think it's far superior quality to the Seiko SK007 for example, although I am a fan of the former. I have not had the Orient for long, but can honestly say from experience, that I've NEVER had a problem with a Citizen when swimming. I think the Orient will be the same. Citizen / Orient get my vote.

G.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Well to get back to Peter's very good original query, what do you think is the best dive watch, I am surprised no one has mentioned

*Panerai*.

As far as I can ascertain, correct me if I'm wrong







, they seem to have done at least as much as Rolex in advancing the art of making a watch water resistant and fuctional for a diver in the days before Suunto. I'm thinking 8 day power reserve, that way they have of locking the vrown down, dial layout re visibility...

Maybe it is just there are not many Panerai owners here, I don't see them mentioned much.

Can't be due to price, as there are many watches discussed on RLT in that kind of price bracket. Maybe it is a size problem.


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

I'd say price has something to do with it. They go for as much if not more than Rolex. But Rolex probably makes 100 times more watches. The Panerai Submersible has a fairly useless looking bezel especially underwater. Subseconds are harder to see underwater too. Not to mention the fact that I would kill myself if I scratched it on coral or something (if I owned one) (if I scuba-dived). The Rolex Sub and Omega Seamaster were in my opinion originally more of a tool watch decades ago. Today, while retaining the characteristics of a great dive watch they are primarily jewelry. Omega and Rolex were issued to armed forces in various countries because they are durable water-tight and legible. Though they may be thought of as jewelry today they were not designed as such. The Panerai may be as durable, water-tight and legible as the others, but I believe it WAS designed as jewelry. Maybe this is a whole other can of worms. If I was to go diving tomorrow I can tell you that my Seiko SKX779 would be on my wrist. I wouldn't worry about a thing.


----------



## pauluspaolo (Feb 24, 2003)

I always thought the Panerai was a modern version of Italian armed forces (possibly navy) watch. Do they make their own movements? They are way out of my league in terms of price and size anyway!

Cheers

Paul


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

As far Ias I know they use to use Rolex movements but now they use ETA.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

I no nothing of Panerai, except they look overpriced.

Agree with Sargon about the SKX779, but I don't consider the Omega SMP to be jewelry, but I think I know what he means. I've never been quite happy with the helium escape valve.

The Citizen Divers Eco Drive 200M makes me confident of its case integrity for diving, and I'd feel confident with the M5.

If I was judging on BOTH price and confidence, I'd agree with Sargon.

But my favourite would still be the SMP.

It's worth remembering the SMP is rated to 300M

Eddie's Dreadnought will be interesting


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

My SMP is my favorite too. I'd be afraid to scratch it or loose it. I just got a new camera today so indulge me...


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Hell, I've forgotten an important watch, which I've put on today. It's my Broadarrow PRS-3, rated to 300M.

It has to be joint second in my preference with the SKX779.

Thr PRS-3 is meant to be a navy divers watch, with sapphire, screw down crown, and is fantastic value compared to its CWC equivalent.

Got mine off Roy, and Eddie does 'em as well.

Bought mine on a Nato, but since put it on the metal bracelet off Roy.

This 10 year lithium battery watch with Swiss Ronda 5 jewel quartz improved movement is a brilliant watch.

Posting pics later.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Panerai Oringinaly made depth gauges & stuff for Italian Navy.They are primarily a watch manufacturer The founder started as a watchmaker in 1800s. Think it was his grandson that created the Radiomir


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

I believe they went out of business at some time though and were reinvented by the Vendome Luxury Group.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

My diver watches:-


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

p.s.

Does anyone know when a mechanical PRS-3 is coming out?

Is is going to be with an orange dial? Will it be a black PVD case? Roy?

p.p.s

Do you all use flash taking pics of your watches?

I used it on the ones on page 7.

If you don't, you seem to get more camera shake, as the aperture is more open, and therefore less depth of field, and the images then become more likely to be blurred!


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

It should be soon,

You should never use flash when taking pictures of watches.


----------



## Foggy (Feb 25, 2003)

Agree with Roy on the watch photography and flash. I never use flash. Wherever possible I try and use natural light but avoiding strong sunlight.

Cheers

Foggy


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

I used flash once, but it took loads of shots to get a decent one. I just got loads of glare. Mind you, I am still a novice


----------

