/fa/ - Fashion

>>13980429
I don't dive.

>>13894033
There's a lot of weird ideas out there about water resistance.

A 30m wr rating specifically means that the watch won't leak under 30m water equivalent pressure. If that were the end of the story, you could swim with it just fine (debunking of the common myth that when you're swimming your arm's movement through the water dramatically increases the pressure is here https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/sigh-myth-busting-again-610734.html#/topics/610734 ). There's a number of complicating factors:

Unless the watch is certified as a Diver watch, it probably hasn't actually been tested. Standard wr watches are sample tested - the manufacturer tests, say, 1% of watches to ensure most of then meet the standard (there is an ISO process for sample testing you can look up if you're curious). Your watch may never have been tested, in which case it's up to the manufacturing consistency and quality control of the manufacturer whether.your watch is constructed the same as the samples that passed.

Seals can degrade over time. Even if your watch had 30m wr when it was made, it may not any more. As seals age they harden, which can make them less effective at sealing. To have faith in your watch's wr you should be testing it every year and every time it's opened.

If you've tested your individual with recently and it passed a 30m test, it is perfectly fine for surface swimming. The reason people often say "your watch needs 100m wr and a screw down crown for surface swimming" is a hope that such overspeccing will mean that even watches that haven't been tested are likely at least good enough.

>>13723310
As long as the watch has decent water resistance not sure what you're worried about.

How do you store your divers wt?

>>13517146
>>13517152
Well, unsurprisingly, watch seems to be fine this morning. Took it out and send to be running okay.