Extreme watches!
Discussion
Inspired by this:
Apart from the extreme dive watches, which are getting to the point where they simply cannot be used as intended (humans don't dive to 2000 m and deeper AFAIK, they use deep-sea bathyscapes? Not even a diving suit will prevent squishing at those depths so the watch cannot be strapped around a wrist but merely chained to the side of the submersible, so the design *as a wristwatch* is pointless), does anyone know of any 'extreme' watches that are specifically designed and engineered to survive 'extreme' conditions that a human could not possibly survive - and then these impossible scenarios are marketed as a key feature of the watch?
Assuming I'm right (which I'm probably not), an example of this would be that old Rolex advert that has (I think) one of the Cousteaus and a wild-eyed extreme mountaineer (my google-fu is lacking on this, and I can't find a pic of this advert, but I remember it well. It may not even be for Rolex but I'm sure it is). The Explorer may be good for a mountaineer, but the picture shows the diving bloke with a mask and gas cylinder in his hands - he wouldn't be wearing a watch and that kit at more than 2 km depth though
However that's not *that* funny, because whilst the depth rating of today's extreme dive watches are absurd, this doesn't mean they're pointless because you *can* dive to 700m or so with an 'atmospheric diving suit' (which looks like a big suit of armour, more akin to a spacesuit). This would squish flat like spam in a can at 2000m but hey ho, there's a point to the Sea Dweller - but it's over-engineered to absurdity.
What I'm *really* looking for an example of something utterly pointless, like a watch designed to be worn on the surface of the Sun or something equally silly - the sort of thing that has the potential to get me giggling like a little girl insanely for hours Has anyone marketed something like this? Shock resistance is another one - has Casio ever marketed the actual extreme accelerations the G-Shock series can endure? Marketing actual figures would be hilarious if you consider what they actually mean for a *wristwatch* - fasten that watch to the wrist of a hapless tester and accelerate the human subject at 1,000G for a second - the results are fairly predictable 
This one is getting there: http://www.haldasweden.com/space-module/
I love the special case material - resistant to extreme temperatures and resistant to acid and chemicals! So you'll be safe to strap one of these on and jump into a vat of boiling aqua regia, floating on the surface of the Sun. As long as you hold your breath.
I'm in a fairly insane mood so this may be funny to me but not to anyone else, so please forgive me. But even forum favourites (and one of my favourites too!) Sinn are guilty of this - take the temperature resistance technology… the Arktis (yeah I know I've said that I want one - but I'm only having ONE Sinn in my collection and I'd have to part-ex it for my 356-II first) lubrication is rated down to -45˚C. This is fine, as humans can survive and work (e.g. Antarctic science outposts) with a wristwatch on at such temperatures. However Sinn then go on to say it works at 80˚C. No human can operate at 80˚C, but I suppose given a body suit with cooling gear (as per the spacesuit get-out-of-jail card I'm using for Omega) it's feasible.
Any other crazy claims?
andy tims said:
Never walked on the Moon with my Speedmaster either 
my surreal humour functions went into overdrive Apart from the extreme dive watches, which are getting to the point where they simply cannot be used as intended (humans don't dive to 2000 m and deeper AFAIK, they use deep-sea bathyscapes? Not even a diving suit will prevent squishing at those depths so the watch cannot be strapped around a wrist but merely chained to the side of the submersible, so the design *as a wristwatch* is pointless), does anyone know of any 'extreme' watches that are specifically designed and engineered to survive 'extreme' conditions that a human could not possibly survive - and then these impossible scenarios are marketed as a key feature of the watch?
Assuming I'm right (which I'm probably not), an example of this would be that old Rolex advert that has (I think) one of the Cousteaus and a wild-eyed extreme mountaineer (my google-fu is lacking on this, and I can't find a pic of this advert, but I remember it well. It may not even be for Rolex but I'm sure it is). The Explorer may be good for a mountaineer, but the picture shows the diving bloke with a mask and gas cylinder in his hands - he wouldn't be wearing a watch and that kit at more than 2 km depth though
However that's not *that* funny, because whilst the depth rating of today's extreme dive watches are absurd, this doesn't mean they're pointless because you *can* dive to 700m or so with an 'atmospheric diving suit' (which looks like a big suit of armour, more akin to a spacesuit). This would squish flat like spam in a can at 2000m but hey ho, there's a point to the Sea Dweller - but it's over-engineered to absurdity.
What I'm *really* looking for an example of something utterly pointless, like a watch designed to be worn on the surface of the Sun or something equally silly - the sort of thing that has the potential to get me giggling like a little girl insanely for hours
Has anyone marketed something like this? Shock resistance is another one - has Casio ever marketed the actual extreme accelerations the G-Shock series can endure? Marketing actual figures would be hilarious if you consider what they actually mean for a *wristwatch* - fasten that watch to the wrist of a hapless tester and accelerate the human subject at 1,000G for a second - the results are fairly predictable This one is getting there: http://www.haldasweden.com/space-module/
I love the special case material - resistant to extreme temperatures and resistant to acid and chemicals! So you'll be safe to strap one of these on and jump into a vat of boiling aqua regia, floating on the surface of the Sun. As long as you hold your breath.
I'm in a fairly insane mood so this may be funny to me but not to anyone else, so please forgive me. But even forum favourites (and one of my favourites too!) Sinn are guilty of this - take the temperature resistance technology… the Arktis (yeah I know I've said that I want one - but I'm only having ONE Sinn in my collection and I'd have to part-ex it for my 356-II first) lubrication is rated down to -45˚C. This is fine, as humans can survive and work (e.g. Antarctic science outposts) with a wristwatch on at such temperatures. However Sinn then go on to say it works at 80˚C. No human can operate at 80˚C, but I suppose given a body suit with cooling gear (as per the spacesuit get-out-of-jail card I'm using for Omega) it's feasible.
Any other crazy claims?
Sinn UX & EZM2 and B&R Hydronaut use the silicon oil filling to take it down to 5km and 11kms respectively (quartz module crush being the limiter).
The Sinn 'special' oil takes a watch down to -45 (after that the graph slopes downhill, and although it'd still work at -80 it would be quite slow iirc) - bear in mind the function of this design is to have the watch on top of the sleeve - therefore making it easy to read despite how many layers and coats you have on - eminently logical when you think about it.
I think the Alaska project relied on an aluminium jacket to keep the cold at bay.
Lum-tec pump out a few Tungsten watches which must be amongst the 'hardest'.
The G-Shock - have you seen the ad where they use it as an ice-hockey puck? It was also shot with a 12-bore on The Gadget Show and survived.
The Sinn 'special' oil takes a watch down to -45 (after that the graph slopes downhill, and although it'd still work at -80 it would be quite slow iirc) - bear in mind the function of this design is to have the watch on top of the sleeve - therefore making it easy to read despite how many layers and coats you have on - eminently logical when you think about it.
I think the Alaska project relied on an aluminium jacket to keep the cold at bay.
Lum-tec pump out a few Tungsten watches which must be amongst the 'hardest'.
The G-Shock - have you seen the ad where they use it as an ice-hockey puck? It was also shot with a 12-bore on The Gadget Show and survived.
Thing is, when a watch says WR50, it means in still water... WR50 means you should be able to shower or swim with it. So WR2000 just means in still water, thus any movement would "reduce" the depth to a more realistic one. You don't want something that's just capable as it will likely get damaged; you need it to be more than capable so you can continue using it. Just like the rev limit on a car; it's not set at the physical limit but a bit below to avoid damaging the engine.
BTW is the Rolex Explorer actually good for exploring? Is it shock-proof and scratch-proof? If I whack it against a table... or a G-shock... will the Rolex win?
BTW is the Rolex Explorer actually good for exploring? Is it shock-proof and scratch-proof? If I whack it against a table... or a G-shock... will the Rolex win?
Edited by ShadownINja on Thursday 14th October 11:12
ShadownINja said:
Thing is, when a watch says WR50, it means in still water... WR50 means you should be able to shower or swim with it. So WR2000 just means in still water, thus any movement would "reduce" the depth to a more realistic one.
I thought this had been comprehensively debunked, using science?>casts beady eye upon the internets<
http://forums.watchuseek.com/f281/water-resistance...
Look! It's got sums in it and everyfink!
CommanderJameson said:
ShadownINja said:
Thing is, when a watch says WR50, it means in still water... WR50 means you should be able to shower or swim with it. So WR2000 just means in still water, thus any movement would "reduce" the depth to a more realistic one.
I thought this had been comprehensively debunked, using science?>casts beady eye upon the internets<
http://forums.watchuseek.com/f281/water-resistance...
Look! It's got sums in it and everyfink!
ShadownINja said:
andy_s said:
True - iirc it's about 0.15secs for the finger to react to the eye.
I wonder what the fastest watch in the world is...
I've got a Goer skeleton watch that gains 3 minutes a day. Do I win?I wonder what the fastest watch in the world is...
Edited by andy_s on Thursday 14th October 15:46
OK, so Swatch might not qualify... how about the GammaMaster?
FAQ said:
The following table gives some typical dose rates that might be measured by the GammaMaster and their possible interpretation.
I like "something is wrong" | Observed Dose Rate(µSv/h) | Possible Cause | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | Normal Background | |
| 3 | Flight on jet airplane | |
| 10 | Near a radium dial pocket watch | |
| 100 | On the side of a truck carrying radioactive material | Move away unless you have a reason for being there |
| 1000 | Near high grade uranium ore | Members of the public should not be here |
| > 2000 | Exposed artificial source. If you walk into a field this large, something is wrong | Members of the public should leave and let professionals handle the situation |
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff