The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30 July 2008, 01:12 AM   #1
mfer
"TRF" Member
 
mfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Real Name: Mik
Location: USA
Posts: 13,724
Why GMT IIc only rated to 100M

I'm looking at my sub. Says "1000ft=300m". Looking at the stats on my GMT IIc in the mail. Docs say good to 100m. It has the triple crown over the twin lock. Is the GMT IIc really good to 300m as well?

In the latest issue of WatchTime, they said that the DS was actually tested down to 15000ft, but Rolex chose 12,800ft instead.
__________________
member#3242
mfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 01:25 AM   #2
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfer View Post
I'm looking at my sub. Says "1000ft=300m". Looking at the stats on my GMT IIc in the mail. Docs say good to 100m. It has the triple crown over the twin lock. Is the GMT IIc really good to 300m as well?

In the latest issue of WatchTime, they said that the DS was actually tested down to 15000ft, but Rolex chose 12,800ft instead.
Good thread on this awhile back. We established with the help of many that the crystals are the same as the Sub. Of course, both have triple lock crowns. The great unknown is the caseback.

A pure guess on my part -- want that to be clear -- is that the Sub and GMT-IIC are much closer together on water resistance than they are rated. 1) it could be a marketing effort to impress the "Lloyd Bridges" types to opt for the Sub. I mean, that's about the only "plus" feature of the Sub over the GMT. 2) it just be keeping with the rating of the GMT-II to avoid undercutting the reputation of the remaining inventory.

To your last point -- Rolex tests "past" specs in insure the specs are attained in practice.
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 01:28 AM   #3
Ed Rooney
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Annapolis, MD
Watch: Sea-Dweller 16600
Posts: 5,081
I thought I heard Rolex tests to 120% of depth rating.

I think the crystal and possibly the caseback of the GMTIIc are thinner than the Sub. All triplock crowns are good to extreme depths, far exceeding the DS.
Ed Rooney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 01:48 AM   #4
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Rooney View Post
I thought I heard Rolex tests to 120% of depth rating.

I think the crystal and possibly the caseback of the GMTIIc are thinner than the Sub. All triplock crowns are good to extreme depths, far exceeding the DS.

The Sub and GMT-IIC share the same crystal. The part number is the same. Vanessa confirmed it.
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 01:52 AM   #5
acce1999
"TRF" Member
 
acce1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: GMT+1
Posts: 2,711
The crystal is the same on all 36 mm Datejusts and sports models (2 mm) with the exception of the SD (3 mm).

The difference is the thickness of the caseback. Vanessa recently posted some measurements, and promised to get back as soon as she has more info. She also informed us that there is a different crystal gasket on the sports models, but I do not know if it is the same for all models.

Example: 16610 1.51 mm, 16750 0.72 mm.

The triplock is supposedly good to 500 atm, so that is not an issue, it is about bending of the caseback at high pressure.

I would guess that any Oyster model would do fine at 200 meters or even 300 meters. I am more concerned about the person bringing it down there. Let me know when the GMTII-c passes 100 meters... I have only been down to 16 meters myself...

Here is what Rolex themselves once said in an ad, and if we assume the ad is based on the truth (and applicable on the non-plexi models), and that the sapphire crystal itself is good to at least 300 meters we can conclude that the Oyster case is capable of MUCH more than 100 meters ("at 1900 feet the back showed signs of bending"):



Best,

A
acce1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 01:53 AM   #6
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
You beat me to it.

Here's the thread on the subject.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...hlight=vanessa

Salient Point:

Originally Posted by Vanessa
The crystal is NOT thinner on a GMT compared to a Submariner. They are exactly the same!
The only crystal that is thicker is on the Seadweller.
All the crystals on the oyster cases have the same thickness for that matter... the datejust, airking, day-date, explorer,... all have the same crystal! The only difference with these compared the the ones with rotating bezels (TOG excluded), is the height of the gasket
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 01:58 AM   #7
acce1999
"TRF" Member
 
acce1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: GMT+1
Posts: 2,711
In addition: I read that someone tested his YM to 300 meters without problems. Also, there is a professional diver that has a site where he says he has taken his GMT IIc to below 100 (real, not pressure chamber) meters (if I remember correctly). Can not remember the site. I'll see if I can find it.

Best,

A
acce1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 03:01 AM   #8
Z-Sub
2024 Pledge Member
 
Z-Sub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: So Cal, USA
Watch: Not a ONEWatch Man
Posts: 7,383
Case back. If you compare the case back of different watches, thicker case backs goes to SD and sub.
But I do also believe the New GMT-IIC has potential to go deeper than the 16710.
But, does that really matter for most of us who don't go below 100M, ever!??
__________________
SS Submariner Date "Z"
SS SeaDweller "D"
SS Submariner "Random"
TT Blue Submariner "P"
SS GMT-Master ll "M", Pepsi
Pam 311, 524, 297
Z-Sub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 03:03 AM   #9
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z-Sub View Post
But, does that really matter for most of us who don't go below 100M, ever!??
99.9% of these watches never go deeper than the bottom of a hot tub.
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 03:06 AM   #10
mfer
"TRF" Member
 
mfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Real Name: Mik
Location: USA
Posts: 13,724
I know, I know. I'll never go below 100m, much less 3m. Just wondering why is all. Makes sense they don't want to make the sub seem obsolete. But if I had to guess, the GMT IIc looks like it could go deeper than the sub with the supercase. Have no clue. Just a guess. I have NO evidence to support that.
__________________
member#3242
mfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 03:15 AM   #11
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfer View Post
I know, I know. I'll never go below 100m, much less 3m. Just wondering why is all. Makes sense they don't want to make the sub seem obsolete. But if I had to guess, the GMT IIc looks like it could go deeper than the sub with the supercase. Have no clue. Just a guess. I have NO evidence to support that.
Well the same crown and crystal for sure. The case itself isn't a weak link. That leaves the case back. GMT-II is thinner, jury's out on the II-C. My GUESS would be the II-C is better than 100m watch, after all, it was that with the double-lock crown in the earlier model. Will it get to 1000'? Don't know, don't care.
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 06:47 AM   #12
f16570
"TRF" Member
 
f16570's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Real Name: F
Location: Scotland
Watch: Exp II White Face
Posts: 4,272
Would be interesting if someone actually tested their watch to the specified depth.
I unfortunately can only hold my breath for 31 seconds so that rules me out.
__________________
Why have what's new when you have what's best.
f
f16570 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 08:20 AM   #13
SPORTSFAN
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Mike
Location: NW England
Posts: 791
I like the Jeremy Clarkson quote on this ......something like.......

My watch is waterproof to 1000 feet, which is completely pointless to me.However it is comforting to know that when I drop it in the sink it will be OK......



Regards Mike.
SPORTSFAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 10:01 AM   #14
subman999
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 28
interesting comments guys,all I need to know is can I shower, swim, and snorkel wearing my Gmt11c, I think so!!...and if you must dive, 100m is deeper than most military clearance divers ever go, and then you wear a dive computer you can not see a watch below 5 meters in most waters around the world.
subman999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2008, 10:49 AM   #15
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by subman999 View Post
interesting comments guys,all I need to know is can I shower, swim, and snorkel wearing my Gmt11c, I think so!!...and if you must dive, 100m is deeper than most military clearance divers ever go, and then you wear a dive computer you can not see a watch below 5 meters in most waters around the world.
If you find this discussion on the GMT-IIC silly think about the SDDS. If you need a macho fix buy a MTM Black Seal, it's the ONLY waterproof watch validated to 29,000 feet. Oh, and you get a great looking, accurate,tritium tubed watch with no glare thanks to the oil filled case. Those are the attributes that got me excited about it-- and you save $7K over the SDDS. Oops, not a Rolex -- nevermind.
Attached Images
 
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.