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 2018, 04:33 AM   #1
TRM
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Kansas
Posts: 289
Submariner vs GMT Depth Rating

From an article on Google:

Although the two watches are remarkably similar and share the same Triplock winding crown, the reference 116610 Submariner has a depth rating of 300 meters, while the reference 116710 GMT-Master II is only rated to a depth of 100 meters.Oct 6, 2017

Anyone know why this is?
TRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:37 AM   #2
superstarmar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: In Motion
Watch: my wrist presence
Posts: 7,436
One is a divers watch the other is a pilots watch ...
You actually get a bonus of water proofing on the
pilots GMT watch , that’s the brilliance and quality of
owning a Rolex !!!

Actually , if I’m correct all Rolex watches are water proof to
100 meters unless it’s a divers model ...
superstarmar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:38 AM   #3
SearChart
TechXpert
 
SearChart's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 23,639
Thinner case back on the GMT.
Don't worry about it, you won't be visiting that depth anyway.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GB-man View Post
Rolex uses rare elves to polish the platinum. They have a union deal and make like $90 per hour and get time and half on weekends.
SearChart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:43 AM   #4
KBM
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
KBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: K.
Location: 780
Posts: 10,460
The real question should be why 100m wr doesn't count as diving depth. Any watch with 100m wr is a do all (diving included) piece.
KBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:45 AM   #5
Nikrnic
"TRF" Member
 
Nikrnic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Real Name: Louis Nick Ric
Location: Michigan, USA
Watch: Blnr, Expll, Subs,
Posts: 10,172
I think the crystal is also thicker on the Sub

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Nikrnic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:47 AM   #6
traf
"TRF" Member
 
traf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: dave
Location: miami
Watch: me ride bikes
Posts: 1,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikrnic View Post
I think the crystal is also thicker on the Sub

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


No it’s not


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
traf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:48 AM   #7
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by kauebm View Post
The real question should be why 100m wr doesn't count as diving depth. Any watch with 100m wr is a do all (diving included) piece.
the original sub 100m so its plenty sufficient
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:51 AM   #8
KBM
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
KBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: K.
Location: 780
Posts: 10,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler1980 View Post
the original sub 100m so its plenty sufficient
JLC's deep sea chrono is also diving certified and 100m. That's more than 99.99% of us will ever need.
KBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:56 AM   #9
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by kauebm View Post
JLC's deep sea chrono is also diving certified and 100m. That's more than 99.99% of us will ever need.
its more of a case of they can now make a deeper depth rating these days therefore we think need it because its available, but we don't.
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 05:24 AM   #10
KBM
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
KBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: K.
Location: 780
Posts: 10,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler1980 View Post
its more of a case of they can now make a deeper depth rating these days therefore we think need it because its available, but we don't.
Agreed. Bragging rights do have an important role in today's market.
KBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 05:38 AM   #11
Golf&Watches
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Global
Watch: 116719
Posts: 482
I've dived with several of my GMT's. and whilst not planned I went well beyond 100, and not much less than 300, Rolex is so good (possibly very underrated?), ��
Golf&Watches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 07:52 AM   #12
Brian Page
"TRF" Member
 
Brian Page's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 6,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golf&Watches View Post
I've dived with several of my GMT's. and whilst not planned I went well beyond 100, and not much less than 300, Rolex is so good (possibly very underrated?), ��
You dove with a GMT just shy of 300? - 300 what?
Brian Page is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 07:56 AM   #13
Burlington
"TRF" Member
 
Burlington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golf&Watches View Post
I've dived with several of my GMT's. and whilst not planned I went well beyond 100, and not much less than 300, Rolex is so good (possibly very underrated?), ��


These depths are in metres, not feet.

It’s a one way trip if you did an unplanned dive past 100M to almost 300M.
__________________
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.”

― Winston S. Churchill
Burlington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 08:09 AM   #14
c41006
"TRF" Member
 
c41006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Real Name: Joshua
Location: Atlanta
Watch: Pelagos
Posts: 7,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burlington View Post
These depths are in metres, not feet.

It’s a one way trip if you did an unplanned dive past 100M to almost 300M.


It happens all the time I’m sure. It’s like when I go to the grocery store and I miss my exit and end up two states over. I hate it when that happens.

c41006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 08:11 AM   #15
Wcdhtwn
"TRF" Member
 
Wcdhtwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Houston
Watch: SkyD, SD43, GMT2
Posts: 5,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by kauebm View Post
JLC's deep sea chrono is also diving certified and 100m. That's more than 99.99% of us will ever need.
I'm not sure... my pool is pretty deep.

Wcdhtwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 08:15 AM   #16
rscott9399
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Page View Post
You dove with a GMT just shy of 300? - 300 what?
I would also like to hear the details here
rscott9399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 08:24 AM   #17
Old Expat Beast
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
Old Expat Beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Far East
Watch: Golden Tuna
Posts: 28,826
Oddly enough the Tudor Heritage Ranger and Chrono are rated to 150m. You'd think they could do that for the GMT, Explorer, etc.
__________________
_______________________
Old Expat Beast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 08:42 AM   #18
Mystro
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Mystro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 15,511
Yea, DJ, Daytona, GMT all have 100M WR and that’s plenty for snorkeling and any thing you are gonna do in a pool. They have a Oyster on them for a reason. The Sub was and still is the Rolex ultimate dive watch icon for a reason at 300m. Beyond that (saturation diving reasoning) is bar stool bravado that is mostly meaningless to the Rolex diver. Like the lobster cracker specially designed for outer space astronaut use.
HE valves are one more needless item to go wrong with your watch.
__________________
https://www.dropbox.com/s/hyitq0aikqgajc0/Time%20sig.jpg?raw=1[/img]
Mystro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 08:55 AM   #19
Nikrnic
"TRF" Member
 
Nikrnic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Real Name: Louis Nick Ric
Location: Michigan, USA
Watch: Blnr, Expll, Subs,
Posts: 10,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by traf View Post
No it’s not


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
O ok I guess I thought or heard wrong, now I no

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Nikrnic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 09:18 AM   #20
dnslater
"TRF" Member
 
dnslater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Indiana
Posts: 91
Caseback is thinner and flat on the GMT. Overall mid case is also a thinner design.
dnslater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 10:09 AM   #21
Gogo Monomaneshi
"TRF" Member
 
Gogo Monomaneshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by kauebm View Post
The real question should be why 100m wr doesn't count as diving depth. Any watch with 100m wr is a do all (diving included) piece.

100m WR means the gaskets can withstand 10 atm (atmospheric pressure). But that’s static and does not consider rapid changes in pressure with fast wrist movements. When you’re swimming and diving, the impact of your wrist on the surface of the water can already generate pressures that’s close to 10 atm. Add in gasket deterioration of temperature changes, and the GMT might not be as WR as you might think.
Gogo Monomaneshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 02:37 PM   #22
CRM114
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: HK & USA
Watch: GMTs,1803, 16610LV
Posts: 2,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gogo Monomaneshi View Post
100m WR means the gaskets can withstand 10 atm (atmospheric pressure). But that’s static and does not consider rapid changes in pressure with fast wrist movements. When you’re swimming and diving, the impact of your wrist on the surface of the water can already generate pressures that’s close to 10 atm. Add in gasket deterioration of temperature changes, and the GMT might not be as WR as you might think.
The 100m WR of a GMT is more than sufficient for swimming, diving into pools, scuba diving at recreational depths, splashing, or making any other kind of "fast wrist movements" or surface impact with the water you can think of.

The only difference between a modern GMT and Sub's WR is case-back thickness, the case back being the part that will bend inwards during compression at great depths. If water could intrude into a GMT from splashing or diving on the surface, it could intrude into a Sub as well doing the same thing.
CRM114 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 02:42 PM   #23
Tomas Eriksson
"TRF" Member
 
Tomas Eriksson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Stockholm
Watch: 15707CE
Posts: 2,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRM114 View Post
The 100m WR of a GMT is more than sufficient for swimming, diving into pools, scuba diving at recreational depths, splashing, or making any other kind of "fast wrist movements" or surface impact with the water you can think of.

The only difference between a modern GMT and Sub's WR is case-back thickness, the case back being the part that will bend inwards during compression at great depths. If water could intrude into a GMT from splashing or diving on the surface, it could intrude into a Sub as well doing the same thing.
What this gentleman just said
__________________
State of the union: 5066A,15400ST,15707CE,116610LN,26470OR and a few other…
Tomas Eriksson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 03:11 PM   #24
Ckci
"TRF" Member
 
Ckci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Real Name: Russell
Location: KC, MO
Watch: FedEx 4 next 1
Posts: 2,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Page View Post
You dove with a GMT just shy of 300? - 300 what?
I suspect mm’s.
Ckci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 03:50 PM   #25
BLNR Nairobi
"TRF" Member
 
BLNR Nairobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Real Name: Tony
Location: Global
Watch: All of them.
Posts: 1,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gogo Monomaneshi View Post
100m WR means the gaskets can withstand 10 atm (atmospheric pressure). But that’s static and does not consider rapid changes in pressure with fast wrist movements. When you’re swimming and diving, the impact of your wrist on the surface of the water can already generate pressures that’s close to 10 atm. Add in gasket deterioration of temperature changes, and the GMT might not be as WR as you might think.
Nonsense.

Harsh because this is why people start thinking they cannot wash their hands with their watch on. Lots of misinformation on some subjects, with WR being a more serious grouping of misinformation. I usually only bother for such ...although there are others that are hilarious, though not serious. For example, had a certain poster here claim the watches with HE valves have them so the AD can ‘add helium to the watch.’

Anyway - moving back to WR, your statement on ‘dynamic’ pressure changes is incorrect when it comes to Rolex WR.

There are long explanations I could give, and there are longer online discussions on why the ‘static vs dynamic’ narrative is not true for Rolex (and other professional watches).

To save time though, I’ll just post the Hodinkee article below discussing Dr. Sylvia Earle, one of the most reknown professional divers in the world. She’s made many of her dives wearing a gold Rolex Datejust, and so far hasn’t come across any ‘rapid changes in pressure due to fast wrist movements.’

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/di...spatches-rolex
BLNR Nairobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:40 PM   #26
padi56
"TRF" Life Patron
 
padi56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 53,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by SearChart View Post
Thinner case back on the GMT.
Don't worry about it, you won't be visiting that depth anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golf&Watches View Post
I've dived with several of my GMT's. and whilst not planned I went well beyond 100, and not much less than 300, Rolex is so good (possibly very underrated?), ��
Please explain 300 what.???????


Have to agree most dive watches today hardly see any water except for perhaps a dip in the pool or shower.Fact there have been more men to have gone to the moon than have dived past 300M wearing just normal scuba gear.
__________________

ICom Pro3

All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only.

"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever."
Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again.

www.mc0yad.club

Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder
padi56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 04:46 PM   #27
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLNR Nairobi View Post
Nonsense.

Harsh because this is why people start thinking they cannot wash their hands with their watch on. Lots of misinformation on some subjects, with WR being a more serious grouping of misinformation. I usually only bother for such ...although there are others that are hilarious, though not serious. For example, had a certain poster here claim the watches with HE valves have them so the AD can ‘add helium to the watch.’

Anyway - moving back to WR, your statement on ‘dynamic’ pressure changes is incorrect when it comes to Rolex WR.

There are long explanations I could give, and there are longer online discussions on why the ‘static vs dynamic’ narrative is not true for Rolex (and other professional watches).

To save time though, I’ll just post the Hodinkee article below discussing Dr. Sylvia Earle, one of the most reknown professional divers in the world. She’s made many of her dives wearing a gold Rolex Datejust, and so far hasn’t come across any ‘rapid changes in pressure due to fast wrist movements.’

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/di...spatches-rolex
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 05:04 PM   #28
Burlington
"TRF" Member
 
Burlington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by padi56 View Post
Please explain 300 what.???????


Have to agree most dive watches today hardly see any water except for perhaps a dip in the pool or shower.Fact there have been more men to have gone to the moon than have dived past 300M wearing just normal scuba gear.
To be fair, some of the best marine life (and only shark to date - little nurse shark off the FL Keys) I've seen whilst diving has been at the astounding depth of about 300cm

even 300 ft, let alone Metres, would be quite the miraculous achievement to survive on a solo tank trip in regular gear.
__________________
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.”

― Winston S. Churchill
Burlington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 05:40 PM   #29
jimcameron
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ByDawns Earlylite
Watch: 16800
Posts: 3,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golf&Watches View Post
I've dived with several of my GMT's. and whilst not planned I went well beyond 100, and not much less than 300, Rolex is so good (possibly very underrated?), ��

You dive to 100 meters and close to 300 meters?

......or feet?

Stick with golf.
jimcameron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2018, 06:44 PM   #30
thesharkfactor
"TRF" Member
 
thesharkfactor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Watch: GMT
Posts: 3,643
For reasons above, the SD DeepSea is a ridiculous watch?
thesharkfactor 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

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

OCWatches


*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.