Submariner vs GMT Depth Rating

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by thesharkfactor

For reasons above, the SD DeepSea is a ridiculous watch?

of course it is. Its an engineering marvel but it matters not one bit in any real life application. Its not a better dive watch because of the WR rating.

[hnlee]

SUB and GMT are almost the same only diff at depth. Sub is 300 MTR while GMT 100 MTR. I am a recreational diver and touched 43 meters so honestly speaking, we will not touch more than that anyway except you are technical diver but hey, who is using their rolex when work underwater?
By my opinion, both never wrong. I love Sub just because of my mentality about scuba diving and its feature 300 meter compare to GMT it is like more high tech. Also the look is NEATER and SLICK compare to GMT and this brain keep telling me Sub class is higher than GMT but it is only me. Again both are great choice and never wrong.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by thesharkfactor

For reasons above, the SD DeepSea is a ridiculous watch?

No it's not really. It is an expression of Rolex's engineering prowess.
It's a super car watch. By this logic every single car Ferrari or Lamborghini make would also be ridiculous. Who needs a GT3 RS....oh wait but someone may actually take it to the track....maybe..how many GT3 Rs are getting beaten up at a track, probably none because it's an "investment" now and would hurt resale.

A Deepsea is similar. There was a member here who was a saturation diver and specifically used his Deepsea at work. Could he have used a SD4K or Planet Ocean, sure. But then you could go to the track and kill it in a Miata or S2000.

Why do these extreme machines like the 720S, GT2, Ducati P. V4, RM Nadal, AP Concept or Deepseas exist, well to show just how advanced in materials, engineering and design a company is or more simply, because they're freaking cool as #$*@ to enjoy going to Walmart in everyday life.

[thesharkfactor]

Spot on..!

[GMT Aviator]

I’ve dived my trusty 16710 GMT down to 130ft recreational diving in the Indian Ocean.
That’s about 1/3 of it’s rated depth and as deep as anyone is likely to go scuba diving for recreation. It held up just fine and a Datejust would likely do the same.
Unless you’re a professional diver who journeys to the depths of the Abyss with professional equipment using nitrox, then pretty much any Rolex watch you can buy is good for 100% of the people 100% of the time.
The difference between the depth rating of the sub vs the current ceramic GMT is about 1mm thickness of the steel case back between the two watches and that’s it. On the older 5 digit GMT is was the twin lock crown vs trip lock as well.

[BLNR Nairobi]

Originally Posted by GMT Aviator

I’ve dived my trusty 16710 GMT down to 130ft recreational diving in the Indian Ocean.
That’s about 1/3 of it’s rated depth and as deep as anyone is likely to go scuba diving for recreation. It held up just fine and a Datejust would likely do the same.
Unless you’re a professional diver who journeys to the depths of the Abyss with professional equipment using nitrox, then pretty much any Rolex watch you can buy is good for 100% of the people 100% of the time.
The difference between the depth rating of the sub vs the current ceramic GMT is about 1mm thickness of the steel case back between the two watches and that’s it. On the older 5 digit GMT is was the twin lock crown vs trip lock as well.

100%.

For most divers, a DateJust is just as good as any Submariner in terms of ‘reachable’ diving depth. The only thing the Submariner has that is unique is the timing bezel.

Now, the SeaDweller’s HE valve has utility for saturation dives where the divers would be spending a lot of time working/living underwater that requires a saturation spread, and without a HE valve to slowly release the tiny helium molecules that are tiny enough to squeeze through any seals - and which, with buildup, can literally pop the watch’s crystal off - the watch could be damaged.

But even with the SeaDweller and it’s HE valve, (a) the vast majority of divers (let alone, people) will never do a saturation dive, and (b) those who do will rely on modern technology (that uses 1s and 0s rather than gears and springs) for the job. Even the most basic professional dive computer will beat out the best watch, and most professional divers will opt for the security of a dive computer over the elegance of a SD43 or DSSD.

Thus, any Oyster Rolex will match a Submariner in achievable depth; and while Oyster Rolexes without a HE valve run some risk in saturation dives during the spread period, so would a Submariner.

A Rolex with a 100m water rating is good enough for the vast majority of people ...especially considering 30 meters (100 feet) is considered professional diving. Thus, a watch with 100 meters (almost 330 feet) is more than enough for ANY recreational diver, most of who never go below 40 feet.

[schoolboy]

Originally Posted by c41006

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.

Hahahaha that's hilarious.

Good one

[jsausley]

More to the point, a 300 meter depth rating means the watch WAS water RESISTANT (not proof, no watch is waterproof) to 300 meters (30 atm) when it was manufactured. For a watch to be considered a diver it needs to meet certain requirements at manufacture. It doesn't mean that watch will be 300 meter WR a year later, or five years later, or ten years later.

Rolex are some of the best QC watches in the world but you should still have your watch pressure tested at least once a year if you are regularly scuba diving with it.