Back to Dive Watches - the Tissot Sea-Touch

OK, back from a brief hiatus to my search for the perfect dive watch.  This week, instead of going back into the history books, I thought I'd profile a "brand new" watch from Tissot.  The pictures are from the Tissot ads, rather than of an actual watch, but I didn't think you'd mind.

The Tissot T-touch line has been around for a while now (probably about 10 years).  They're Tissot's version of the ABC watch (altimeter, barometer, compass), with a slick little twist - the watch crystal is a "touch screen".  The typical t-touch has an altimeter, a barometer, a

 thermometer, a digital compass, an alarm, and a chronograph mode.  To select which mode you want, you activate the screen by pushing a button (the touch screen isn't always on - that would cause lots of false activations), then pointing to the section of the screen labelled with the function you want.  For example, if you wanted to use the thermometer

 function, you'd push a button, then press on the crystal at about the 10:00 mark.  The temperature function would show up on the lcd screen at the bottom of the watch.

I've always liked these watches, but never really saw the need for one.  First, I don't need an altimeter.  I've never needed one.  Second, I don't need a barometer.  Wouldn't know how to use it. Third, the thermometer function is near useless on just about every ABC watch, since the temperature sensor is (invariably) close to your skin.  So you always get false readings that are somewhere between the ambient temperature and 37 degrees celcius.  I admit a compass would be cool, but not really necessary - when am I ever going to need a compass and not need a GPS?  I can usually guestimate direction based on the time and the direction of the sun.

I've also never bought one because, although I like techy watches, and I love ana-digi watches, I never really liked the style of these.  To me, the non-rotating bezel, with it's direction indicators, seemed a bit over-done.  And although I like ana-digi movements, there's something about the

 location, or the size, or something, about the LCD screen on these watches that kind of turns me off.  It's really cool to press the screen, watch the hands twirl around, and tell people where North is, but that really wasn't enough for me to buy this watch.

The only one I ever considered was the Silen-T, which is Tissot's "silent" alarm watch.  Very cool features, that I would probably use a lot.  Involving being able to tell the time without looking at the face, and a silent alarm.  I still think this is a great looking watch with amazing features, and will probably buy one at some point...  But I'll leave that watch for another day.

Well, just recently, Tissot added a new watch to their T-touch line, that's made me consider these watches again.  And it's a dive watch.  It probably won't win "best dive watch ever", but it's a pretty cool watch, so I thought I'd talk about it today.

The names of Tissot watches always put a smile on my face.  There was the T-touch (T for Tissot).  The Silen-T (the touch screen watch with a silent alarm.  Now the Sea-Touch, which is kind of a cute play on T-touch.  The Sea-Touch uses the t-touch technology, but instead of being an ABC watch, it's got a bunch of features useful for diving.  It still has the compass (the coolest, and marginally most useful of the ABC features), and a thermometer, but instead of an altimeter or a barometer, it has a dive computer.  The dive computer automatically activates once you dive, and records your depth every 15 seconds.  Once you hit sea level again for more than 5 minutes, the dive computer stops, and the information gets transferred to the dive log.  Very cool feature - now you've got a record of your diving times and depths.  You can quickly access your maximum depth, your dive duration, and a bunch of other features.

You know, with this kind of information available, it would have been nice to incorporate other features, such as an alarm when you hit a pre-set time or depth, but I guess I'm asking for too much.

The Sea-Touch has another nice dive feature that is absent far too often from dive watches - the buttons work under water.  OK, the tactile touch screen is deactivated, but the normal buttons work.  The watch is water resistant to 200 m, which is quite respectable and sufficient. 

Aesthetically, the watch looks much nicer than the other t-touches, mostly because of the classic "dive" elements.  It has a proper bezel.  That rotates.  That indicates something useful.  I'm not sure what happens after 30, though - suddenly the numbers jump to 75.  Maybe the numbers are used in conjunction with the hands to indicate depth, but that would be stupid, given that the bezel rotates.  And I'm not sure why the minute increments end at 30, but the orange part of the dial goes to 50.  I guess I'd have to say that the first half of this bezel (up to 30) is useful, and the rest is just weird.  

Oops - that last paragraph was my bad - it helps to read the manual!  When in dive mode, the elapsed time shows on the LCD, and the depth in meters (or feet, depending on the bezel chosen) is indicated with the minute hand.  The hour hand indicates dive speed!!!  (in minutes per minute or feet per minute) so you can easily calculate decompression!!!  This using the white segment of the dial.   So I've changed my mind - the bezel is quite cool.  The only problem I have with it now is that it looks like it rotates (it's even got little ridges to make it easier to rotate with gloves on).  Given how the bezel works, and what it indicates, it probably shouldn't rotate.  

I do love the look of this watch a lot more than the other t-touches, but compared to a traditional dive watch?  I'm not so sure.  I like the use of orange, both in the orange watch and the more conservative black watch that has orange accents.  The face is a traditional black, but the hands are a little less legible than most dive watch hands.  I'm not sure if orange on black is the most legible combination.  The LCD is backlit, which is nice, but only for the information that's on the LCD - it doesn't help read the time.

Over all, I do like this watch.  It's in the consideration set.  But I'm not certain it's the one dive watch to rule them all.

The Ultimate Divers' part II - The Rolex Submariner

This week's watch of the week is a little early, since I'll be "computer free" for a while.  I don't have too much time to find something esoteric, and realistically, I couldn't do a search for the ultimate Diver's watch without at least considering the entries from Rolex, so we'll get those out of the way today.

For a lot of people, the Submariner is the ultimate diver's watch, and it's not hard to see why.  It's the watch that everyone else copied.  The oyster case was one of the first waterproof cases, meant for extreme use, and the Rolex is really very functionally and clasically laid out - which is why it hasn't changed too much 

in the last few decades.

I'll be looking at a few different Subs, though, since the devil is in the details, and you can really tell what's important in a watch by the little changes that are made over the years.  All photos used today are courtesy of Antiquorum.com - these are all watches that Antiquorum sold over the last week, in their mega watch auction.

So let's look at this first sub.  Black dial?  Check.  Easy to read, luminescent hour markers and hands? Check.  Unidirectional rotating decompression bezel, with luminescent marker and markings every 5 minutes?  Check.  Easy to turn with gloves on? Check.  Water resistant to a reasonable depth? Check.  Touch crystal and band? check.  So it's a diver's watch.  

But let's look at some of the extra features that make this Submariner so special.  Crown guards.  Nice touch.  This way, the screw down crown doesn't get banged up from hits to the side.  It also prevents the crown from accidentally getting unscrewed (which would be very bad at 300 metres).  

The first 15 minutes of the bezel are ticked off every minute, to make it easier to see exactly where you stand.  There is also a subtle, but readable minute chapter ring on the dial.  The hands are easy to read - the "mercedes" hour hand, called this because it resembles the mercedes symbol, is unmistakably distinct from the minute or second hands.  The second hand is big enough to read easily, but tapers to a fine point for accuracy.  It is perfectly aligned with the minute chapter ring.  The second hand has a big luminescent dot making it easy to read, but is quite thin for accuracy.  Use of a triangle at 12 and sticks of luminescence at 3,6,and 9, with circles of luminescence at the other hour markers, make this watch very easy to read - you always know which way is up.  Many, many other watches have copied this style.

The oyster band has also been frequently copied.  Nice, big, solid chunks of stainless steel.  In earlier models, the band looked pretty much the same, but solid links weren't used - instead, they were thick sheets of metal folded to shape.  This was fine, but as the watches got used and got older, the metal would bend out of shape slightly, resulting in band "stretch".  Not a big deal, since it really didn't effect the integrity of the band, and actually probably made the band more comfortable to wear, but people didn't like this (made the watch look old) so the solid links (which are also purportedly stronger since the links are solid metal) were adopted.  Of course,

 the band is only as strong as its weakest link, and the spring bars are the same, but so much of the watch business is perception!

The clasp (which can't be seen in any of the pictures) is also much copied.  It folds over itself and never actually separates - another safety feature - it would be hard to lose this watch over your wrist, even if the band somehow got opened.

People have gone on and on about the history of Rolex (to me, looks like a beautifully executed "marketing" play from the start, and not really about watchmaking - for a long time, they had other companies make their movements, under confidentiality).  People have gone on and on about the movements (oyster perpetual, has all sorts of refinements, including use of interesting alloys and mechanisms to increase reliability, all are officially certified chronometers, etc., etc., etc.,).  But I really don't know enough about Rolexes to add anything of value to those discussions.  

Instead, let's look at a couple of "variations on the theme", and see where they get us.

  This one is a "sub date".  The biggest difference is that it features a date window.  Personally, I don't like the date version as much, for a few reasons.  First, the date window is magnified by what's called the "cyclops" loupe.  There's actually a big piece of glass (or acrylic, depending on the year of manufacture) that sticks OUT of the crystal.  If I had one of these, this would get banged up.  A lot.  I'd end up with lots of scratches on this piece of glass, since it sticks out and just asks to be banged into something.  Second, I think the big white aperture window detracts a lot from the symmetric nature of the face.  Everything else is black.  Your eye just automatically goes to the magnified (and distorted, since magnification will do this) date, rather than to the time.  Other watch brands have used an inverted date (with the number in white, on a black background), and I like that a little more.  Finally, this is a sports watch.  A diving watch.  I'm going to wear it diving.  Even James Bond didn't wear his all the time - he had a dress watch for dress occasions.  So every time you wear it, you have to set the date.  No thanks.

The other obvious difference between the two watches is that this one looks to be a bit older.  The luminescent markers have yellowed nicely, giving a vintage look.

This next one is called the "Roger Moore" sub.  Not sure why, but I suspect it's the model Roger Moore wore in Moonraker, or some such thing.  

Even though it's got "Roger Moore" in the name, I quite like it.  The luminescent strips have aged quite nicely, and almost look orange.  

A "sub" discussion just wouldn't be complete without a look at the watch known as the "James Bond" submariner.  This is a much earlier version of the watch, made famous for a close-up shot in one of the very early Bond movies (possibly even Dr. No).  Although it's got the submariner rotating bezel, it looks a lot like an Explorer, because there are no crown guards.  Also, I think the overall size of the watch was a fair bit smaller than the submariners you see today.  

It's got so-called "historic value" because of it's movie fame, but I think I'd rather have a version with crown guards.  

If I had my choice, I would get an older one, with a matte dial and as little as possible written on the face (the later Rolexes have more 'stuff' on the face; "superlative chronometer", water resistance in feet and metres, etc. etc. etc.).  Nicely yellowed luminescence (radium if I can find it, or if they ever used it - there's something cool about a radioactive dial).  Crown guards.  And (yes) an acrylic crystal.  None of this sapphire crystal stuff - old school.  I wouldn't care so much about the stretch on the band, or whether the band had a wetsuit extension clasp (some of the newer ones do).  Definitely no date.  This is something I really didn't know I felt so strongly about until I wrote this article - so I guess there is a use to this!  The more I think about it, the more I think a date window detracts from a divers' watch - at least from THIS diver's watch.

I should note that the bezel comes in different "flavours" too - they came out with a "Rolex Green" bezel for the watch's anniversary a few years back.  And I think there might be a few with the first 15 minutes in a different colour.  Oh - and I think the new ones are ceramic rather than painted steel - which means they don't scratch or wear out nearly as much.  But those features are unnecessary to me - a Sub should be banged up - it's a professional divers' watch.  And it should be as black as possible, 'cus that's just the way it should be.

The search for the perfect dive watch

I know it's not Wednesday yet, but I thought I'd start out the week with a new idea.  Instead of random "watch I like" posts, for the next few weeks, I'll be exploring, researching, and highlighting dive watches, in the search for a "perfect" dive watch.

Just about every manufacture of watches makes at least one "dive" watch.  The first that comes to mind for most people is the Rolex Submariner.  Most other dive watches are at least loosely based on the Sub.  But even among Subs, there are all sorts of different styles.  The hands on an older Tudor Sub are quite different from the hands on a modern Rolex Sub.  The dials, and rotating bezels, can be different colors.  And of course there's the "Sea Dweller" - the uber-Sub.  

Other examples quickly come to mind - the Breitling Top-Time (James Bond's had a geiger counter built-in).  The IWC Aquatimer.  The Patek Philippe Nautilus.  The Cartier Pasha.  The Omega Seamaster.  The Seiko and Casio dive watches are also right up there.

So, what makes a watch a dive watch?

Wikipedia defines a dive watch as a watch designed for underwater diving that features, as a minimum, a water resistance greater than 10 ATM, the equivalent of 100 meters (330 feet).  There is an ISO standard for diver's watches (ISO 6425).  These are suitable for diving with underwater breating apparatus in depths of 100 m or more; an ISO 6425 certified watch can be marked with the word "DIVER'S".

But there are thousands of watches out there that are water resistant to 100 m.  Really, you could take just about any modern watch scuba diving.  So what unique features make a watch a diver's watch? 

Well, the ISO certification standard gives us some clues.

1) Fantastic visibility in just about all levels of light.

The ISO certification requires adequate readability at 25 cm in total darkness; an indication that the watch is running in total darkness; clearly distinguishable minute markings.

But a good diver's watch, I think, should go beyond this.  It should be legible at any light.  The sun's glare.  The light of the moon.  A dim reflection.  A lot of watches are readable in complete darkness; it's when there's just a little bit of light that makes reading them difficult - your eyes adjust to absolute darkness, and become much more sensitive.  Analog watches should have several different ways of reflecting light back to your eyes.  The hour and minute hands should have a healthy amount of chemiluminescence.  But they should also have some "mirrored" elements, and (ideally) some sections in white or other color that contrasts highly with the colour of the dial.  Hour markers on the watch should be the same - ideally they should have mirrored segments, black or white segments (high contrast to the face color), and a healthy chemiluminescent dollop.

Although a diver's watch can have a face of any colour, the majority are black with white hands and markers.  I think my "perfect" diver's watch will have to have this color combination, or a minor variant of it (dark blue?).  Strictly an aesthetic thing, but isn't that the most important thing here?  After all, it's not like I even dive!

2.  Easy to read the exact time

The ISO standard states that there should be clearly distinguishable minute markings on the watch face.  Makes sense to me.

3.  Unidirectional bezel

The ISO standard states that there should be a unidirectional bezel, with elapsed minute markings at least every 5 minutes, and a specific marker to mark a specific minute marking.  

In other words, there should be a rotating bezel.  It can only rotate in one direction.  So, once it's set, it can be accidentally moved, but only to tell you you have LESS air, not that you have MORE air.  i.e. if you set the marker at the minute hand now, the minute markings will tell you how long you've been underwater.  If the bezel gets moved accidentally, it can only be in the counterclockwise direction, which means when you see how much time you've been under water, it will seem like more, not like less, time.  

I would add a few things to the ISO standard (not that I've read the ISO standard, but I'm just reading about it on Wikipedia...  my apologies if these things are part of the standard already, and just not mentioned in Wikipedia).  First, the specific marker should be chemiluminescent.  It should also be readily visible in any light conditions.  AT A MINIMUM, you should be able to read three things in any light conditions: the location of the minute hand, the location of the "12", and the location of the bezel marker.

Second, the bezel should have some kind of grip on it, so that it can be easily turned, even with gloves on.

Third, the bezel should "click" every minute (or half minute). None of this free-wheeling bezel stuff - you need a bit more accuracy than that.

Fourth, ideally, the bezel should be designed so that sand and salt won't gum it up.  I don't want to have a "stuck" bezel, just because I've been in the sand or sea - that's what it's for!  I'm a bit torn about whether this means that the bezel needs to be an internal bezel (like the one on some of the IWC aquatimers).  With an internal bezel, you just turn a crown to turn the bezel, but the bezel is under the crystal, and is therefore protected from sand and salt.  However, it does change the look of the watch a lot - I'm not sure if a "perfect" dive watch should have an internal bezel...

Finally, I'm a bit torn on whether the bezel should be one colour or two - in a lot of traditional dive watches, the first 15 minutes of the bezel are a different colour.  Not sure why that is - I would understand it if we were counting down (last 15 minutes you can be underwater) but on almost all of these bezels, we're counting up.  I'll have to look into the significance - now it's really staring to bother me.

4.  Tough, reliable watch

The ISO certification has requirements for magnetic resistance, shock resistance, chemical resistance, strap/band solidity.  It also nees an End of Life indicator on a battery powered watch, and an indicator that the watch is running.  Makes sense to me.  You don't want the watch falling off in the middle of the ocean.  You want to know that you're not going to run out of batteries in the middle of a dive.  You want to be able to glance at the watch and confirm that it's still running, and doing what it needs to do.  Theoretically, you are depending on the watch for your health and safety.

Also makes sense that the watch should be able to withstand the corrosive nature of seawater.

5.  Looks like a Dive watch

I think it's important for a dive watch to look the part.  It should have a metal, rubber, or fabric strap.  A big, easy to read, black face.  A serious piece of metal on your wrist.  It should be devoid of fancy features that decrease legibility - no chrono dials, preferably no date indicator (though, if you must, one with a black background).  Although the quintissential dive watch (the Rolex Sub) has a cyclops magnifier for the date window, I would do without - it distorts the face, and sticks up too much (it will get banged up and scratched).  This is a utilitarian watch.  Oh - and I think it should have a wetsuit extension clasp if it's a metal band, or an extra-long bracelet if it's rubber or fabric.  It should have a safety clasp.  Big thick hands.  And a screw-down crown.  I'm not too fussed about fancy shmancy "helium release valves", depth guages, trip computers, or any of those things.

So this wednesday, we'll take a look at our first dive watch.  And we'll look at another every Wednesday 'till I get bored and decide to look at other types of watch for a change.