Officially Named the Post of the Year! -d4m
Test-Special: Replica Divers’ Watches
Part 1: three handed watches
Somehow, I have always been attracted to divers’ watches. Their simple but functional design, their professional appearance and sturdiness make them perfect daily beaters as they usually fit every outfit. There are quite a lot of very nice and reliable replicas out there and I will try to find out how they will compete against each other. Of course I cannot get all of them as there are way too many out there (some are discontinued anyway), but I think I did a good job collecting a nice choice for this test. All of the tested watches are the so called “swiss†versions with ETA movements, with exception of the Panerai Luminor Marina which uses a high-tech asian movement.
In this first part I will have a thoroughgoing look at three handed watches only, while the chronographs will be tested in a second part.
How will I test?
First of all I will try to point out all flaws, advantages and disadvantages of the regarded replica. After that I will check out the movement and its running rates on a professional Witschi timing machine. Of course I will try to include all posts that have been made about the regarded watch as well.
After that, I will simulate a diving test.
Here in Germany, a watch may call itself water resistant or even a divers’watch only if it meets certain requirements. A watch is water resistant due to DIN-standard 8310 (DIN means “Deutsche Industrie Normâ€), if it withstands sweat, rain and a 30 minute bath in 1m deep water. To call itself legally “divers’ watchâ€, it has to bear a little bit more than this: No less than 13 inspections have to be fulfilled to meet the German DIN-standard 8306. I will not test all 13 inspections, but most of them. First of all, it has to be at least waterproof to 100m, the more the better. Further it has to be legible from 25cm under water, the bezel has to show continous minutesteps and the bracelet or strap has to meet special requirements, too. Also, the dial may show depths-rates only in 100m steps. The bezel has to remain operable after some serious dirt contact, which I am going to simulate by pushing the bezel into fine sand under water. After that I will check how good it will operate while being still wet.
I will make a pressure test for at least 50m with a professional leak checker (yes, the one you have already seen in my previous tests). It is working by creating a 5 bar strong vacuum inside a chamber where the watch is placed between two measurement and control devices. This will pull out the watch’s crystal for around 0.001mm and check if it will go out any further in 20 seconds. It also checks if air is escaping the watch case. The idea is that if something is able to escape the case, it will obviously invade it as well.
After that all watches will be checked in a container that is filled 1/2 with water. At first, the watch will hang loose in the air above the water, while we will manually pump more air into the container. This will create a pressure atmosphere of around 6 bar (Damn, this is exhausting…). Then we will wait one minute, so the watch can be invaded by the air – if it is leaky.
After that, we dump the watch into the water and open a valve at the container. The pressure will now escape it and if it is inside the watchcase, the watch as well. The cool thing is, if there is pressure inside the watch and we release it too fast, it will pop out the crystal for sure… WatchTime gives 1 minute to decompress, but I think they are sissys. We will do it in 30 seconds, as we do not have all day long to test. This means the watches have to stand more than the genuines in the WatchTime tests. There is a very nice article describing thoroughly how this works on RWG. Read it here!
As a divers’ watch obviously might get in contact with salt water, I will make check how the watches behave when they stay in a salty bath at room temperature for around 12 hours. Seawater has an average salinity of 3.5%(DIN8306), I will test with a salinity of 5% to be sure. Some metals corrode in saltwater and of course, the seals will be attacked as well. This is supposed to simulate a longer lasting dive.
Legibility is an important factor for divers, so I will check if the watches are readable in direct sunlight, in the dark and in 25cm under water.
I am also going to check if the bracelet or diving strap will fit over a diving suit if it can be extended and if it is tough enough to withstand a weight of 200N (~20.4kg) for 1 minute (again DIN8306). Note that my weights are “only†18.9kg, so the force will be a little bit less than DIN standard.
The grand final will be a visit at an AD who is able to check the participants up to 100m. For all who want to pull out the red flag now, don’t worry, he is obviously one of the cool guys. He will AT NO CHANCE give me any proof or allow any pictures of this – as this would risk his authorisation. I am sure you can understand this.
How will I rate?
I am going to rate the design of the watch strictly in regard to the purpose of a diver. This will get 10 points max.
The first leakchecker test will get 10p max.
The water-chamber test will get 10p max.
The movement rate will get 10p max.
The strap/bracelet will get 10p max. If a watch is tested with both, I will make a combined result.
The dirt test will get 10p max.
The salinity test will get 10p max.
The legibility will be rated by 10p max, as well.
The final 100m test at the AD will receive 20p.
This makes a total possible score of 100p!
However, even if one replica watch passes my tests perfectly, I will not guarantee that your personal watch of the same kind will do the same. If you wanna use it underwter I hardly suggest you to have your watch pressure checked individually. Make sure that all gaskets are sealed.
I know that it would be smarter to get a 150 usd Seiko for diving but this is the rep-game and I am attempting to proof that you actually can go for a dive with our replicas, as long as they are properly sealed.
The Breitling participants:
If you are interested in Breitling replicas and you want to learn more on them in general, I strongly suggest you to read Bytor’s community guide on best Breitling replicas.
Breitling Avenger Seawolf ti
This rare collector’s timepiece is now discontinued and the only titanium watch in this test. It can still be purchased in a fantasy stainless steel design as far as I know. This oldskool piece, however is made of real titanium, which is really corrode-resistant which might give it a bonus in the saltwater test. When it arrived, it was as water-resistant as a strainer. That was because of the HeV that really let water get into the case without any kind of resistance. When I started to write this test, my watchsmith had fixed this issue – but it proofed to be no good. This is why you can see only the empty case on the cover.
The case is made extraordinary good, with correct dimensions. The week points are the thinner fantasy caseback (1.3mm) and the crystal which is also too thin (2.2mm) in regards to the genuine item.
As I put a genuine dial and rehaut in, you can clearly spot the gap between the rehaut ring and the crystal, which is AR’ed by my friend K2222 by the way.
The good thing about this watch is of course that it is really made out of titanium which makes it a lightweight for its size and really comfortable to wear. It feels soft and warm on the skin. The HeV looks exactly like on the genuine and the ridertap-style bezel is the best I have ever seen on a Breitling repica. It has a very good pearl and functional screws and is with the Steelfish bezel the only one that fulfils the DIN-standard for Divers’ watches.
Inside ticks a reliable ETA 2824-2, just like inside the gen, but undecorated.
On the timing machine it received average results even though it is a few years old and did not get a service for quite some time. It showed an average going rate of +17 secs and an amplitude of 257°. The largest difference between all 6 positions was +9 secs and 20° for the amplitude.
Read my test if you are interested to know more about this model here.
Now let’s see how it behaves as a divers’ watch.
1. The watch arrived leaky because of the HeV and my watchmaker somehow managed to seal it. It can be pushed in, as you can see and it seems like the spring which holds it in place isn’t strong enough. My watchmaker is now going to fix it with some special glue that is used by Junghans to seal their crystals.
2. It – of course – failed the waterpressure test, too. I will update it as soon as my watchmaker has fixed this issue.
3. Dirt test
After pushing and turning it into the sand under water, the bezel remained slip-proof and operable, even though some tiny grain of sand managed to get between it the bezel and the case.
4. Legibility
The watch is pretty legible due to K2222’s AR and the good contrasted genuine dial.
Lume could be better though.
5. bracelet test/divingsuit test (extension)
The bracelet has a nice diver extension, which is almost 10mm longer than the one of the Avenger Chrono. That being said, the bracelet failed the weight-test completely. I could not make a picture as quick as the clasp (including the security lever and diving extension) jumps open. This reallyshows bad tolerances in terms of workmanship.
The genuine divingstrap will be rated just like on the SFSO, which might save this part of the test for the Seawolf…
Result
We did not even take it to the AD, to be honest with you. Sealing this watch isn’t as easy as we hoped, but it is going to happen soon. I will update this test then, even though I will let these entire issues flue into the result. It feels really like those cool replicas from the beginning of the boards when it started all: visually perfect but with some weird drawbacks
Nonetheless, it has one of the only two DIN-standard bezels and good legibility. Also the titanium case material is, as expected, not reacting to the saltwater. It is also a pleasure to wear. The bezel remains operable after some serious sand contact, even though the sand can get between case and bezel.
The bracelet that came with it has a good working divers’ extension. It sucks in terms of wearing comfort. I will change it for a genuine rubber strap for sure after everything is fixed.
Perfect design for a diving watch, 10p.
The leakchecker test failed, just like the water-chamber test.0p
The movement rate: 5p
The strap/bracelet: 5p
The dirt test was quite okay. 7p
The salinity test was successful 10p
The legibility: 7p
100m test at the AD was failed.0p
= 47p in total for the Seawolf.
Breitling SuperOcean Steelfish
Being probably the most popular divers’ replica among the boards (next to several Rollie-Subs, of course), it is regarded as the top ranger in this test. Let’s see if it can meet the expectations.
Its case is very well crafted even though the lug horns are way too sharp. I bought mine from Takashi who had it superlumed with C3 Tritec. Together with the nice rep-AR it is probably one of the legibility-test winners, as the hands are easily distinguishable from one another,
The replica has a very thick crystal on par with the genuine counterpart protected by a bezel which is almost as nice as the before regarded Seawolf. It does not have the same solid “clicking†sound and the pearl looks a little off, too, but it fulfils the German DIN-standard.
The case is made of stainless steel with polished and brushed surfaces and I wonder how it will act in the saltwater.
The caseback is really thick (3.38mm, at the thickest part even 6.35mm!) and heavy. It is even decorated from the inside.
Inside the watch ticks an ETA 2824-2, basically the same as in the genuine but without any decoration. It can be operated easily with the nicely structured crown – but the thread is way too thin and can be damaged easily. The timing machine test showed very good results with all positions getting results between +4 secs and -1sec per 24h, only the face up position is ruining the COSC standard with +11 secs.
The tested watch is worn on a genuine Breitling divers’ strap, which has an excellent cost/value ratio. It is easily long enough to fit over a diving suit.
There have been quite a lot members posting good stuff about this replica.
By-Tor made a great competitive review of it vs. his UPO.
Pugwash’s stunning pictorial can be seen here.
I have tested this watch as well, read my article here.
1. Pressuretest.
The leakchecker test didn’t cause any problems and I did not expect any. Sometimes, when the crystal is too thick, it is not able to pull out the crystal the necessary 0.001mm. But this time there was no problem at all.
2. Waterpressure test
So I had no problem to dump it into the 6bar water-container. With movement and dial inside the case! I thought as it is advertised up to 1000m by our trusted dealers and they are always telling the truth, *lol*, I should keep the faith here. My watchmaker wasn’t so comfortable at all with this. He complained, sentences fell on my deaf ears like “if the crystal pops out during the releaseâ€â€¦ “Totally destroyedâ€â€¦ I could hardly hear him. “It is a frickin rep!†I yelled madly “Drown it! We need more action in this test! Muahahahahaha…â€
So down it went and, as you can see, it went good.
3. Dirt test
The bezel remained operable and no sand managed to get between it and the case. Due to the ridertaps, it is easy to turn even in wet condition!
4. Legibility
Thanks to the rep AR, Taka’s superlume and the nicely proportioned hands, the legibility is pretty good. I might AR coat it by K2222 nevertheless.
5. As for the bracelet/strap test, I am going to test both: the replica professional 2 bracelet and the genuine rubber strap. The bracelet is much better than the one from the Seawolf, but has no diving extension which is a big drawback. You would need to change the whole bracelet in order to get it over a diving suit. The clasp remains safely closed though during the minute.
The genuine professional rubber strap reacts by getting longer and longer. But there were no signs it would tear. After the test it went back to normal length at once.
Two thumbs up!
Result
It failed the 100m test at the AD. I really don’t know why, but maybe it is the HeV here, too. I also swam with it in the Mediterranean Sea, so maybe the salty water attacked the gaskets. As it is advertised as 1000m waterproof, it is really annoying it fails already the 100m. I might have listened to my watchsmith a little bit mindful during the waterchamber-test if I had known this before, but it passed the 50m/6bar test without problems though.
However, the design matches pretty much the perfect diving watch; the crown is well protected between thick crownguards and a good and functional bezel protecting the thick AR coated crystal. The Hands can be distinguished a glance and the genuine superlume is doing its part, too. Also, the saltwater could not corrode the case at any visible spot.
Only the inside of the replica bracelet clasp showed a small corroded spot:
It survived the weight test, just like the rubberstrap, but lacks of a diving extension.
Again, perfect design for a diving watch, but made of stainless steel 8p.
The leakchecker test: 10p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 7p
The strap/bracelet: 7p
The dirt test was quite okay. 7p
The salinity test was successful 10p
The legibility: 9p
100m test at the AD was failed.
= 68p in total for the SFSO
Breitling SuperOcean Héritage 46
The probably most beautiful watch in the entire test lacks of a lumed second hand, a pearl and minute-indices on the bezel.
Last mentioned is probably the biggest drawback for a diving watch – you will have to count the marks between the minute hand and the pearl every time when you need to know the diving time…
Nevertheless it deserves a chance to compete with its brothers here, but I will not test the leather strap for saltwater resistance or weight-durability.
The case, made of stainless steel is well made. The lugs are too sharp though, but can be “disarmed†with some cape cod polishing. The crown winds in nicely and seals the case together with the gasket at the screwed in caseback. It has a very good overall-appearance even though the dial font has a flaw. Being a real homage watch, I can oversee the lack of a crownguard in favour of design.
Inside the case, I found the nicest movement I ever saw in a replica. It is a clean and oiled, fully decorated ETA 2824-2 and here in germany it is more expensive than the whole replica. If you are able to source it, that is.
Even after extensive wear on my wrist, it shows outstanding rates on the time machine, with all positions between +4 and -2 seconds in 24h. This is COSC standard.
Read the full Test on this timepiece here.
1. Pressuretest.
Just like it’s Steelfish brother, it passed the leakchecker flawless.
2. waterpressure test
As Silix advertised it as 100m waterproof and he never disappointed me before, I had no problem to drown it with movement and dial, too.
3. Dirt test
No sand was able to get between the bezel and the case and it was astonishing handy in wet condition.
4. The legibility is okay, even though the lume on the dial could be better. Hands are clearly distinguishable from one another.
Result
This watch is amazing in terms of quality, even though it showed some staining after the 12h saltwater test at the side of the case.
It not only passed all tests in our lab, it passed the 100m test at the AD as well! Due to the AR coating, the huge dial and the distinguishable hands, the legibility of this timepiece is nothing but excellent, even though it could use some more superlume. Unfortunately, the already mentioned bezel-design, the missing lume on the second hand and the missing crownguards will make it hard for the Héritage to win the competition as I do not rate beautifulness in this test… Also, the supplied leatherstrap is already totally improper for swimming, but then again, it can be changed to a stock Breitling rubber strap easily.
The design is obviously more meant to meet the historic and aesthetical demands than to meet the requirements of a professional divers’ watch. 5p.
The leakchecker test: 10p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 10p
The strap/bracelet: N/A
The dirt test : 8p
The salinity test: 3p
The legibility: 6p
100m test: 20p
= 72p in total for the Héritage.
Omega:
Again, Bytor managed to write a thoroughgoing guide on best Omega replicas out there. A mandatory reading for every rep collector, not only in my opinion.
Omega Planet Ocean “4th generation†42mm
As I have not tested this watch before, I think it is okay if I write a little more on this watch than on the other participants that I have already written something about.
Omega was always good in product placement, they sponsor the Olympic Games, or prominent (and mostly good looking) people like Nicole Kidman, George Clooney or Michael Phelps to wear their current collection. And of course, having sent the first mechanical wristwatch to the moon, hasn’t damaged their image neither. However, their biggest commercial success is obviously to place their current sportsline in the billion dollar rainmaking James Bond machinery. Pierce Brosnan wearing a Seamaster Professional 300 in his four assignments for his majesty wasn’t bad. But after having seen badass Daniel Craig rocking the new model of the Planet Ocean through a show-jumping course chase in the first part of the last movie, the sale-numbers have exploded on this particular model.
WatchTime hyped this watch to be a professional divingtool with roots to Omega’s divingwatch history.
Even though it’s a very nice watch, I really don’t agree on this statement. Being a mixture of several elements from different Omega watches, is the case is taken from the speedmaster series with no protection for the crown. Even though it winds in smoothly, even on our replicas and does not push into the hand, the lack of a crownguard for design purpose is dangerous for a diving watch.
Let me explain why this is not a good idea: the crown is usually wound into the tube, so it presses constantly against the hopefully greased gasket. This is what makes it waterproof. Now imagine you have to do physical work with it under water and knock the crown against a rock. There are good chances that the crown gets into a tilt and water can invade.
There is a reason why the producers of real diving watches are placing the most sensible part of every watch sometimes on the left side of a case, like Sinn and Oris for example or at least protect it by a crownguard like Breitling and Rolex. Oh, almost forgot, Omega does it too – at least on their inferior SMP 300 line.
The bezel has a Rolex-style aluminium inlay. Rolex invented this system in the nineteen-fifties, in order to make a replacement not so expensive for the owner. The bezel inlay is the part of the watch that needs to be exchanged the most as it is easily scratched during use. Omega, however, does not supply service-watchmakers with the inlays. They charge the owner for a full, expensive (!) new bezel system.
The inlay has an innermost third with a matte-silver surface that serves no purpose at all; the outer two-thirds are coloured black (or orange on the “pumpkinâ€) with slim numerals matching the inner third in colour. They are placed in the usual 10minutes steps from numeral 20 on. There are Indexes displaying the first 15 minutes and from then on between the numerals. Interestingly, Omega made cut backs in terms of function in favour to the design again: there are no continuously minute indexes between the numerals. This does not only go against the common diving norm for watches (DIN-standard 8306), it would’ve also given the inner third part of the bezel a sense.
The pearl is glowing nicely on the gen, while it looked so bad on the rep that I simply broke it out. Bond-style.
The bezel nevertheless aligns perfectly with the crystal, which was AR coated by K2222. The dial underneath isn’t really nice, some markers are crooked and I am thinking of buying a genuine dial for it. The lume however is of the better replica standart. It is applied on dial and hands equally, not near genuine luminosity, but good enough to read the time still after a few hours in the dark.
The hands are taken from the Railmaster- or Broad Arrow line, but now hour, minute and second hand are somewhat arrow-headed. They do look nice, but they fail to read out the time at a first glance, really. They are too easily misread. The second hand’s tip is coloured in bright orange and it is luminous so you can check the watch is working properly at a glance.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not rant at the PO as a sports- or outdoor watch. But it is not the professional diving device as Omega advertises.
The movement is a nickel-plated ETA 2824-2, gaining average 16secs in 24h, with a difference of 10 seconds between fastest and slowest position this could be better but keep in mind it has been unserviced for more than 3 years now.
Please note the ugly plastic spacing-ring.
The gen is powered by a 2500 C, which is based on a strongly modified ETA 2892 with a coaxial escapement, Omega’s latest marketing gag. They say it now will need less-long service intervals. At the same time they do not state any exact periods, so the owner will have to bring it to his AD just like any other watch. Anyway, to receive best results, the balance’s frequency has been reduced from 28.800bph to 25.200bph. This means that anybody with a little knowledge of this stuff will notice the second hand sweep to be too fluently.
As for the visual flaws of the replica, I strongly suggest you to read Bytor’s mandatory read on the PO 4th gen.
The genuine diver’s strap I bought for mine, however, is very comfortable. It is vulcanised so it will not collect any dust and long enough to fit over a dry suit worn by Jabba the Hut.
It has a little play when attached to the replica case, but nothing which would be noticed.
1. Pressuretest.
It failed at first. We don’t know if it was because of the old gaskets or because of the senseless HeV, it could’ve been because of a too thick crystal as well…
We dissembled it and put new and greased gaskets in. The gasket inside the crown was already fully destroyed. Another example that you will have to replace these after some time, especially if you let them get in contact with saltwater.
The HeV, which is totally unnecessary for the genuine as well, was already broken off when I received this watch from another member. My friend and I decided to glue it on for eternity. Again, no saturation diving with replica watches.
2. Waterpressure test
This prepared, it was allowed to sink into the container. This time without the movement and dial, a precautionary measure that proved unnecessary. The watch resisted the 6bars without a problem.
3. Dirt test
Some dirt made it between bezel and case and with its slippery design it was really a pain to operate it afterwards in wet condition. It got stuck every now and then and moved too far after overcoming the obstacle. I honestly could not imagine how to do this with gloves…
4. Legibility test
Confusing hands design make it hard to read out at a glance, even though the K2222 AR works like a charm. Average rep-lume make it sort of visible in the dark.
5. Bracelet test
Unlike all other bracelets in the test, I was not able to put it back on. The holes in the case simply do not match the bracelet pin position! I did the only thing I could do and test it with the bracelet wedget between the lugs.
It did not open, nor did the extension come out.
The genuine diverstrap did not behave as good as the genuine Breitling strap. In fact I am glad it did not rupture. It could stand the test but it was scary, guys!
Everything for the community!
Result
It surprisingly passed the AD 100m test. Still, the bad HeV and the above mentioned design-issues weigh into the rating. It also showed – just like the Héritage – some staining at the case sides near the bezel.
The gen diverstrap disappointed a bit. For a strap this expensive I would’ve expected more than this. Still a very nice watch for almost any occasion, but not my choice for a dive – neither replica nor genuine.
Rating:
The design is a mixture out of modern and historic Omega watches and doesn’t meet the requirements of a professional divers’ watch. 5p.
The leakchecker test: 5p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 7p
The strap/bracelet: 5p
The dirt test : 2p
The salinity test: 4p
The legibility: 4p
100m test: 20p
= 62p for the 4th gen PO
Omega Planet Ocean “Ultimate†45.5mm
(Picture courtesy of Bytor)
I wish I could’ve tested this watch along with the others, but unfortunately I relied on the fact that a friend who was engaged with my girlfriend’s sister owns one. But now as they are no longer engaged it felt wrong to me asking him this favour. I apologize to all UPO fans, but as I have tested the smaller brother it is not that bad, I hope.
If you are interested in this replica, I will strongly suggest you to read Bytor’s cool comparison of it with the Steelfish, or his review on it.
Rolex:
“Super†SeaDweller 16600
Even though I am certainly not the archetype of a Rolexman, this is in my opinion the very archetype of a divers’ watch, just as “WatchTime†states in their test from October 2005.
And they are right, the design is a winner for more than 50 years now and remained almost unchanged since it’s first appearance. I hope you don’t mind me to write a little more about this watch, just like I did with the Planet Ocean, as I have not written anything about it before.
The here examined SeaDweller from Silix-Prime is the thickest and toughest member of the Submariner line, and very recognizable with its helium escape valve, it’s thicker bezel and the lack of a magnification lens. It is the only Rolex with a datewindow but no mag, btw.
Rolex explaines this with the extreme pressure the watch is made to resist. It is also the reason why I personally prefer a SeaDweller over a Submariner any day.
The “design follows function†credo – not as thoroughgoing as on the earlier versions – still lives in the 16600, with the black bezel insert that can be changed easily as it will most likely get scratched during diving operation and the smaller but thicker case. The bezel has a nice structure that allows operation under any circumstances. It doesn’t have the mandatory minute steps to fulfil the DIN-standard, but then again, this watch has been designed and used by professional divers (!) a long time before the DIN-standard was invented
It has a better “click†than any other sub replica I owned so far and moves unidirectional in half minute steps. The pearl is glowing, even though it does not look like the real deal. Again, I do not regard the closeness of the copydesign so important here, but the actual behaviour as a divers’ watch.
The crown, which can be operated easily with gloves is protected by too fat crownguards, which look wrong, but do a nice job.
A disadvantage, which survived through the years, is the high crystal sticking out of the case. It is unprotected by the bezel and as it is sapphire, it may get damaged during contact with diving gear or rocks easily. It is full 3mm (!) thick on the replica.
Like on any Rollie, it is uncoated, which makes it almost impossible to read out from certain angles in direct sunlight. The Mercedes shaped hour hand can be distinguished from the minute hand easily at first glance. The lume – even though not genuine superlume – is working above average.
This watch, along with the Doxa line, is in my opinion the only one that should have a HeV without looking like a marketing gag, but more out of a historical purpose than out of real necessity. Because Rolex and Doxa were in fact the companies that invented and made it available for non professional divers for the first time.
The movement is running good with all positions giving an average result of +7 sec in 24 hours by an average amplitude of 282°. The biggest difference between all positions is only +4 seconds which is very good and 26° for the amplitude.
Not bad for a stock ETA 2836-2 movement.
1. Pressuretest
Just like the Omega, it failed the leakchecker in first place.
2. As we found out inside the water-container, the crown-tube was leaky.
This could be my mistake as I accidentally danged the crown pretty hard against a table… We installed a genuine tube, which was quite a lot of fun. First we impaled the old tube on a metal stick and simply screwed it off from that.
Then we drilled the tube hole out a little with scary looking watchmaker tools.
To fix the case, we used simple rodico and I felt a little bit like Mac Gyver.
After that, the genuine tube fit right in.
The cool thing is: the replica crown fits right onto it without modification and if I ever feel like spending 70 Euro, I can switch it to the real deal without problems.
Then we put new and greased gaskets into the tube, crown and caseback.
This armed, it went back into the container and I pumped it up to over 6bar.
No problem at all!
3. Dirt test
The SeaDweller remained perfectly operable after the test.
4. legibility test
The watch is legible in most situations but sucks in direct sunlight.
5. bracelet test
Just like a genuine Rolex bracelet it feels cheap and rattly. But it works and passed the test without problems.
Result
This watch is amazing, in terms of quality equal to the Superocean Héritage replica, but it didn’t fail the saltwater test.
Okay, we had to replace the tube, but this modification was not even near the trouble with the HeV of the Breitling Seawolf and I am pretty sure I caused it by my own stupidity. And it adds the opportunity to simply change the crown to a genuine triplock one if desired. The legibility is like on any Rolex not really good in direct sunlight because of the reflections of the crystal. The Mercedes shaped hands and the above average rep-lume make the readout – even under water – very good. The replica uses the same triplock crown system as the gen, this particular rep even with a genuine tube. The slipproof crown is protected by even fatter crownguards than the genuine, which looks wrong and ugly, but works.
The bezel clicks in solid half minute steps and even though it is not DIN-standard compliant, it remained perfectly operable after the dirt test. The sand was not able to get between bezel and case. It unsurprisingly passed the 100m test at the AD.
Rating:
The design is the archetype of a professional divers’ watch. They invented it with Blancpain. 10p.
The leakchecker test: 5p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 8p
The strap/bracelet: 7p
The dirt test : 10p
The salinity test: 10p
The legibility: 8p
100m test: 20p
= 78p in total for the SSD
Panerai:
Luminor Marina
I really wish I could’ve sent a real divers’watch from the “Firenze workshop†into the race, like a 087, but I don’t own one and could not afford another watch. So this has got to do it.
The model, even though it is very waterproof, is at no chance a divers’ watch. It has no bezel to set the diving time, which is the most important part for diving. Therefore I will pass on the dirt test as I really see no reason for one here.
Apart from that, it does a pretty good job: It is as legible as a watch can be, it has a distinctive minute hand and the halfmoon shaped crownguard will protect the crown better than any other guard I can think of.
The other drawback is the manual movement which should be charged before any dive.
Without a power-reserve display, a running out of power is very dangerous for a diver who relies on his watch. But the strongly luminous second hand will make it visible at once when the watch has stopped.
I have tested this watch here, if you’re interested in flaws and advantages of this timepiece.
1. Pressuretest.
It passed the leakchecker without any problems.
2. waterpressure test
No problems in the watercontainer either. We didn’t even feel necessity to take the movement and dial out before.
3. saltwater test
No corroding or staining noticeable. Seems like this watch is made from a very good steel.
4. legibility test
The pam had easily the best legibility of all tested watches.
Result
Just like the Héritage, this watch starts into the competition with some handicaps. It does not have a diving bezel at all and is powered by a manually wound movement. On the other side, it has the best crown protection and the best legibility under any circumstances of all participants. It also passed all tests (including the 100m AD test) and pretty decent timing machine results.
Saltwater couldn’t corrode the case in more than 12 hours just like the Steelfish, the Seawolf and the SSD.
The design is really not meeting the demand of a divingwatch. 0p.
The leakchecker test: 10p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 8p
The strap/bracelet: N/A
The dirt test : N/A
The salinity test: 10p
The legibility: 10p
100m test: 20p
= 68p in total for the Pam111
Final results
My ratings were tough and I was told even most genuines wouldn’t have gained much more points than these replicas. However, I think I proofed that replicas are better than their reputation. Only the Seawolf really failed which is no surprise as there is a real hole in the case.
The Planet Ocean is a nice watch and I enjoy wearing it – but the salinity result, the bezel, the HeV, the legibility, the bracelet and even the genuine strap prevent a really good rating. Still it passed the important 100m AD test.
The Luminor Marina and the Superocean Steelfish share the 3rd place. A real surprise for the last mentioned as I would have placed my bet on it before all tests as well. The failure at the AD really ruined the win for it. The Pam made the tests it could participate in really competent. If it had a dirt proof diving bezel and an automatic movement, the pam would’ve probably won the match. But as it has none, I can only award it for being a superb outdoor watch you can safely swim or snorkel with.
Probably the most surprising result in this test made the Superocean Héritage. It started as the underdog and won the silver medal due to the passed pressure-tests, the excellent movement rate and the dirt test. The lack of a bracelet/strap test and the inferior (but beautiful) design prevent the upset.
Gold medal for the SSD for being the all-round talent in most tests. It was the only watch that made average to good points in all competitions. It might have been a different story it the Héritage would’ve had a different bracelet or strap, or if the SFSO had passed the AD test.
The test was really a lot of fun for me and my watchsmith and I would like to thank him for all the trouble he had and for making this test possible in this way. Now I am really looking forward to the second part, where I am going to examine diving chronographs.
I hope you all enjoyed this read as much as I enjoyed writing it and, as always, comments are really appreciated!
Have a very nice day!
Test-Special: Replica Divers’ Watches
Part 1: three handed watches
Somehow, I have always been attracted to divers’ watches. Their simple but functional design, their professional appearance and sturdiness make them perfect daily beaters as they usually fit every outfit. There are quite a lot of very nice and reliable replicas out there and I will try to find out how they will compete against each other. Of course I cannot get all of them as there are way too many out there (some are discontinued anyway), but I think I did a good job collecting a nice choice for this test. All of the tested watches are the so called “swiss†versions with ETA movements, with exception of the Panerai Luminor Marina which uses a high-tech asian movement.
In this first part I will have a thoroughgoing look at three handed watches only, while the chronographs will be tested in a second part.
How will I test?
First of all I will try to point out all flaws, advantages and disadvantages of the regarded replica. After that I will check out the movement and its running rates on a professional Witschi timing machine. Of course I will try to include all posts that have been made about the regarded watch as well.
After that, I will simulate a diving test.
Here in Germany, a watch may call itself water resistant or even a divers’watch only if it meets certain requirements. A watch is water resistant due to DIN-standard 8310 (DIN means “Deutsche Industrie Normâ€), if it withstands sweat, rain and a 30 minute bath in 1m deep water. To call itself legally “divers’ watchâ€, it has to bear a little bit more than this: No less than 13 inspections have to be fulfilled to meet the German DIN-standard 8306. I will not test all 13 inspections, but most of them. First of all, it has to be at least waterproof to 100m, the more the better. Further it has to be legible from 25cm under water, the bezel has to show continous minutesteps and the bracelet or strap has to meet special requirements, too. Also, the dial may show depths-rates only in 100m steps. The bezel has to remain operable after some serious dirt contact, which I am going to simulate by pushing the bezel into fine sand under water. After that I will check how good it will operate while being still wet.
I will make a pressure test for at least 50m with a professional leak checker (yes, the one you have already seen in my previous tests). It is working by creating a 5 bar strong vacuum inside a chamber where the watch is placed between two measurement and control devices. This will pull out the watch’s crystal for around 0.001mm and check if it will go out any further in 20 seconds. It also checks if air is escaping the watch case. The idea is that if something is able to escape the case, it will obviously invade it as well.
After that all watches will be checked in a container that is filled 1/2 with water. At first, the watch will hang loose in the air above the water, while we will manually pump more air into the container. This will create a pressure atmosphere of around 6 bar (Damn, this is exhausting…). Then we will wait one minute, so the watch can be invaded by the air – if it is leaky.
After that, we dump the watch into the water and open a valve at the container. The pressure will now escape it and if it is inside the watchcase, the watch as well. The cool thing is, if there is pressure inside the watch and we release it too fast, it will pop out the crystal for sure… WatchTime gives 1 minute to decompress, but I think they are sissys. We will do it in 30 seconds, as we do not have all day long to test. This means the watches have to stand more than the genuines in the WatchTime tests. There is a very nice article describing thoroughly how this works on RWG. Read it here!
As a divers’ watch obviously might get in contact with salt water, I will make check how the watches behave when they stay in a salty bath at room temperature for around 12 hours. Seawater has an average salinity of 3.5%(DIN8306), I will test with a salinity of 5% to be sure. Some metals corrode in saltwater and of course, the seals will be attacked as well. This is supposed to simulate a longer lasting dive.
Legibility is an important factor for divers, so I will check if the watches are readable in direct sunlight, in the dark and in 25cm under water.
I am also going to check if the bracelet or diving strap will fit over a diving suit if it can be extended and if it is tough enough to withstand a weight of 200N (~20.4kg) for 1 minute (again DIN8306). Note that my weights are “only†18.9kg, so the force will be a little bit less than DIN standard.
The grand final will be a visit at an AD who is able to check the participants up to 100m. For all who want to pull out the red flag now, don’t worry, he is obviously one of the cool guys. He will AT NO CHANCE give me any proof or allow any pictures of this – as this would risk his authorisation. I am sure you can understand this.
How will I rate?
I am going to rate the design of the watch strictly in regard to the purpose of a diver. This will get 10 points max.
The first leakchecker test will get 10p max.
The water-chamber test will get 10p max.
The movement rate will get 10p max.
The strap/bracelet will get 10p max. If a watch is tested with both, I will make a combined result.
The dirt test will get 10p max.
The salinity test will get 10p max.
The legibility will be rated by 10p max, as well.
The final 100m test at the AD will receive 20p.
This makes a total possible score of 100p!
However, even if one replica watch passes my tests perfectly, I will not guarantee that your personal watch of the same kind will do the same. If you wanna use it underwter I hardly suggest you to have your watch pressure checked individually. Make sure that all gaskets are sealed.
I know that it would be smarter to get a 150 usd Seiko for diving but this is the rep-game and I am attempting to proof that you actually can go for a dive with our replicas, as long as they are properly sealed.
The Breitling participants:
If you are interested in Breitling replicas and you want to learn more on them in general, I strongly suggest you to read Bytor’s community guide on best Breitling replicas.
Breitling Avenger Seawolf ti
This rare collector’s timepiece is now discontinued and the only titanium watch in this test. It can still be purchased in a fantasy stainless steel design as far as I know. This oldskool piece, however is made of real titanium, which is really corrode-resistant which might give it a bonus in the saltwater test. When it arrived, it was as water-resistant as a strainer. That was because of the HeV that really let water get into the case without any kind of resistance. When I started to write this test, my watchsmith had fixed this issue – but it proofed to be no good. This is why you can see only the empty case on the cover.
The case is made extraordinary good, with correct dimensions. The week points are the thinner fantasy caseback (1.3mm) and the crystal which is also too thin (2.2mm) in regards to the genuine item.
As I put a genuine dial and rehaut in, you can clearly spot the gap between the rehaut ring and the crystal, which is AR’ed by my friend K2222 by the way.
The good thing about this watch is of course that it is really made out of titanium which makes it a lightweight for its size and really comfortable to wear. It feels soft and warm on the skin. The HeV looks exactly like on the genuine and the ridertap-style bezel is the best I have ever seen on a Breitling repica. It has a very good pearl and functional screws and is with the Steelfish bezel the only one that fulfils the DIN-standard for Divers’ watches.
Inside ticks a reliable ETA 2824-2, just like inside the gen, but undecorated.
On the timing machine it received average results even though it is a few years old and did not get a service for quite some time. It showed an average going rate of +17 secs and an amplitude of 257°. The largest difference between all 6 positions was +9 secs and 20° for the amplitude.
Read my test if you are interested to know more about this model here.
Now let’s see how it behaves as a divers’ watch.
1. The watch arrived leaky because of the HeV and my watchmaker somehow managed to seal it. It can be pushed in, as you can see and it seems like the spring which holds it in place isn’t strong enough. My watchmaker is now going to fix it with some special glue that is used by Junghans to seal their crystals.
2. It – of course – failed the waterpressure test, too. I will update it as soon as my watchmaker has fixed this issue.
3. Dirt test
After pushing and turning it into the sand under water, the bezel remained slip-proof and operable, even though some tiny grain of sand managed to get between it the bezel and the case.
4. Legibility
The watch is pretty legible due to K2222’s AR and the good contrasted genuine dial.
Lume could be better though.
5. bracelet test/divingsuit test (extension)
The bracelet has a nice diver extension, which is almost 10mm longer than the one of the Avenger Chrono. That being said, the bracelet failed the weight-test completely. I could not make a picture as quick as the clasp (including the security lever and diving extension) jumps open. This reallyshows bad tolerances in terms of workmanship.
The genuine divingstrap will be rated just like on the SFSO, which might save this part of the test for the Seawolf…
Result
We did not even take it to the AD, to be honest with you. Sealing this watch isn’t as easy as we hoped, but it is going to happen soon. I will update this test then, even though I will let these entire issues flue into the result. It feels really like those cool replicas from the beginning of the boards when it started all: visually perfect but with some weird drawbacks
Nonetheless, it has one of the only two DIN-standard bezels and good legibility. Also the titanium case material is, as expected, not reacting to the saltwater. It is also a pleasure to wear. The bezel remains operable after some serious sand contact, even though the sand can get between case and bezel.
The bracelet that came with it has a good working divers’ extension. It sucks in terms of wearing comfort. I will change it for a genuine rubber strap for sure after everything is fixed.
Perfect design for a diving watch, 10p.
The leakchecker test failed, just like the water-chamber test.0p
The movement rate: 5p
The strap/bracelet: 5p
The dirt test was quite okay. 7p
The salinity test was successful 10p
The legibility: 7p
100m test at the AD was failed.0p
= 47p in total for the Seawolf.
Breitling SuperOcean Steelfish
Being probably the most popular divers’ replica among the boards (next to several Rollie-Subs, of course), it is regarded as the top ranger in this test. Let’s see if it can meet the expectations.
Its case is very well crafted even though the lug horns are way too sharp. I bought mine from Takashi who had it superlumed with C3 Tritec. Together with the nice rep-AR it is probably one of the legibility-test winners, as the hands are easily distinguishable from one another,
The replica has a very thick crystal on par with the genuine counterpart protected by a bezel which is almost as nice as the before regarded Seawolf. It does not have the same solid “clicking†sound and the pearl looks a little off, too, but it fulfils the German DIN-standard.
The case is made of stainless steel with polished and brushed surfaces and I wonder how it will act in the saltwater.
The caseback is really thick (3.38mm, at the thickest part even 6.35mm!) and heavy. It is even decorated from the inside.
Inside the watch ticks an ETA 2824-2, basically the same as in the genuine but without any decoration. It can be operated easily with the nicely structured crown – but the thread is way too thin and can be damaged easily. The timing machine test showed very good results with all positions getting results between +4 secs and -1sec per 24h, only the face up position is ruining the COSC standard with +11 secs.
The tested watch is worn on a genuine Breitling divers’ strap, which has an excellent cost/value ratio. It is easily long enough to fit over a diving suit.
There have been quite a lot members posting good stuff about this replica.
By-Tor made a great competitive review of it vs. his UPO.
Pugwash’s stunning pictorial can be seen here.
I have tested this watch as well, read my article here.
1. Pressuretest.
The leakchecker test didn’t cause any problems and I did not expect any. Sometimes, when the crystal is too thick, it is not able to pull out the crystal the necessary 0.001mm. But this time there was no problem at all.
2. Waterpressure test
So I had no problem to dump it into the 6bar water-container. With movement and dial inside the case! I thought as it is advertised up to 1000m by our trusted dealers and they are always telling the truth, *lol*, I should keep the faith here. My watchmaker wasn’t so comfortable at all with this. He complained, sentences fell on my deaf ears like “if the crystal pops out during the releaseâ€â€¦ “Totally destroyedâ€â€¦ I could hardly hear him. “It is a frickin rep!†I yelled madly “Drown it! We need more action in this test! Muahahahahaha…â€
So down it went and, as you can see, it went good.
3. Dirt test
The bezel remained operable and no sand managed to get between it and the case. Due to the ridertaps, it is easy to turn even in wet condition!
4. Legibility
Thanks to the rep AR, Taka’s superlume and the nicely proportioned hands, the legibility is pretty good. I might AR coat it by K2222 nevertheless.
5. As for the bracelet/strap test, I am going to test both: the replica professional 2 bracelet and the genuine rubber strap. The bracelet is much better than the one from the Seawolf, but has no diving extension which is a big drawback. You would need to change the whole bracelet in order to get it over a diving suit. The clasp remains safely closed though during the minute.
The genuine professional rubber strap reacts by getting longer and longer. But there were no signs it would tear. After the test it went back to normal length at once.
Two thumbs up!
Result
It failed the 100m test at the AD. I really don’t know why, but maybe it is the HeV here, too. I also swam with it in the Mediterranean Sea, so maybe the salty water attacked the gaskets. As it is advertised as 1000m waterproof, it is really annoying it fails already the 100m. I might have listened to my watchsmith a little bit mindful during the waterchamber-test if I had known this before, but it passed the 50m/6bar test without problems though.
However, the design matches pretty much the perfect diving watch; the crown is well protected between thick crownguards and a good and functional bezel protecting the thick AR coated crystal. The Hands can be distinguished a glance and the genuine superlume is doing its part, too. Also, the saltwater could not corrode the case at any visible spot.
Only the inside of the replica bracelet clasp showed a small corroded spot:
It survived the weight test, just like the rubberstrap, but lacks of a diving extension.
Again, perfect design for a diving watch, but made of stainless steel 8p.
The leakchecker test: 10p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 7p
The strap/bracelet: 7p
The dirt test was quite okay. 7p
The salinity test was successful 10p
The legibility: 9p
100m test at the AD was failed.
= 68p in total for the SFSO
Breitling SuperOcean Héritage 46
The probably most beautiful watch in the entire test lacks of a lumed second hand, a pearl and minute-indices on the bezel.
Last mentioned is probably the biggest drawback for a diving watch – you will have to count the marks between the minute hand and the pearl every time when you need to know the diving time…
Nevertheless it deserves a chance to compete with its brothers here, but I will not test the leather strap for saltwater resistance or weight-durability.
The case, made of stainless steel is well made. The lugs are too sharp though, but can be “disarmed†with some cape cod polishing. The crown winds in nicely and seals the case together with the gasket at the screwed in caseback. It has a very good overall-appearance even though the dial font has a flaw. Being a real homage watch, I can oversee the lack of a crownguard in favour of design.
Inside the case, I found the nicest movement I ever saw in a replica. It is a clean and oiled, fully decorated ETA 2824-2 and here in germany it is more expensive than the whole replica. If you are able to source it, that is.
Even after extensive wear on my wrist, it shows outstanding rates on the time machine, with all positions between +4 and -2 seconds in 24h. This is COSC standard.
Read the full Test on this timepiece here.
1. Pressuretest.
Just like it’s Steelfish brother, it passed the leakchecker flawless.
2. waterpressure test
As Silix advertised it as 100m waterproof and he never disappointed me before, I had no problem to drown it with movement and dial, too.
3. Dirt test
No sand was able to get between the bezel and the case and it was astonishing handy in wet condition.
4. The legibility is okay, even though the lume on the dial could be better. Hands are clearly distinguishable from one another.
Result
This watch is amazing in terms of quality, even though it showed some staining after the 12h saltwater test at the side of the case.
It not only passed all tests in our lab, it passed the 100m test at the AD as well! Due to the AR coating, the huge dial and the distinguishable hands, the legibility of this timepiece is nothing but excellent, even though it could use some more superlume. Unfortunately, the already mentioned bezel-design, the missing lume on the second hand and the missing crownguards will make it hard for the Héritage to win the competition as I do not rate beautifulness in this test… Also, the supplied leatherstrap is already totally improper for swimming, but then again, it can be changed to a stock Breitling rubber strap easily.
The design is obviously more meant to meet the historic and aesthetical demands than to meet the requirements of a professional divers’ watch. 5p.
The leakchecker test: 10p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 10p
The strap/bracelet: N/A
The dirt test : 8p
The salinity test: 3p
The legibility: 6p
100m test: 20p
= 72p in total for the Héritage.
Omega:
Again, Bytor managed to write a thoroughgoing guide on best Omega replicas out there. A mandatory reading for every rep collector, not only in my opinion.
Omega Planet Ocean “4th generation†42mm
As I have not tested this watch before, I think it is okay if I write a little more on this watch than on the other participants that I have already written something about.
Omega was always good in product placement, they sponsor the Olympic Games, or prominent (and mostly good looking) people like Nicole Kidman, George Clooney or Michael Phelps to wear their current collection. And of course, having sent the first mechanical wristwatch to the moon, hasn’t damaged their image neither. However, their biggest commercial success is obviously to place their current sportsline in the billion dollar rainmaking James Bond machinery. Pierce Brosnan wearing a Seamaster Professional 300 in his four assignments for his majesty wasn’t bad. But after having seen badass Daniel Craig rocking the new model of the Planet Ocean through a show-jumping course chase in the first part of the last movie, the sale-numbers have exploded on this particular model.
WatchTime hyped this watch to be a professional divingtool with roots to Omega’s divingwatch history.
Even though it’s a very nice watch, I really don’t agree on this statement. Being a mixture of several elements from different Omega watches, is the case is taken from the speedmaster series with no protection for the crown. Even though it winds in smoothly, even on our replicas and does not push into the hand, the lack of a crownguard for design purpose is dangerous for a diving watch.
Let me explain why this is not a good idea: the crown is usually wound into the tube, so it presses constantly against the hopefully greased gasket. This is what makes it waterproof. Now imagine you have to do physical work with it under water and knock the crown against a rock. There are good chances that the crown gets into a tilt and water can invade.
There is a reason why the producers of real diving watches are placing the most sensible part of every watch sometimes on the left side of a case, like Sinn and Oris for example or at least protect it by a crownguard like Breitling and Rolex. Oh, almost forgot, Omega does it too – at least on their inferior SMP 300 line.
The bezel has a Rolex-style aluminium inlay. Rolex invented this system in the nineteen-fifties, in order to make a replacement not so expensive for the owner. The bezel inlay is the part of the watch that needs to be exchanged the most as it is easily scratched during use. Omega, however, does not supply service-watchmakers with the inlays. They charge the owner for a full, expensive (!) new bezel system.
The inlay has an innermost third with a matte-silver surface that serves no purpose at all; the outer two-thirds are coloured black (or orange on the “pumpkinâ€) with slim numerals matching the inner third in colour. They are placed in the usual 10minutes steps from numeral 20 on. There are Indexes displaying the first 15 minutes and from then on between the numerals. Interestingly, Omega made cut backs in terms of function in favour to the design again: there are no continuously minute indexes between the numerals. This does not only go against the common diving norm for watches (DIN-standard 8306), it would’ve also given the inner third part of the bezel a sense.
The pearl is glowing nicely on the gen, while it looked so bad on the rep that I simply broke it out. Bond-style.
The bezel nevertheless aligns perfectly with the crystal, which was AR coated by K2222. The dial underneath isn’t really nice, some markers are crooked and I am thinking of buying a genuine dial for it. The lume however is of the better replica standart. It is applied on dial and hands equally, not near genuine luminosity, but good enough to read the time still after a few hours in the dark.
The hands are taken from the Railmaster- or Broad Arrow line, but now hour, minute and second hand are somewhat arrow-headed. They do look nice, but they fail to read out the time at a first glance, really. They are too easily misread. The second hand’s tip is coloured in bright orange and it is luminous so you can check the watch is working properly at a glance.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not rant at the PO as a sports- or outdoor watch. But it is not the professional diving device as Omega advertises.
The movement is a nickel-plated ETA 2824-2, gaining average 16secs in 24h, with a difference of 10 seconds between fastest and slowest position this could be better but keep in mind it has been unserviced for more than 3 years now.
Please note the ugly plastic spacing-ring.
The gen is powered by a 2500 C, which is based on a strongly modified ETA 2892 with a coaxial escapement, Omega’s latest marketing gag. They say it now will need less-long service intervals. At the same time they do not state any exact periods, so the owner will have to bring it to his AD just like any other watch. Anyway, to receive best results, the balance’s frequency has been reduced from 28.800bph to 25.200bph. This means that anybody with a little knowledge of this stuff will notice the second hand sweep to be too fluently.
As for the visual flaws of the replica, I strongly suggest you to read Bytor’s mandatory read on the PO 4th gen.
The genuine diver’s strap I bought for mine, however, is very comfortable. It is vulcanised so it will not collect any dust and long enough to fit over a dry suit worn by Jabba the Hut.
It has a little play when attached to the replica case, but nothing which would be noticed.
1. Pressuretest.
It failed at first. We don’t know if it was because of the old gaskets or because of the senseless HeV, it could’ve been because of a too thick crystal as well…
We dissembled it and put new and greased gaskets in. The gasket inside the crown was already fully destroyed. Another example that you will have to replace these after some time, especially if you let them get in contact with saltwater.
The HeV, which is totally unnecessary for the genuine as well, was already broken off when I received this watch from another member. My friend and I decided to glue it on for eternity. Again, no saturation diving with replica watches.
2. Waterpressure test
This prepared, it was allowed to sink into the container. This time without the movement and dial, a precautionary measure that proved unnecessary. The watch resisted the 6bars without a problem.
3. Dirt test
Some dirt made it between bezel and case and with its slippery design it was really a pain to operate it afterwards in wet condition. It got stuck every now and then and moved too far after overcoming the obstacle. I honestly could not imagine how to do this with gloves…
4. Legibility test
Confusing hands design make it hard to read out at a glance, even though the K2222 AR works like a charm. Average rep-lume make it sort of visible in the dark.
5. Bracelet test
Unlike all other bracelets in the test, I was not able to put it back on. The holes in the case simply do not match the bracelet pin position! I did the only thing I could do and test it with the bracelet wedget between the lugs.
It did not open, nor did the extension come out.
The genuine diverstrap did not behave as good as the genuine Breitling strap. In fact I am glad it did not rupture. It could stand the test but it was scary, guys!
Everything for the community!
Result
It surprisingly passed the AD 100m test. Still, the bad HeV and the above mentioned design-issues weigh into the rating. It also showed – just like the Héritage – some staining at the case sides near the bezel.
The gen diverstrap disappointed a bit. For a strap this expensive I would’ve expected more than this. Still a very nice watch for almost any occasion, but not my choice for a dive – neither replica nor genuine.
Rating:
The design is a mixture out of modern and historic Omega watches and doesn’t meet the requirements of a professional divers’ watch. 5p.
The leakchecker test: 5p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 7p
The strap/bracelet: 5p
The dirt test : 2p
The salinity test: 4p
The legibility: 4p
100m test: 20p
= 62p for the 4th gen PO
Omega Planet Ocean “Ultimate†45.5mm
(Picture courtesy of Bytor)
I wish I could’ve tested this watch along with the others, but unfortunately I relied on the fact that a friend who was engaged with my girlfriend’s sister owns one. But now as they are no longer engaged it felt wrong to me asking him this favour. I apologize to all UPO fans, but as I have tested the smaller brother it is not that bad, I hope.
If you are interested in this replica, I will strongly suggest you to read Bytor’s cool comparison of it with the Steelfish, or his review on it.
Rolex:
“Super†SeaDweller 16600
Even though I am certainly not the archetype of a Rolexman, this is in my opinion the very archetype of a divers’ watch, just as “WatchTime†states in their test from October 2005.
And they are right, the design is a winner for more than 50 years now and remained almost unchanged since it’s first appearance. I hope you don’t mind me to write a little more about this watch, just like I did with the Planet Ocean, as I have not written anything about it before.
The here examined SeaDweller from Silix-Prime is the thickest and toughest member of the Submariner line, and very recognizable with its helium escape valve, it’s thicker bezel and the lack of a magnification lens. It is the only Rolex with a datewindow but no mag, btw.
Rolex explaines this with the extreme pressure the watch is made to resist. It is also the reason why I personally prefer a SeaDweller over a Submariner any day.
The “design follows function†credo – not as thoroughgoing as on the earlier versions – still lives in the 16600, with the black bezel insert that can be changed easily as it will most likely get scratched during diving operation and the smaller but thicker case. The bezel has a nice structure that allows operation under any circumstances. It doesn’t have the mandatory minute steps to fulfil the DIN-standard, but then again, this watch has been designed and used by professional divers (!) a long time before the DIN-standard was invented
It has a better “click†than any other sub replica I owned so far and moves unidirectional in half minute steps. The pearl is glowing, even though it does not look like the real deal. Again, I do not regard the closeness of the copydesign so important here, but the actual behaviour as a divers’ watch.
The crown, which can be operated easily with gloves is protected by too fat crownguards, which look wrong, but do a nice job.
A disadvantage, which survived through the years, is the high crystal sticking out of the case. It is unprotected by the bezel and as it is sapphire, it may get damaged during contact with diving gear or rocks easily. It is full 3mm (!) thick on the replica.
Like on any Rollie, it is uncoated, which makes it almost impossible to read out from certain angles in direct sunlight. The Mercedes shaped hour hand can be distinguished from the minute hand easily at first glance. The lume – even though not genuine superlume – is working above average.
This watch, along with the Doxa line, is in my opinion the only one that should have a HeV without looking like a marketing gag, but more out of a historical purpose than out of real necessity. Because Rolex and Doxa were in fact the companies that invented and made it available for non professional divers for the first time.
The movement is running good with all positions giving an average result of +7 sec in 24 hours by an average amplitude of 282°. The biggest difference between all positions is only +4 seconds which is very good and 26° for the amplitude.
Not bad for a stock ETA 2836-2 movement.
1. Pressuretest
Just like the Omega, it failed the leakchecker in first place.
2. As we found out inside the water-container, the crown-tube was leaky.
This could be my mistake as I accidentally danged the crown pretty hard against a table… We installed a genuine tube, which was quite a lot of fun. First we impaled the old tube on a metal stick and simply screwed it off from that.
Then we drilled the tube hole out a little with scary looking watchmaker tools.
To fix the case, we used simple rodico and I felt a little bit like Mac Gyver.
After that, the genuine tube fit right in.
The cool thing is: the replica crown fits right onto it without modification and if I ever feel like spending 70 Euro, I can switch it to the real deal without problems.
Then we put new and greased gaskets into the tube, crown and caseback.
This armed, it went back into the container and I pumped it up to over 6bar.
No problem at all!
3. Dirt test
The SeaDweller remained perfectly operable after the test.
4. legibility test
The watch is legible in most situations but sucks in direct sunlight.
5. bracelet test
Just like a genuine Rolex bracelet it feels cheap and rattly. But it works and passed the test without problems.
Result
This watch is amazing, in terms of quality equal to the Superocean Héritage replica, but it didn’t fail the saltwater test.
Okay, we had to replace the tube, but this modification was not even near the trouble with the HeV of the Breitling Seawolf and I am pretty sure I caused it by my own stupidity. And it adds the opportunity to simply change the crown to a genuine triplock one if desired. The legibility is like on any Rolex not really good in direct sunlight because of the reflections of the crystal. The Mercedes shaped hands and the above average rep-lume make the readout – even under water – very good. The replica uses the same triplock crown system as the gen, this particular rep even with a genuine tube. The slipproof crown is protected by even fatter crownguards than the genuine, which looks wrong and ugly, but works.
The bezel clicks in solid half minute steps and even though it is not DIN-standard compliant, it remained perfectly operable after the dirt test. The sand was not able to get between bezel and case. It unsurprisingly passed the 100m test at the AD.
Rating:
The design is the archetype of a professional divers’ watch. They invented it with Blancpain. 10p.
The leakchecker test: 5p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 8p
The strap/bracelet: 7p
The dirt test : 10p
The salinity test: 10p
The legibility: 8p
100m test: 20p
= 78p in total for the SSD
Panerai:
Luminor Marina
I really wish I could’ve sent a real divers’watch from the “Firenze workshop†into the race, like a 087, but I don’t own one and could not afford another watch. So this has got to do it.
The model, even though it is very waterproof, is at no chance a divers’ watch. It has no bezel to set the diving time, which is the most important part for diving. Therefore I will pass on the dirt test as I really see no reason for one here.
Apart from that, it does a pretty good job: It is as legible as a watch can be, it has a distinctive minute hand and the halfmoon shaped crownguard will protect the crown better than any other guard I can think of.
The other drawback is the manual movement which should be charged before any dive.
Without a power-reserve display, a running out of power is very dangerous for a diver who relies on his watch. But the strongly luminous second hand will make it visible at once when the watch has stopped.
I have tested this watch here, if you’re interested in flaws and advantages of this timepiece.
1. Pressuretest.
It passed the leakchecker without any problems.
2. waterpressure test
No problems in the watercontainer either. We didn’t even feel necessity to take the movement and dial out before.
3. saltwater test
No corroding or staining noticeable. Seems like this watch is made from a very good steel.
4. legibility test
The pam had easily the best legibility of all tested watches.
Result
Just like the Héritage, this watch starts into the competition with some handicaps. It does not have a diving bezel at all and is powered by a manually wound movement. On the other side, it has the best crown protection and the best legibility under any circumstances of all participants. It also passed all tests (including the 100m AD test) and pretty decent timing machine results.
Saltwater couldn’t corrode the case in more than 12 hours just like the Steelfish, the Seawolf and the SSD.
The design is really not meeting the demand of a divingwatch. 0p.
The leakchecker test: 10p
The water-chamber test: 10p
The movement rate: 8p
The strap/bracelet: N/A
The dirt test : N/A
The salinity test: 10p
The legibility: 10p
100m test: 20p
= 68p in total for the Pam111
Final results
My ratings were tough and I was told even most genuines wouldn’t have gained much more points than these replicas. However, I think I proofed that replicas are better than their reputation. Only the Seawolf really failed which is no surprise as there is a real hole in the case.
The Planet Ocean is a nice watch and I enjoy wearing it – but the salinity result, the bezel, the HeV, the legibility, the bracelet and even the genuine strap prevent a really good rating. Still it passed the important 100m AD test.
The Luminor Marina and the Superocean Steelfish share the 3rd place. A real surprise for the last mentioned as I would have placed my bet on it before all tests as well. The failure at the AD really ruined the win for it. The Pam made the tests it could participate in really competent. If it had a dirt proof diving bezel and an automatic movement, the pam would’ve probably won the match. But as it has none, I can only award it for being a superb outdoor watch you can safely swim or snorkel with.
Probably the most surprising result in this test made the Superocean Héritage. It started as the underdog and won the silver medal due to the passed pressure-tests, the excellent movement rate and the dirt test. The lack of a bracelet/strap test and the inferior (but beautiful) design prevent the upset.
Gold medal for the SSD for being the all-round talent in most tests. It was the only watch that made average to good points in all competitions. It might have been a different story it the Héritage would’ve had a different bracelet or strap, or if the SFSO had passed the AD test.
The test was really a lot of fun for me and my watchsmith and I would like to thank him for all the trouble he had and for making this test possible in this way. Now I am really looking forward to the second part, where I am going to examine diving chronographs.
I hope you all enjoyed this read as much as I enjoyed writing it and, as always, comments are really appreciated!
Have a very nice day!
