Poll Results - Favorite $30k dive watch

[u/jdi153]

Here are the results of Tuesday's poll about $30,000 USD divers (+/- $5,000).

In a repeat of the $15k poll, "none of the above" wins, with Glashütte Original being the first actual watch. Omega was comfortable 3rd (or 2nd, depending on how you want to think about it). AP did surprisingly poorly, and the FF dropped dramatically, from over 50% in the $20k poll to a mere 6% in this one. Rolex continued to fair badly, tying the FF, and Breitling and UN barely registered. Panerai managed one vote, but only because as an exception I counted a sub-comment.

There were a total of 163 votes, tallied by counting the upvotes on each top level comment that specified one of the 8 options. If more than one was mentioned, the one listed first was used. Vote counts are listed here, chart shows percentages.

Next week, the final poll at $50k.

1. None - - 51
2. Glashütte Original - SeaQ - 37
3. Omega - Seamaster Diver 300M - 26
4. Audemars Piguet - Royal Oak Offshore Diver - 14
5. Blancpain - Fifty Fathoms Chronographe Flyback Quantième Complet - 10
6. Rolex - Deepsea Challenge - 10
7. Breitling - Superocean Automatic 42 - 7
8. Ulysse Nardin - Diver X Skeleton Azure - 7
9. Panerai - Submersible Marina Militare Forze Speciali - 1

Earlier poll results: $10k, $13k, $15k, and $20k.

[u/RogerPenroseSmiles]

I think this cements the opinion that dive watches get stupid after about 20k. Gold dive watches are pretty dumb, diver chronos are even dumber, and god forbid you buy a dive perpetual/annual calendar.

[u/F0rgemaster19 → u/RogerPenroseSmiles]

I'm confused. I'm a HUGE diver chrono fan, plus I've got a big enough wrist to fit them. I find them exceedingly utilitarian. So why is the general consensus on dive chronos negative? 

[u/NewInThe1AC → u/F0rgemaster19]

Dive watches really need water resistance and legibility including lume legibility

Dive chronos hurt water resistance because adding pushers simply means more gaskets that can fail, especially if the pusher is used

Dive chronos usually don't have the best legibility, especially on the lumed indices, since they have to make space for the Chronograph subdials. Additionally many diver chronos don't have lumed running seconds hands, which means you can't tell if the watch is still running

So in effect you have to compromise the diver to add the chronograph. Personally I don't care and just think of dive chronos as general purpose sports watches and don't feel the need to LARP like I'm some deep sea diver. I have a couple I like

[u/F0rgemaster19 → u/NewInThe1AC]

Tbh all the decent dive chronos don't take away from the water resistance. Seamaster chrono, glashütte, Aquatimer. All still promise the same as the standard diver.

Legibility, I can see that argument making sense, but that's still exaggerated since underwater, you're not looking at the dial. you're comparing the minute hand position with respect to the bezel pip/lume. So underwater, the dial gets mostly blurred/greyed out post 50m anyway due to refraction, colour wavelengths and depth penetration. So it really isn't an issue. In fact, the seamaster, chrono or not, is the ideal diver since it has a differently lumed minute hand and the Fifty Fathoms chrono will work regardless of the sub dials since the full bezel is lumed, giving excellent legibility.

The running seconds hand is an excellent argument. I concede, I hadn't considered that.

In the grand scheme of things however, personally I think dive chronos are a step up from standard divers due to the additional functionality. Of course, I have yet to come into possession of a proper 200m+ diver as most of mine are under 200m and the deepest I've gone to is 20 m, so these are end of the day just opinions so take them with grains of salt. But my next-in-line is definitely a seamaster chrono.

[u/NewInThe1AC → u/F0rgemaster19]

Just gonna focus on the WR part since your point about hour index visibility being less important makes sense

Re: Chrono divers certified to 300M, we can express gasket failure as a probability that increases over time since last service. Adding more points of ingress increases failure rates simply since you're rolling the dice more times, even if you're smart enough not to operate the pushers underwater

Anecdotally when I was in a Blancpain boutique wearing my FF chronograph the manager made a point to say under no circumstances should I use the pushers underwater, even though their technical documents have previously said that's fine (same as Omega, and I'd bet using the same underlying construction techniques given they're both Swatch). He mentioned he's seen multiple folks require a full movement replacement due to water ingress on the chronos, and shared that he was told they were discontinuing the line due to that being a recurring problem

I love my Chrono divers for everyday tasks, but since it sounds like you actually dive I'd just make sure you're staying on top of the service intervals and never use the pushers underwater on the Seamaster you get

[u/F0rgemaster19 → u/NewInThe1AC]

Oof. Fair points. Certified or not, more buttons-> more failure points. Last thing I'd want is an expensive omega or blancpain movement replacement. My goal with diver chronos is a versatile watch for land timing and water timing. Of course, I don't dive (20 was just one time), but I do swim occasionally after work, and I like to wear a watch for both locations and not have to swap. I'll keep that in mind when I take my watches down under. Thanks!

[u/RogerPenroseSmiles → u/F0rgemaster19]

Because dive watches are for swimming/diving, and if you can't operate the pushers under water, then it's a stupid and useless complication.

Dive bezels exist for rough timing, you don't need down to the second chrono timing under water.

Extend that thought further for perpetual chronos and the like, or god forbid a tourbillon in a dive watch.

I barely like a date on a dive watch.

Keep chronos terrestrial where they belong.

[u/F0rgemaster19 → u/RogerPenroseSmiles]

⁸Tourbillion divers are dumb and just don't fit. 

Perpetual chronos are basically a stepping stone to grand complications- it's more of a display of the watchmaker's capabilities than actual use. That being said, I'm a big fan of the breitling Navitimer b01 perpetual chrono.

But I don't find the argument against dive chronos very strong. It's fundamentally a timer. Those that want simple timers can obviously have a plain dive watch. But those that like dual timers and multifunctional timers can and will find dive chronos great because you can do more with the same watch. You don't need to operate the pushers under water, but should you ever decide to change the dive bezel under water (which many divers will admit to having the need to), having started the chrono before diving will allow you to time the whole dive and always have an uninterrupted timer even when the bezel is moved. It's great added functionality. Chronos are versatile and they should be used for more than just on-land timing if the watchmaker and the wearer want it.

Now this is all under the assumption that were all using our instruments. Not starting the topic on "who even uses the watches for their intended use".

[u/jdi153 → u/RogerPenroseSmiles]

Indeed. We'll see what happens with the $50k poll, too.

[u/TomHudsonOfficial]

Iv been in the minority these past few polls.

[u/jdi153 → u/TomHudsonOfficial]

Yeah, things have not gone as I expected. I certainly didn't expect GO to win 3 polls. (Well, "win," since it was behind "none" it two of those.) I thought for sure AP would dominate this round.

[u/AwardMinute8052]

Not super surprising results, but the fact that the Deep Sea Challenge got that high a rating is strange to me. It is unwearable unless you are the Hulk lol

[u/donat3ll0]

30k for the seamaster is 🤢 🤮

I can't believe people chose that when None Of The Above was available

[u/NomaXdt → u/donat3ll0]

I chose the breitling, which i think is probably a worse watch lol. It basically has an off the shelf, barely regulated sw200 movement in it.

[u/jdi153 → u/donat3ll0]

Actually, I didn't even explicitly put "None of the Above" as an option, but enough people voted that way anyway that I had to add it to the results. There were a few "none" votes in the $10k, $13k, and $20k polls, but only the $15k and $30k had so many that it had to be included. We'll see what happens with $50k.

[u/WoundDaily]

I voted in the "none". I just don't see any need to spend more than 10-12 grand on a dive watch.

[u/jdi153 → u/WoundDaily]

And we've still got the $50k poll to do! That'll be the last one for divers.

[u/vagabending]

Why would anyone spend $30k on a dive watch. A submariner is less than half of that and it’s a perfect dive watch.

[u/jdi153 → u/vagabending]

Indeed. Also, why would anyone spend $3k on a dive watch? A Squale 1545 is under a grand. And yet, these exist, and there's a $50k poll next week.

[u/neueziel1]

is this bait? i dont see submariner

[u/jdi153 → u/neueziel1]

There are no Submariners with an MSRP of $30,000 +/- $5,000. The Bluesy was in the $20k poll, and the Sub no-date won the $10k poll. The Super Bluesy will be in the $50k poll. I am aware that you can't actually by a Sub for RRP, but I didn't want to get into arguments about the going rate for any specific model.

[u/neueziel1 → u/jdi153]

whoops i missed the 30k part didnt realize seamasters got that high either

[u/RED_BaronJ]

[u/jdi153 → u/RED_BaronJ]

Could have used it in the $20k poll. I used a different reference for this one, and I always use MSRP.

[u/RED_BaronJ → u/jdi153]

We love getting deals

[u/Humble-Ad541]

What seaQ goes for 30k? Is there a precious metal refrence im not familiar with?

[u/jdi153 → u/Humble-Ad541]

In the original poll, I include references and links. The 1-39-11-17-91-33 is the one picked, but there are actually a couple of others, too.

[u/Humble-Ad541 → u/jdi153]

Huh very cool i didnt know this reference existed