Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum Message Archive
150m vs 200m on the divers...what caused the increase?
was it just a matter of testing it to the greater depth, or did the newer (7002s and 7s26s) have better water tightness than the 6105s and 6309s? thanks!
Message Thread
- 150m vs 200m on the divers...what caused the increase? - brian - 2003-03-06 13:58:00
- my gist.... - shawn - 2003-03-06 14:01:00
- what 200M means in practical terms >>>> - ponycarp51 - 2003-03-06 14:08:00
- Pony, those are the standards I'm talking about... - shawn - 2003-03-06 14:15:00
- FWIW found this site looks like 1996 is current std. >>>>> - pony - 2003-03-06 16:06:00
- For what it's worth, I read recently that anything deeper than 140m without... - Rob - 2003-03-06 14:31:00
- Isn't it the case...(more) - Alex - 2003-03-06 14:46:00
- That's possible. nt - Rob - 2003-03-06 15:03:00
- totally correct- my 6309 took far more pressure at the surface during... - shawn - 2003-03-06 15:09:00
- You are correct [nt] - Will V. - 2003-03-06 17:58:00
- Once saw an analysis of the effects of dynamic pressure .... - JacobC - 2003-03-06 18:25:00
- That's kinda the point (more) - Alex - 2003-03-06 22:05:00
- The same thing appeared on Ultimate Dive Watch form - John S. - 2003-03-07 04:36:00
- That was me! I'll dig up my calculations or the reference... - B Hannigan - 2003-03-07 06:49:00
- Here 'tis.... - B Hannigan - 2003-03-07 07:09:00
- Great information. Thanks for sharing. nt - Rob - 2003-03-07 10:17:00
- This should lay all fears regarding dynamic pressure to rest, once and for all !! - JacobC - 2003-03-07 18:51:00
- calculations... fwiw - mike p - 2003-07-10 18:30:00
- That's Why We Need a new WR Standard - Kixo - 2003-03-06 23:07:00
- Yeah but... - Alex - 2003-03-07 00:22:00
- Static pressure vs Dynamic pressure>>> - jeff - 2004-11-16 08:42:00