Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum Message Archive
my gist....
seiko always offered their 150m "proof" or "resist" watcehs as divers, and on their old charts always stated 150m as ok for scuba diving.
in early to mid 90's, what could legally be called a dive watch changed, and to call it a "scuba" watch required 200m water resistance.
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