Buying vintage and worrying about water resistance

[Makoto]

I've always been reluctant to buy a very old Rolex because I was concerned that it wouldn't be as water-(shock/dust-) resistant as a newer piece. Do you think this is an important concern?

Can I expect that a 16800 Submariner, for example, or a 1016 Explorer, should be water proof enough for a swim if they've recently been serviced? Or could they be sent for servicing to assure that they will be?

I have a newer Explorer and am shopping for a similar Explorer II now. But after reading article on Hodinkee ""Twelve More Mistakes New Watch Enthusiasts Make (And How To Avoid Them)" that advised against only enjoying modern (or only vintage) watches, I thought it would be nice to try something else. But this issue worries me, so I'm asking for your thoughts and experience. Thanks!

[Tools]

If the seals and sealing surfaces are sound, it is well maintained, the watch will be as waterproof as it was when it was new.

Watches don't become feeble as they age.

[tekno]

Buy the watch you want and have it serviced/pressure tested by someone who knows what they are doing as soon as you know that you want to keep it.

Specifically tell the watchmaker your want to ensure the watch is waterproof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Dan S]

Unfortunately, you won't know if the watch is capable of passing a pressure test until after it has been cleaned and tested with new seals, it will depend on the integrity of the sealing surfaces and other factors. While it's easy to say that old watches can be made waterproof, in practice my first-hand experience says that it's not always as easy as it sounds. I have some watches from the 1960s and 1970s that pass a 100m pressure test, and others that do not. And if you are determined to have it pass a pressure test, you might have to replace the crystal, crown, etc. Generally speaking, I don't plan to swim in vintage watches.

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Generally speaking, I don't plan to swim in vintage watches.

This. If you're swimming, get a modern Sub or Tudor. Why risk a beautiful irreplaceable vintage piece, even if you've had it pressure tested?

[Styles Bitchley]

Originally Posted by zapokee

This. If you're swimming, get a modern Sub or Tudor. Why risk a beautiful irreplaceable vintage piece, even if you've had it pressure tested?

I think it depends on the watch. One with a rare dial in exceptional original condition would be pretty silly to swim with. But, as the OP was thinking, a 16800 - especially a non-matte dial - would make a great daily you can swim with.

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Styles Bitchley

I think it depends on the watch. One with a rare dial in exceptional original condition would be pretty silly to swim with. But, as the OP was thinking, a 16800 - especially a non-matte dial - would make a great daily you can swim with.

I used to take baths wearing my WG 1803. Don't know what I was thinking (even though it was pressure-tested). My stance has definitely changed. I wouldn't dare do that now. Wholly unnecessary risk.

[Styles Bitchley]

Originally Posted by zapokee

I used to take baths wearing my WG 1803. Don't know what I was thinking (even though it was pressure-tested). My stance has definitely changed. I wouldn't dare do that now. Wholly unnecessary risk.

I used to swim and even scuba dive with my 1680. I don't do that anymore. But I do like having a watch that I don't have to worry about getting wet. My thinking is that a 16800 (better yet, 168000) is more robust than a four digit sub and the sapphire is less prone to crystal leaks. I actually have no idea if that's true or not but it seems to make sense!

[White Collar Boy]

I am interested in hearing from anyone with expertise about how frequently a vintage watch should be pressure tested and have seals checked in order to be safe to swim with. My local watch repair shop told me “once a year”, so I swim with a G-Shock instead.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Hungry Eyes

I am interested in hearing from anyone with expertise about how frequently a vintage watch should be pressure tested and have seals checked in order to be safe to swim with. My local watch repair shop told me “once a year”, so I swim with a G-Shock instead.

Nobody knows when a watch will fail.

Swimming is a lot different than diving. Diving you may want a once a year check, but it is seldom necessary for swimming; different dynamics.

Vintage or new is irrelevant, as long as it has been maintained and the sealing surfaces are sound.

The risk with vintage is that if it does fail, you cannot repair it to it's original condition. Depending on the model, that could be more risk than many of us would want to take.

[Nick9]

I have never missed knowing the time when swimming. I don't see the point of wearing a watch while swimming. Am I alone in this?

[swish77]

Originally Posted by Nick9

I have never missed knowing the time when swimming. I don't see the point of wearing a watch while swimming. Am I alone in this?

Depends. If you're in a pool with your kids, sometimes for hours, you need to know the time. And divers need to know the time too, of course.

[Styles Bitchley]

Originally Posted by Nick9

I have never missed knowing the time when swimming. I don't see the point of wearing a watch while swimming. Am I alone in this?

Have you ever been on holiday at the beach and felt a little uneasy stuffing your Rolex into the toe of your beach shoe while you take a dip? And sometimes you just dive in and forget to take it off. It’s just nice to not have to think about it.

[lupus66]

Used to swim with my 67 5513. Stopped on that.

[swaini3]

I would just wear a cheap watch and not worry about it while swimming or on the beach. The sight of water damage to my vintage watch just for the sake of swimming etc would kill me. Yes, frequent servicing and testing helps but I still wouldn't do it. :)

[ravenhome777]

A watch maker can test water resistance in 5 minutes with a machine. Bring it to a watch maker with a good reputation and they'll test it for you.

[AJMarcus]

Frankly, I wouldn’t swim or dive with any vintage watch. I have a DJ 1603 from 1969 I had serviced by my Rolex parts watchmaker. It keeps perfect time within COSC but it’s still a 50 year old timepiece. I didn’t buy vintage to wear it as a GADA watch. Why have to worry about getting it knocked around on the beach or worse a pool. My Explorer is my knock around watch. Get a knock around piece for swimming. .

[1watch]

Even if a properly serviced vintage Sub, etc. passes a pressure test, as mentioned above the risk is really high if it fails for some reason and you're left with a problem requiring replacement parts. Not worth the angst to me at all. If someone wants to loan me their 5513 to do a test, fine... not risking it with mine though

[Makoto]

Thanks everyone for your input.

I did buy a newer Explorer II, because it's what I had my heart set on in the first place. But I'll look into a vintage watch next. I'm not as worried about this issue anymore, thanks to the conversation.

[Richard Carver]

omg

[White Collar Boy]

Originally Posted by Tools

Nobody knows when a watch will fail.

Swimming is a lot different than diving. Diving you may want a once a year check, but it is seldom necessary for swimming; different dynamics.

Vintage or new is irrelevant, as long as it has been maintained and the sealing surfaces are sound.

The risk with vintage is that if it does fail, you cannot repair it to it's original condition. Depending on the model, that could be more risk than many of us would want to take.

Thanks Larry and others.

Nick, I use the G-Shock for timing laps, sometimes a Seiko turtle. No granular data, just elapsed time. Haven’t been able to in a while though, with covid-related pool closure!

Agree with the prevailing sentiment that it’s not worth risking a vintage piece over.

[Nick9]

Should have clarified. I take a beater on vacation. It sits in my shoe when I go for a dip.

I suppose wearing a watch in the pool with the kids would be okay, with the right watch. A vintage Rolex (or vintage anything) would never be the right watch. There is enough grief in vintage watch collecting already. No need to invite more, for me anyway.

To each his own, of course.

[fusionstorm]

Would you expect swim or dive goggles that were 40+ years old to all have as tight of a seal in the water as a modern pair of goggles?

There are times when you don’t want to tempt fate. This is one of them.......

[Tools]

Originally Posted by swaini3

I would just wear a cheap watch and not worry about it while swimming or on the beach. . . . )

the Sub is my cheap watch.

[Styles Bitchley]

Originally Posted by Tools

the Sub is my cheap watch.

Lol! Well played.

[swaini3]

lol

Originally Posted by Tools

the Sub is my cheap watch.

[Harmon Rabb]

Originally Posted by Tools

Nobody knows when a watch will fail.

Swimming is a lot different than diving. Diving you may want a once a year check, but it is seldom necessary for swimming; different dynamics.

Vintage or new is irrelevant, as long as it has been maintained and the sealing surfaces are sound.

The risk with vintage is that if it does fail, you cannot repair it to it's original condition. Depending on the model, that could be more risk than many of us would want to take.

With all said above. I take my chances and use all my vintage Rolex in the open sea while swimming. Usually I travel with one watch on my wrist and I rather loose it to the bottom of the sea or destroyed by salt water than having someone steal it hidden in cloth or shoes at the beach, in a car out of sight or hotel room even keep in a safe. It’s not that hard to open a hotel room safe and I don’t think I’d like to have discussions with hotel staff, owner or my insurance company about the loss of a say 10 000- 25 000 dollar watch. It could end up in a blame game. Not worth my time.

I thrust my watches to be waterproof and if they would fail. That’s life. It’s just a watch at the end of the day. It’s replaceable.

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Harmon Rabb

It’s replaceable.

A mint 1680 Red or a Daytona 6265 are technically "replaceable," but only if you can find one, and only if you're comfortable risking that much money just for the sake of having a dive/swim/bath/shower. Anything can go wrong at any time with watches, regardless of how recently they've been pressure checked or serviced.

As long as I have a modern Tudor or Rolex in the collection, that's what I'll be wearing in the pool. Wholly replaceable and (relatively) affordable. For me, vintage isn't for watery places. Stay safe.

[Harmon Rabb]

Originally Posted by zapokee

A mint 1680 Red or a Daytona 6265 are technically "replaceable," but only if you can find one, and only if you're comfortable risking that much money just for the sake of having a dive/swim/bath/shower. Anything can go wrong at any time with watches, regardless of how recently they've been pressure checked or serviced.

As long as I have a modern Tudor or Rolex in the collection, that's what I'll be wearing in the pool. Wholly replaceable and (relatively) affordable. For me, vintage isn't for watery places. Stay safe.

The same can be said about just about anything in life. There are no guarantees. I can walk over the street and fall and break my neck or I can do it while do something fun like skiing. One of the nice features about a Rolex say red 1680 to take your example above is that is was made as a tool watch and can continue to be that regarding waterproof ness and that it’s made to take some beating. Most vintage watches already have patina from many years of usage. A few more doesn’t matter. I’d rather wear no watch at all than owning a vintage watch thats I’m afraid of damaging. What’s the point. I ride motorbikes, doing active sports like swimming, skiing, playing tennis etc. So far I have never done any damage to any of my watches after 15 years or so.

[Styles Bitchley]

I know it’s been discussed in multiple threads (even some currently active ones) what to do if you have a failure and moisture gets in. If you’re obsessive about your watches, you’re likely to notice this right away and address it. My guess is that most vintage dials or movements would not be damaged much if at all from a few days exposure to water. If it happens, get right to a watchmaker for a full service. (I realize this may provoke a strong response from some!)