On the workbench: Submariner vs. Deepsea crystal

[belligero]

I recently caught up with my watchmaker friend, and he had a few nifty things in the shop.

Here's the difference between the 300-m-rated Submariner's crystal and the 3900-m-rated Deepsea's:



The Submariner's rating is plenty for anything in the real world — except possibly the six occasions that anyone's have gone below 300 m on SCUBA gear recreationally, and even then I'd bet it would be OK — and it's remarkable how thin the crystal looks beside the Deepsea's.

Clearly, the thirteen-times-greater pressure resistance of the DSSD is insane, but I still thought it was cool to see exactly how much thicker they actually had to make the crystal to achieve a legitimate (and conservative) 3900 m rating plus 25% safety reserve. It's a massive chunk of sapphire, but it sure ain't 13X the thickness. And although it makes me appreciate my Deepsea a bit more, I still never wear it.

By the way, here's an informative bit of reading on why those ridges are on the edge of the Submariner's crystal. It's good stuff: watchmakingblog — Rolex Gasket System

As a bonus, there was an OG diver's watch in for service, too:



It was great to see an original PloProf; it's an impressive watch for sure. With the North Sea history around here, there are certainly some notable diver's watches in the area.

Anyway, let me know if you guys have any requests for the next session.

[ericf4]

I'm totally surprised how thick the dssd crystal is. I've handled the watch many times and frankly I would not have guessed that thick. Cool read!

[Panerai7]

Go big or go go home, lol

[Ryeguy]

Interesting how the thinner Sub sapphire uses the gasket groove yet the uber DSSD sapphire does not.

[belligero]

I'm totally surprised how thick the dssd crystal is. I've handled the watch many times and frankly I would not have guessed that thick. Cool read!

Yeah, it's remarkable that the watch isn't thicker considering that there's also hands, dial, movement, rotor, and equally-burly caseback sandwiched in there, too.

The 116660 is 17.7 mm thick, and the 116610 is 12.7 mm excluding the Cyclops. To get a 1300-%-greater rating with only about a 40 % increase in overall thickness is pretty amazing — that's only 2.5 mm per side!

Something tells me that the Submariner has quite a bit more than a 25% safety margin, though. It would be cool to see how much it can actually handle by testing one to failure in...



...THE FATHOMETER!

Anyone wanna volunteer a spare case?

By the way, they had to get a newer pressure testing machine a long time ago; the one in the photo is over 40 years old and was used for Subs and the original 600 m Sea-Dwellers.

Interesting how the thinner Sub sapphire uses the gasket groove yet the uber DSSD sapphire does not.

Indeed, the Deepsea uses a whole different system with a tension ring that clamps down harder as pressure increases. In fact, I think every component involved the case and crystal system is unique to the reference, whereas pretty much every other model has some common dimensions and parts interchangeability when it comes to gaskets, crystals, crowns, etc.

There's something to ask next round...

[BSears]

Good stuff, Ryan. That is a big ol chunk of sapphire on the DSSD. Love the old Fathometer!

[rockmastermike]

I like the article on the ridges on Rolex crystal - good stuff

[belligero]

I like the article on the ridges on Rolex crystal - good stuff

Aye; there's heaps of legitimate expertise and insight on that blog based on working on all sorts of different watches, which is a nice change from the usual opining from the self-appointed internet experts. It's a goldmine, and I appreciate how they share their understanding of how stuff works instead of just talking about the superficialities or quoting specs.

http://watchguy.co.uk/ is another high-quality blog by an independent watchmaker if this kind of stuff interests you.

[cdnwatchguy]

Great post Ryan, thanks.

[dukerules]

Great stuff, Ryan. I've always been impressed by the engineering that goes into the 116660, although it's not a watch I think I could wear. Honestly, I'm almost as impressed by the standard 116600s and 16600s--4x the water resistance of the Sub, yet only slightly thicker.

[belligero]

Great stuff, Ryan. I've always been impressed by the engineering that goes into the 116660, although it's not a watch I think I could wear. Honestly, I'm almost as impressed by the standard 116600s and 16600s--4x the water resistance of the Sub, yet only slightly thicker.

Thanks!

Yep, the 1220-m Sea-Dweller is my favourite current diver's model, and I find it much more practical for wearing than the Deepsea. Though I gotta say that for the premium over the Sub, the DSSD's stupendous clasp would have been a nice feature to include.

I made this comparison photo of mine with the standard Submariner a while back, and though there's a difference, you probably wouldn't guess that it had a four-times-higher pressure rating:



I much prefer the look of the crystal being raised instead of sitting flush with the bezel; it gives a hint of the old top-hat plexi look:



Although some worry about chips, if it takes a hard knock, I'd much rather have the damage on the crystal than a smashed ceramic bezel. Now if only it had either a Cyclops or a date delete, it would be the perfect diver's watch.

[moishlashen]

Basically borrowing from gas/fluid delivery/storage industry using the ridge as essentially a knife edge compression fitting. Quite an elegant solution and one that's been around for a long time. They work and work and work.