|
Post by earthphase on May 9, 2018 6:48:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on May 9, 2018 9:07:33 GMT -8
Jason, the author of the article, bought a 7548-700F from me last year.
edit - After reading the article, what an epic fail. Like he mentioned, it looks nothing like a proper dive watch, nor is it attractive IMO.
|
|
Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on May 9, 2018 9:44:46 GMT -8
Well, the manual clearly states that is it not to be used for diving (although the Manufacturer allowed him to dive with this one). The fault it developed may or may not have something to do with the diving, but Jaeger says that it was a problem with the inner rotating ring not meshing with the gear on the stem (which sounds reasonable, as the crown stopped turning). So yeah, it failed - but it IS a tad more complex than your SKX.
|
|
|
Post by earthphase on May 9, 2018 10:52:58 GMT -8
I don’t see it that way Jonas. 13k for a 200m rated dive watch inscribed with a diving helmet on the back getting blown out at swimming pool depths is an endictment, big time, on what JLC “sells” vs. what they “make”.
|
|
|
Post by leffemonster on May 9, 2018 11:20:48 GMT -8
I just don’t get why anyone would make a 200m rated watch, emblazoned with a diver’s helmet on the caseback, and then have a disclaimer in the manual that you mustn’t dive with it. Surely, a watch rated to that depth should be capable of being used underwater to reasonable depths, else why bother?
Maybe it’s just me but I look on these kind of horological creations as being for those with more money than sense, and just another cash-in Anniversary model.
|
|
|
Post by philsinclair on May 9, 2018 15:57:16 GMT -8
Hi. I could not find a dive rating on the watch and would think any watch with an ISO dive rating could not fail when new.The issue seems to be human error. In any case I don’t like to wear shiny things in water because the big meat eater seem to find them an attraction. Cheers Phil
|
|
|
Post by stuart on May 9, 2018 20:35:23 GMT -8
To me thats just a stupid article written by someone who has lost respect for watches and is just trying to either prove a point or create something controversial so people will read his articles and cover some of the costs of his dive.
He has taken a watch which is clearly not a dive watch, the lack of screw down crowns would indicate it is not designed for diving, and has put it into an environment for which it was not designed. I'm not going to comment on why JLC would make such a watch.
Maybe its just me but I dont like this sort of article and puts me off wanting to read any further articles
|
|
|
Post by 69ChevelleSS on May 10, 2018 5:45:20 GMT -8
I'll stick to my cheapo modern Seiko dive watches when I want to get wet!
|
|
|
Post by earthphase on May 10, 2018 6:04:41 GMT -8
I'll stick to my cheapo modern Seiko dive watches when I want to get wet! i think you mean inexpensive. In this post, the cheap watch is the JLC.
|
|
|
Post by saul on May 15, 2018 11:12:39 GMT -8
A $200 mass produced ISO rated diver should be safe out of the box in moderate water activity. A $13,000 dollar limited edition "dive" watch should be able to go deeper than a human can and come back without a scratch. This JLC is just a fluffy piece of jewelry and in all functional aspects of what a dive watch should be, it ain't.
|
|
eeki
Timekeeper
Posts: 510
|
Post by eeki on May 15, 2018 13:21:18 GMT -8
The fault it developed may or may not have something to do with the diving, but Jaeger says that it was a problem with the inner rotating ring not meshing with the gear on the stem (which sounds reasonable, as the crown stopped turning). Exactly. The fault was that the crown was hard to turn, and eventually came off. The one saying this happened due to water ingress is the author, who really is just making a guess as he didn’t actually witness any water ingress and didn’t obviously take the watch apart to make sure. Of course a high-end watch, even though this was a prototype, shouldn’t have this problem no matter the reason. I would’ve assumed they would be extra careful with watches they send to journalists, as this is something that could hurt their reputation.
|
|
|
Post by teatimecrumpet on May 15, 2018 16:26:42 GMT -8
For an LE worth $13k with "diving roots" would it have really killed them to just stick on screwdown crowns?
Imagine a tuna reboot that didn't have a screwdown and was not intended for diving...but was rated as such...with a caseback with a deepsea diver...
|
|
|
Post by saul on May 15, 2018 16:35:41 GMT -8
For an LE worth $13k with "diving roots" would it have really killed them to just stick on screwdown crowns? Imagine a tuna reboot that didn't have a screwdown and was not intended for diving...but was rated as such...with a caseback with a deepsea diver... And to carry the image further...a Seiko Tuna is exactly what I expect to find on the wrist of a saturation diver, not a piece of overpriced jewelry with pretension of being a tool...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2018 18:03:03 GMT -8
For an LE worth $13k with "diving roots" would it have really killed them to just stick on screwdown crowns? Imagine a tuna reboot that didn't have a screwdown and was not intended for diving...but was rated as such...with a caseback with a deepsea diver... And to carry the image further...a Seiko Tuna is exactly what I expect to find on the wrist of a saturation diver, not a piece of overpriced jewelry with pretension of being a tool... Only someone with entitlement issues would wear a watch like this for diving...even in the shallow end of the kiddies wading pool
|
|
|
Post by saul on May 15, 2018 19:30:29 GMT -8
And to carry the image further...a Seiko Tuna is exactly what I expect to find on the wrist of a saturation diver, not a piece of overpriced jewelry with pretension of being a tool... Only someone with entitlement issues would wear a watch like this for diving...even in the shallow end of the kiddies wading pool I don't know about entitled. It's not a cost issue but rather why would you make a watch this expensive that pretends to be what it's not issue. If you take it diving you are a tool, somewhat like how they used to say cocaine is God's way of telling you that you have too much money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2018 19:42:39 GMT -8
Only someone with entitlement issues would wear a watch like this for diving...even in the shallow end of the kiddies wading pool I don't know about entitled. It's not a cost issue but rather why would you make a watch this expensive that pretends to be what it's not issue. If you take it diving you are a tool, somewhat like how they used to say cocaine is God's way of telling you that you have too much money.
Entitlement is a synonym for stupidity
|
|
Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on May 16, 2018 1:14:36 GMT -8
... In any case I don’t like to wear shiny things in water because the big meat eater seem to find them an attraction. Cheers Phil ? ...
|
|
|
Post by 69ChevelleSS on May 16, 2018 5:29:30 GMT -8
... In any case I don’t like to wear shiny things in water because the big meat eater seem to find them an attraction. Cheers Phil ? ... No that right there is a big meal!
|
|
mirrorman
Timekeeper
A fan of SEIKO watches .. just like Virgil
Posts: 670
|
Post by mirrorman on Jun 23, 2018 5:32:02 GMT -8
What a waste of time , and for the potential owner, money ... but that is what many of these very high end brands are all about.
At least a Rolex can withstand a dip in the water.
|
|