I believe the right way to use the water tester is to first put the watch in the part of the tube with air, and then pump up the pressure, and given the air time to leak into the watch. Then you submerge the watch into the water and release the air pressure, and look for bubbles to emerge from the watch. That way, if the water resistance fails, you have time to retrieve the watch before it fills with water.
I think that the point is that he didn't matter if the watch fills with water, at least the watches that he knew that probably would fail. Good to know though ;)
There are two types of test, a dry and a wet. The one you refer to is the dry, and it's the safest, as you can see the air escape when it's immersed, and have a little time to remove it before damage sets in
world of tanks XXX : It's the only way to test ist. If you pressurize the watch submerged, how will you know if it got water inside? By opening it you'll break the seal and you'll never know if it's still waterproof after closing the case again.
With these testers, I think you're supposed to take the watch up to pressure in the chamber above the water, then press the plunger to submerge it and look for bubbles emerging from the case. With your method you could have small amounts of water ingress and you'd never notice. Or shatter the caseback crystal ;)
@@thereyougoagain1280 904L is slightly softer, but the luster of 904L done well is a thing off beauty! I still think SS can look great to if done right...
Hey Jody, as others have already suggested, the proper way to test is by pressurizing with the watch out of the water, dunking, depressurizing, and watching for bubbles. It's true that this gives some time to save a faulty watch, but that's not the real reason. If the watch only had a small leak then it may appear to pass using your method, the air inside the case will compress when water enters and there may not be any bubbles exiting!
Yes, ISO6425 (Divers watch specs) calls for 25% overpressure. ISO22810 (standard most used for watches which are not stamped as "Diver's" - aka the majority of watches on the market) does not call for the 25% overpressure, IIRC. Subject to correction by those more knowledgeable here.
I am no watchmaker but I am sure you are doing this wrong mate! You should have the watch above water, raise the pressure, submerge the watch, and release the pressure. If bubbles are escaping from the watch then it failed, if nothing happens it passed.
Agreed. This "test" doesn't really show anything other than catastrophic failure. It misses identifying whether minor leaks exist, and doesn't check the watches after to see whether water entered the watch or not,unless I missed it. Remember, in very miniscule leaks, water ingress will show up as very small droplets or minor "hazing", not just as obvious liquid water in the case. Pressuring it up underwater greatly increases the chance of water intrusion...... Aristeidis posted the correct method - Marc over @LIW did a great run through of it, along with the folks over at Esslinger (they're pretty much gurus at this stuff). Its what I followed when doing my own tests at home. Lastly (apologies if I misinterpreted) but JOMW was using the watch ticking as evidence of success....which isn't necessarily the best thing. Watches can still run with minor water intrusion....the question is more of long term damage at that point (ask me how I know 😓).
@@arvindkalipersad161the catastrophic failure would occur in either scenario. The point want really about how to diagnose water leakage but test if cheap watches confirm to their advertising, at the risk of destroying these watches. It's a wet test not a dry test, that's all.
@@philipcarr6698 yes, but other than the breakage of the glass on that datejust homage, no check was done on the other watches to verify ingress of water, or otherwise. How do we know the other watches did not have ANY water ingress? Water can migrate through failed gaskets/casebacks, without "catastrophic" failure, or significant volumes of water showing in the watch. The watch would look structurally fine. Again, this type of minor migration will manifest as a fine mist/haze which shows up either on the dial/face e.g. by gaps near the hand stem, or near date/day wheel apertures. In such a case, there isn't a noticeable "fluid" phase in the watch, just minor moisture "haze". So in short, yes, you can test as shown here, but using the watch "ticking" as a criteria for the test being passed, isnt 100% accurate IMHO. In such a case (wet test), you'd generally use a condensation check afterwards with a drop of cold water on the crystal to confirm no hint of moisture ingress. Not trying to drag this on, or be combative in anyway, but thats how I've understood the process from my own work/dabbling/whatever I should call it. Hope I gave a bit more context here.
@@philipcarr6698 true. But that only happens when the chamber is depressured. Simple hydraulics- if the case is sealed, then even though the water pressure is boisted to 6 barg, the water can't get in, and inside the watch stays at 0barg. Scenario 1 - If the watch has a leak, and is pressured up UNDERWATER like what JOMW did, then water will enter the case. Bubbles won't come out since any air inside the case would have been at lower pressure initially...close to 0 barg (basic fluid flow hydraulics). Again, on this scenario, water enters the case, no major bubbles to speak of. Scenario 2 - HOwever if the watch were kept in the air space above the liquid when the pressure was increased, and it has a leak, inside the case gets pressurised as well with air (excess air enters the case). Thats why if the test is done correctly (watch is kept above water, then pressured up, then dunked in the water, and pressure bled off) then you'll see air bubbles escaping once the watch is dunked in the water and THEN the pressure is bled off...... if there was a leak (excess air that leaked into the case exits via whatever leak there was). JOMW has used Scenario 1, which will not result in bubbles due to a small leak, since pressuring up underwater leads to water entering the case if there's a leak. I'd suggest checking out some more experienced folk (better than most of us here) on pressure testing - again Esslinger comes to mind. They break down pretty well (and are professionals, not random hobbyists) the Scenarios I've listed above. Laters.
I know people are saying you’re using it wrong Jody but your way is much more fun. Who wants to see a few bubbles seeping out. I want to see the watch fill up and cases implode. Excellent video and a great indicator of what we’re really buying.
@@JustOneMoreWatch no your not a liar the seals are good and the crown design is also really good but will the sapphire caseback crystal hold 200m? I think so !
Enjoyed that a lot! Think this needs to be a regular content format on this channel, would love to see Steel Dive, San Martin etc tested to see how waterproof those watches actually are! Keep up the good work!
I just watched a vid from beyond the press an hour ago that had them testing a citizen and a dugena. And all I could think about the whole time was I really wish jomw had a test rig like that! Glad to see more testing! Keep it up can’t wait for the next one!
⚠️NOTE⚠️ YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG! The way you're supposed to do it is to hold the watch in the air pocket while you're pumping up the pressure, THEN lower the watch into the water and depressurize. That way if theirs a leak it's just air escaping (you'll see little air bubbles) and you can quickly raise the watch out of the water so no damage will occur. The way you're doing it is just going to pump water into the watch.
@@lebowskiunderachiever3591 I bought it in 2009; in 2020 I put it in a glass of water to take a photo, and I found water in it. The gaskets got dry and brittle. They probably should be replaced more often than every 11 years - luckily they are sold as spare parts (e.g. meranom.com or vostok-watches24.com), they are very cheap (apart from delivery), and you can change them yourself (I did that, unfortunately *after* flooding the watch...). When new, a Vostok Amphibia can stand to pressures up to 80 bar (actual test: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-FwNFy2A7rmU.html )
@@lebowskiunderachiever3591 To see how well a new Vostok Amphibia holds up, look for the video titled, "How Waterproof is Vostok Amfibia Dive Watch? Deep Sea Chamber test!"
I guess so. The lower ratings are most likely one they can guarantee rather than what the watch could. Same goes for food expiry, the dates are just guaranteed longevity rather than how long the food item could actually last.
Thats because they arent QC'ing thier products. Some of these manufacturers probably check only one watch out of a 100, if not 1 out of the whole batch.
I’m ridiculously late to this video but I’m leaving a comment that I would really like to see more videos like this! I love that you went the destructive route rather than the safer test! So entertaining wondering which one is going to not make it!
Genuinely got anxiety when I saw your Breitling! Only water resistance I ever questioned was the Loreo. 200m with a see through caseback? For $60? Hmmmmm.
Hey JOMW! You should also use the pressure chamber to test other budget watches as well! Like the Casio Duro and Seiko SNK809 (many internet legends saying it can withstand up to 10atm). It would certainly be a fun video to watch
Ok, that was the most fun video I’ve ever seen you do. There is something extremely satisfying about breaking stuff. Mythbusters was a huge success because of it.
I just popped in to rewatch this and my son heard the intro and said Helllloooo and welcome to just one more watch in a great impression of you. You know you watch jomw a lot when lol
Really nice test Jody. The originality and tech testing of watches in your channel just keeps me coming back. Other youtubers could learn a thing or two from you. That’s what I like, straight to the point, no 30 min. blabbering about like others out there.
Gary from ILW has somewhat shied away since the channel rebirth, until recently in putting watches in Herman. Good to see some other Watchtubers take the watches for a dunk ;)
The Hydrolic Press channel did this with enough pressure available up to 2 miles of of depth. The watch I was most interested in the invicta pro diver did really good. I can't remember exactly but it was at least twice the rated depth or over before it stopped and worked again after the pressure was released. With no leaks. It's worth checking out. I enjoyed your video. Thanks.
So, a Chinese pressure tester is being used to test the credibility of the waterproof ratings of Chinese watches. Anybody checked the credibility of that pressure gauge?
I think it’s time for Depth Wars! You know the drill... and for added authenticity borrow a long fishing line & Mr X’s boat... 🤣🤣 Or... (serious suggestion) some tests of the water resistance definitions to see if, for example, 30m watches survive a week’s worth of swimming or if 100m sports watches survive some of the more energetic water sports (I know they’re not supposed to but I bet lots will). Also would be interesting to see what happens when watches do let in water (without breaking) and the best ways to fix it. Good to see more variety as well as the reviews 👍👍
Hi. Love the channel. Just curious. I thought you were supposed to suspend the watch above the water, pressurise the chamber, dunk the watch and then release the air. A failure happens when pressured air gets into the watch while it is above the water and appears as bubbles from the submerged watch when the pressure is released from the chamber. In this way a failure doesn't leave the watch flooded inside. Cheers.
Nice vid Jody! I'd LOVE to see you test a Vostok Komandirskie Classic (the cheap manual wind one). Considering how little difference there is between the K and the Amphibia, I have to think that the Komandirskie will out-perform its rating. I'd like to see someone test this!
I once spent a whole week scuba diving while wearing a casio watch rated at 50m water resistance. The poor thing didn't even have a screw down crown and it survived no problem. Casio watch value never ceases to amaze me!
Great tests. You know that I knew the F91 would pass with flying colors. It’s one tough watch. This was a cool video. The case back shattered on that fluted piece! Wow!
Isnt this water test supposed to be done the other way around? You pressurize the watch outside of the water, then dump it in, and then release the pressure. Failure is indicsted by air bubbles coning out of the watch. This way you at least do not ruin a watch, right? 🤗
Gary from I like watches did the same thing. I don't know what was different for his process, I think he releases pressure after and shows the bubbles. Long story short, I was expecting this to go worse.
Ha ha, great video Jody 😃 . I was wondering who was going to be next to get a pressure testing chamber after Gary from the I like watches channel built his 😋
I always treat my watches as if they have no water resistant properties. I also look at what the crystal composition. I also ask if back is screw on and the same with the crown. I also agree that you first suspend the watch case in air , pump up, release with watch case in the water.
So you jumped straight to the wet test without trying the dry test? You are a bold one Jory. 😉 It would be awesome if you could test the Vostok Komandirskie in the future. The 20m brass one that is, the 200m steel ones shouldn't care in the slightest. If another Casio, do the World Time, shouldn't fail, and a few Steeldives would also be nice. Oh, and the Pagani Design Cocktail Time, nobody trusts those 100m either.
Doing the test this way, you won't see any bubbles. If it leaks, water will go in while the air inside the case is compressed. To see bubbles, you need to pressurise it in the air, then submerge and release the pressure. Any air that has worked its way past the seals will then escape as bubbles.
I gave my daughter a Casio F91-W awhile back, she has forgotten to take it off and jumped in a pool with it on a few occasions, still works perfectly. 👍
Always interesting videos. I like. Especially when you submit the watches to the timegtapher. It is always interesting to see the accuracy of the watches that pass here.And now with this device to test the pressure, even better.👍
Just as a note. I got a Pagani. The king air homage. Very pretty. Really like it. Washed my hands with it on. It fogged up. So I took the back off. No gasket. No o-ring. Nada. Pagani say I can send it back.
I know your method is more fun but a watchmaker takes the pressure up with the watch dry above the water puts the watch in water and let's off the pressure. So a failure is air bubbles are coming out and not having to dry the inside of the watch.
What up Jodie! I love the pressure test video! Please do more! I bet a bunch of your fans (like me) would love to see a few Pagani’s go into The Tank as well. Crank up the pressure and let’s separate the Liars from the real deal waterproof Crüe. I bet the Pagani watches pass with flying colors, or at least I hope they do. I now own a few of these Chinese 💎 gems and I love em. You turned me onto this Homage company. I just picked up a PD3306 last week and I love it. Great looking watch and it fits my skinny AF 7” wrist just fine. Have a nice holiday weekend sir.
I believe the watch need to stay above the water line when air is pumped. Then pushed down into the water and then observed for the bubbles to come out. This way if watch is not waterproof the raising air pressure will get inside the watch (pressure outside and inside the watch will get equalized). When watch is lowered down into the water, the bubbles of the pressured air will come out from the watch indicating bad water seals. This way it is also ensured no water is getting inside the watch. Water is not compressible and air (gas) is. Therefore, placing watch into the water and compressing air above the water will be equal to dipping watch into the glass with water. More of the splash proof test. I still appreciate all of the effort author of the video is making on reviewing watches and modifying them. Very interesting and informative reviews. Thanks
Thanks! Great channel. Bought a Seiko 7001 new in 1992 ($280 for cash from local jeweller), wore it for 25 years but now wear the 'plucky' F-91; lightweight, inexpensive, accurate, democratic. I've even got a spare in the glovebox of the car, and a 'loaner' for the kids. Liked the look of the Seiko, and used to dive a bit, but they're relativley expensive to own (CLA every 5-7 years, $100 - $200) and astonishingly inaccurate compared to digital/quartz. Lume completely dead in mine too. But they do have an undeniable charm; I'll keep mine forever, but I wear the F-91.
Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't the pressure tester test the pressure at certain depth, e.g. 6 bar would be 60m down. A 100m watch only recommends surface swimming, and isn't claiming the watch can go 100m underwater (always thought the ratings were a bit odd for this reason). Therefore your 100m watch might actually be performing as well as expected if it can handle 1 bar pressure?
