DDro100m is the classic depth rating and certainly sufficient for 99% of rec divers and 100% of snorkel use. With proper maintenance of the o rings etc I'm sure it's more than sufficient as a backup to a dive computer.
monoclinefair point, but if I'm spending >$1,000 for a dive watch I'd want at least a good a rating as my $200 seiko...
i'd feel a lot better about a better margin of safety. seems shortsighted to offer this in 100M, not 200M
DDroYep. With one caveat... Rolex 100m means something. You can dive with the Explorer, GMT, etc. etc... Every other marque, 100m means I wouldn’t do more than swim with it...
DDroI’d encourage you to look into the mechanisms that Rolex uses for water resistance. On some of their 100m watches, it’s identical to those used on their dive watches. For instance, the GMT Master II, with a WR of 100m, and the Sea-Dweller, with a WR of 1220m, both use a Triplock screw-down crown. The difference in WR is due to a thicker case back and crystal. In other words... The GMT Master will fail at depth before the other due to the water pressure literally deforming the case or crystal. As a diver, I can tell you... that can only occur at depths far greater than any recreational diver goes. Deeper than the vast majority of commercial divers operate at, in fact.
This isn't a dive watch, nothing with only 100M water resistance is...
That said, nice looking watch
i'd feel a lot better about a better margin of safety. seems shortsighted to offer this in 100M, not 200M