Why Don't All Watches Have Screw Down Crowns?
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 11. 2020
- A Discussion around Watches and Screw Down Crowns. The sports watch set the standard and has since become well known for its function. Why don't all watches have them? Is it because manufacturers are lazy or find them unnecessary for their purpose? Is it because of the practicality of simple manual winding? We might see how the screw down crown becomes more relevant as we move our attention to how the sports watch has influenced the industry.
#ScrewDownCrown #DressWatch #SportsWatch
All Images are Sourced from either Press Release Photos or Public Listings.
Below are a list of the common sources that are used in no particular order:
Bob’s Watches | Revolution Watch | HQ Milton | Hodinkee | Monochrome Watches | Jomashop | Analog Shift | Bulang and Sons | Robb Report | Watchfinder | WatchBox | Phillips Watches | Christies | Timekeepers Club | Fratello Watches | Bexsonn | Worn and Wound | A Collected Man | Oracle Time | Time + Tide Watches
Support the Channel: / idguy
Follow me on Instagram: id.guy?hl=en
Contact me: enquire.idguy@gmail.com - Zábava
Channel Support - Patreon: www.patreon.com/idguy
Latest Releases: czcams.com/channels/zf6rqsEBni5G2TSevD6F4A.htmlfeatured
Follow me on Instagram: instagram.com/id.guy/
When they sell watches with a screw down crown and they say that you can swim with the watch, people would try it and drown.....because some people can't swim..
False advertising lol
And then it will be too late ... says the watch.
This read like a mitch hedberg joke
The main disadvantage of a threaded crown on a manual wind watch is that frequent winding promotes wear on the crown and tube threads. Anyone who has handled many vintage Rolex Oyster manual wind watches knows the threads on these watches are often quite worn. Therefore, a manual wind watch is generally better off with a traditional crown (and one reason I no longer own vintage Rolex manual wind watches). For an automatic, this is obviously much less of a concern. But consider that crown threads don’t obviate the need for gaskets, so on a watch with a threaded crown, the threads represent just another point of potential failure, in addition to the gaskets.
Very good points and thank you for this Will!
I have a manual winding watch with a screw down crown that is well over 30 years old and it's perfectly fine.
Depends on how people use them. I have many vintages that have screw down crowns which are still in excellent condition. I also brush a bit of dry lubricant on the threads which help protect from wear. Just a tiny bit of lubricant helps a lot cause if you overdo it you will gunk the inside of the crown. Rolex watches that are made of gold are the ones that really get worn down quickly due to the softness of the metal. All of my dads rolex's too are in great condition including the vintages. Also if the threads are worn then you just need to replace the crown tube when you need to get the watch serviced. Servicing is part of watch collecting and if you can't afford to service your watches then don't collect them.
@@dredgewalker today there aren't that many watches with screw down crowns that you have to wind every day. Actually, I cannot recall any. Do you?
@@vladspb_ Yeah not many new winders with screw down crown today. I still prefer them though cause they are more robust than automatic movements and it has become a habit to me to wind one up everyday.
It’s not only about water resistance, but just as well about dust and humidity resistance.
I thinks it makes a lot of sense to not have a screw down crown on a manual wound watch.
Lars Vargas?, Scandinavian or Hispanic?.
@@japd7897 It's kind of a "joke name" as me and my friends came up with back in school when we were doing a project about the city Las Vegas. Lars is a very common name here in Sweden and I think Vargas was the name of some Mexican football player.
@@larsvargas8479 Vargas is a Spanish surname, and being Lars Scandinavian I wast lost 😰😅.
Agreed. Not for convenience or accessibility reasons (it would only add to the enjoyment IMO), but to avoid the inevitable wear and tear on the threads due to daily winding. This seems like one of those things for which there must be an obvious solution, just waiting for someone to think of it. In any case, it gives me pause when considering hand-winders.
I do sail, swim, practice snorkeling, ride a motorcycle under heavy rain, practice sports in a quite humid climate, ... that is my everyday life, EVERY DAY, to me a screw-in crown is a must.
In my rotation, I switch watches every couple of days. Unlike one watch collection, I interact with the crowns a lot. I prefer a screw down crown only on my recreational watches. For day to day desk job, one needs a screw down crown like a fish needs a bicycle. These are also a nightmare to assemble. I build watches from parts.
A little history here: On 30 October 1925 in La Chaux de Fonds, Switzerland, Paul Perregaux and Georges Perret, registered Swiss patent No. 114948 for a winding system where the crown could be screwed down on to the case to create a waterproof seal.When Hans Wilsdorf saw this patent, he must have thought he had found the solution he had been searching for. He bought all rights to the patent and had it assigned to him, and then applied for a British patent on 1 September 1926: Source - Vintagewatchstarps
Perregaux! Are we talking the precursor of GP that we know today? Fascinating! Rolex and their patent ownerships have made them what they are today :) Thank you for the comment on this! I was just going to ask about more info on the history of the "screw down"
7:39 ! Yes! I'm really considering the First Omega in Space... What a beauty... To be fair what a LOAD OF BEAUTIES! Gorgeously edited video... Great narration. Excellent channel!
I'm considering an FOIS as we speak... don't tell anyone ;) I just can't stop staring at them... Ah, so many watches, so little time. This hobby, man... And thank you so much for the comment!
@@ID-Guy hey no worries at all!! Where are you based man? I've been into watches for a year so far... it is a very crazy rabbit hole.... so my top three are FOIS, Seamaster 41mm with smooth black dial (discontinued 2018 i think), and new 36mm rolex Oyster Perpetual - blue or silver i think.... I've had a few Omegas this year but sold the speedy and aqua terra when I realised I'm not rich!!! So I'm saving.... and wearing a 5600E G shock... I'm really enjoying your videos.... so thank you for that. One of my new favourite channels..I mean that
P.s. if you do get the First Omega, have you had a think about bracelets? Apparently some of the racing 19mm ones can fit.....I think wearing on straps will be great....but bracelet cool too.. I found the speedy a little too large, and the crown guards made hand winding it quite difficult.... this is why I'm so excited about this one.... no guards! Much more pleasant experience... what a great watch
I wash my watches with detergent using a soft brush every few days. Screw down crown relieves me of the worry that I might accidentally pull the crown out, while washing.
*"I personally am willing to pay whatever marginal increase in cost of a watch with a screw down over a push/pull"*
Thank you
Very well articulated and logical discussion. Thanks for this!
always balls to the walls topic ty!
There are a few more in the pipeline too ;) And it's always a pleasure, Jim. Thank you for the comment!
Hello Guy! Thank you for a great video, it raises a lot of different issues. I think basically that form follows function. Obviously you can get a 100 meter water resistance without having a screw down crown, whether or not it has one is probably do to three factors: function, marketing, and manufacture. I think largely that the whole issue of water resistance is market driven. I would almost say that that the best effect of water resistance is that the watch is more resistant to dust! As I have collected, worn watches over decades, I notice how large, bulky and uncomfortable watches have become. Most people do not need a watch with even a hundred meter water resistance. How many people need crown guards? We just like the idea. The "what if". I have two dive watches that I bought because I liked the way they looked. And they are heavy and uncomfortable to wear. Are they cool? Yes. Are they practical for my lifestyle? Not at all. My watches need to fit under shirts, sweaters, jackets. I have five watches that I only wear in the summer because they are a hassle unless I am wearing a short sleeve shirt! The beauty of the handwind movement is that it doesn't need a lot of hight, because you don't have to make room for the rotor. You add an automatic movement and you have to increase case thickness. You add 100 meter water resistance and you have to add case thickness. I love the fact that original field watches were so flat. That was an important design parameter. They were tough, small, water resistant and reasonably accurate. The ultimate sport watch. And it didn't need a screw down crown.
The screw down feels almost like an "assurance" to watch owners (and marketing driven, love that point) - Field watches are definitely the best examples in this category. They really are bulletproof when we look at their specs. Ah, there's a lot to discuss and thank you for these points and your opinion on the matter Sean! It was a great read
Interesting points, and I'd agree with a lot of what you're saying, however durable, waterproof watches with screw-in crowns don't need to be big and bulky at all (with the exception of extreme pro dive watches). The majority of overly big, bulky watches are a product of style evolution plain and simple. When you look at the size of movements used in most of those watches (automatic or otherwise) they're relatively tiny, surrounded by a massive movement ring/spacer.
My favorite everyday auto watch is a Sandoz Explorer from the late 90's...35mm case with an ETA 2836 inside and screw down crown. It's a very compact, elegant form factor. Hopefully watch sizes will continue to trend down in size...~ 34mm used to be considered midsize for men, now it's somehow 39-40mm !?
Screw down crowns add complexity to the key works because they require an added position which disengages the movement. On less expensive watches that makes it harder to get out of one stem position and into another.
The only reason where I would not want a screw Down crown is on a manual wind only watch !!
When we talk about waterproofness we must also take into account with a dress watch there can be spillages involving drinks. It's not impossible that you could end up wearing a drink or have it pour down your arm whilst being in a dress environment. For that reason and the damage that can be done from having a glass knocked over onto your arm I wouldn't even consider a watch without some level of fluid ingress protection. Its almost unforgivable that an expensive timepiece, in some cases, has none
@IDGuy Thank you for addressing my question! Fantastic video as usual.
My pleasure Mark! You'll be getting more info from the comments than the video itself (that's the joy of our small community) ;) Excellent question and one well worth investigating further!
exactly what I did to my speedmaster professional, 35th anniversary panda moonwatch, took it scuba diving... I admit back then I didnt truly understand what 50m water resistant really mean.
anyways watch still ticking strong, no signs of water breaching whatsoever after 15years of ownership.
BUT.... now I do think it's best for watches to use screw down crown regardless. better to be safe than sorry.
Very interesting. Gotta say, I love hearing stories of Speedmasters in water. It's enough to drive the watch enthusiast mad! ;) Thank you for the comment Ric!
Great vid IDGuy! Screw down crowns provided marketing & functional advantages. The marketing advantage was initially overlooked. We know who won.
There have been such great points in the comments. And it feels like the "screw down" is another one of those marketing ploys that we've all bought into ;) Always a pleasure, Doc. I hope the stiffs are treating you well at the morgue!
Amen to this question. GREAT video!
It's just great, simple and to the point. There's so much more investigating we could do around this subject! Thanks for the comment brother
A Patek Philippe Calatrava 5196 with a screwdown crown would look outright weird.
I see two reasons to go with the pushpull crown over the screwdown for non dive watches :
User satisfaction : anyone having experienced the poor threading of the Seiko SKX knows what I’m talking about. Do it right or don’t do it
Constant watch swapping. I’m glad my Breitling Premier 40 and my Nomos Tangente have push-pull crowns. The watches have always died when I pick them, so I can immediately wind them and set the time without the unscrewing / screwing back hassle.
Put that Calatrava on a velcro strap 😉.
Imagine a screw down calatrava? bonkers. And you're so right about the constant need to wind watches in rotation... the treading is just another possible failure point with so many of them. Very good point and thanks for this Hervé
Very interesting! Thanks! 😃
Push-down crowns (with gaskets) make sense on a manual-wind watch. It lets you wind the watch at the 1 position vs an 'unscrewed' 2 position. I wish *every* automatic watch had a screw-down crown but for pieces I wont swim in anyway (mechanical chronographs, dress watches) it's fine. It's the huge variety of 'sporty/dressy' automatics with a push down crown that really disappoint.
Great! Many thanks!
Good article on the FORMEX website on this issue. Just google formex screw down crown. For 30-100 meters water resistance, for whatever that means in real life, it seems that a push pull crown can provide acceptable sealing and requires less maintenance. The user has to understand what water related uses the watch will be put through and then look for a watch with the appropriate rating. If less than 100 m, then a push pull crown is fine. If I were going swimming or more with the watch, which I never do, then I would insist on a screw down crown.
Lol I didn't get by the first two minutes. I have a modest 11 watch collection. Five have screw down 👑S I found them a pain. I like to be able to pick my watch out of the box pull the 👑 out wind it set it and go. My favourite watch for simplicity is my Breitling ref 806 navitimer it doesn't have a date to fiddle with either. Also constantly screwing the crown in and out in a recipe for wear and repair down the road. Don't get me wrong for a diver or a field watch that might see serous water risk good idea. I'm not a fan of screw downs otherwise.
Hello @idguy. Well said as always. The argument that makes sense for a screw down crown are those watches that try to balance the sport and dress sphere like the Constellation from Omega.
I give you all a simple answer (in my opinion). Main reason that most of the watch models do not feature a screwdown crown is due to major impracticality of operating the watch which has such crown. For average people who wear watches, unscrewing and screwing back the crown is difficult, especially if your hands are even slightly greasy or wet. You need to first push and hold the crown, and than turning it at the same time, which requires focus and even some skill. Even to me, sometimes it is quite difficult and it takes a lot of effort. Thus it is better not have it, unless we are talking about divers or special tool watches.
This is valid for the field use as well when e. g. you need to make sure your watch is wound, your hands are dirty, and you need to operate the crown. Unscrewing the crown to wind the watch in such environment would give even greater chance for the water ingress. It is safer just to simply start turning the crown to wind it, then tu manipulate in a way that would expose the gaskets.
your logic holds up for about 2 seconds.... the 'impracticality' of having screw down crowns doesn't seem to have hurt Rolex very much. They appeal more than any other watch brand to 'average people' ....no?
@@jasono4407 Rolex has its own audience and it holds as a status symbol. People who buy Rolex will go over the impracticality of the screwdown crown because in their mind they need to have Rolex no matter what. I noticed around social media that many Rolex owners did a mistake and did not properly screw down a crown or forgot to do it, and they got themselves a really expensive service bill. Does it make sense to place a screw down crown on a casual dress watch such as Datejust? Is it wise to go swimming which such a model? I have a friend who swims with Seiko 5 sports (normal crown), and never did water ingress since years. Like this video says, by the numbers sold, watches without the screwdown crown are the ones sold most, and the question is why the manufactures do not deliver more models with the screwdown crown since it seems like a cool feature. Or perhaps that feature indeed has some severe downsides?
2:26..what is the reference for that beautiful white dial OP?
Another great video, which has opened a rich discussion. Thanks!
For me, if its a Sports Watch it a HAS to have a screw-down crown
I had a experience with a 100M push-down sports watch taking on water. And what had happened was the cold temperature of the water and hot temperature of a summer day created a pressure difference that caused a vacuum in the case and it sucked in a lot of water, despite the seals.
Was it a good quality watch? Because there are screw down watches that still don't seal well
Wouldn't that hold for screw-down crowns as well? Unless it has an addtional gasket underneath the crown?
The real reason I got the 15300 is the size and the screw down crown. Nice video 👍
You know how boss you'd be having a photo of your 15300 in the sea with diving gear? ;)
When the water resistance is good enough I don't mind a non screw down crown. Seiko SARB033 for example
Newer hobbiests think a threaded crown is necessary for water resistance but it is a common misconception. I'm not a great fan of them myself, just another inconvenience when winding and something else to go wrong.. But it's become so ingrained in the public psyche that it's become a marketing gimmick.
Cheers mate 👍🏻
Great topic! I have a Seiko SARB 033 and always wondered why it doesn't have a screw down crown. The crown could be pulled out unintentionally and the gaskets do age and can fail... So, in my opinion, for this type of everyday do it all watches (like the stereotype: the Rolex OP and DJ) should have one. In dress and/or manual wound watches it is understandable. Great video! Cheers!
Amazing!
Just excellent.
I’m with your follower who much prefers a watch with a screw-down crown; however there are a few good reasons why manufacturers do not choose to use one:
1. It’s a dress watch. They have put the production money into characteristics needed in a dress watch. In other words , it’s not a sport’s watch, and as IDGuy states, they don’t expect or want this dress watch to be worn into the water.
2. It’s a hand-wind, mechanical movement. You’ll need to manipulate the crown almost daily in order to wind a mechanical, hand-wound watch. Cycling a screw-down crown through literally hundreds of openings and closings each year is very likely to eventually end with a damaged screw thread. A push-pull crown with good design and gaskets is a much better choice here; it can be water-resistance up to 100 meter if designed and manufactured properly.
3. Nope, that’s about it. If it’s a sports watch with a quartz or automatic mechanical movement, then it should have a screw-down crown.
An interesting aside: a GMT watch used by an active traveler, hence the crown must be opened often in order to change the local hour hand, could perhaps best be fitted with a push-pull crown. If the watch is intended as a sports watch, which is likely, then a screw-down crown would again be preferred, so what to do? Perhaps, as the user/ owner, it might be best to limit crown openings and use the rotating bezel to show the local time zone. Food for thought.
Hello everybody. Stay well
Absolutely! I own 4 Rolexes, 2 Seiko Divers, the next watch I obtain will have a screw down crown... one reason I like the Seiko Prospex SLA 055 (the zaratsu finishing not important to me, I do like the "special" crown which is locked down with a unique motion/action). I dislike push/pull (supposedly have special gaskets, look at the vintage versions, you can see fungus, molds, etc...evidence of "over time" will leak, whereas my 60-year old Rolex clean as a whistle dials, same as my Reverso!).
Excellent clip..one other query i seem to ask everyone and never recieve a response is,since Rolex introduced the Oyster,how is it that all modern cases dont have an easily achieved 100m WR?cant they just make dress watches with the same WR seal?thanks again for the vid
For almost 20 years my only watch was a Rolex Datejust. I remember the embarrassment of taking my first purchased non Rolex watch back because the crown did not lock! I thought it was broken cause I assumed all automatic watches had screw down crowns. Haha..
Crazy right? The comments on this video have been fantastic! Owners diving with their Speedmaster etc. Thank you as always for the comment Juan!
Great subject, and much to consider here. For an every-day-wear automatic or quartz watch, I argue a screw-down crown is a must. With a properly maintained watch w/screw down crown, it's reassuring to not feel you must remember to take your watch off before, say, taking your kid out of the bath tub, or doing dishes, or hosing off your motorcycle, or...
However many watch crown threads are poorly designed/manufactured (mainly too fine of threads or too few) and prone to cross-threading/stripping. And small crowns are difficult to use, especially if you have large hands and understandably a real deterrent for the end user.
I think in modern times a screw down crown is rarely needed, sometimes sure, but I think most cases it is only done to avoid the unrelenting criticism from potential customers
Beyond screw down crowns, you bring up the larger question of why these big traditional watch companies don't innovate and stay in tune with their customers more. For example, the large Swiss watch industry is going to be buried by smartwatches if they are not more innovative, and spend more time on R&d. You can see it in simple things like their watch bands. I bought a fairly expensive Hamilton recently, and found the band to be almost completely unusable. It looked beautiful, but was horrendously thick and stiff, and had so few holes in it for adjustment it would only fit a handful of people with very large wrists. IMO👍.
Omega AT Ultra Light uses a telescopic pop up crown mechanism which retracts into the case itself (well, the case is broader on the right hand side). I think that is the future, tbh. A crown which you can push for it to pop up, and then push again to lock. No threads, perfect seal every time. Hope Omega roll this concept out more widely, especially that their crown tube is actually part of the case, so if you cross the threads on an Omega it will require case replacement in most instances. Rolex crown tube is a separate component and can be replaced on its own.
I'd totally own the AT UL given the chance... The crown is just bloody fantastic. High quality materials, shock resistance to the max... I'm so with you on them rolling out this for their mainstream pieces! Great comment as always, brother. Thank you!
When Omega can put it in a steel watch that doesn't cost the same as a BMW I'm all over it.
From what I have heard the screw down if the crown does NOT make the watch anymore waterproof or water resistant. It’s just to make sure the crown does not accidentally pop out or get pulled out. I have a very rare and limited run Fortis B42 Alarm Chrono that is 200 meters water resistant and does not have a screw down crown.
Thank you for this Dinan. So it's more of a security feature above anything else? Fascinating. The subject should really be dug into more. Thanks for the comment!
Agreed as from what I heard Rolex depth rating is tested with the crown unscrewed. IMO, a manual wind watch with screw down crown will be too much of a hassle and even though modern gaskets without screw down can withstand 20bar as proven by your Fortis, I would assume that the gasket may experience more wear from the frequent winding and therefore advise not to swim with a manual wind watch as you would not know the condition of your watch gasket.
This is why I like a screw down crown on a dive watch; its nice to not have to worry about accidentally knocking the crown open, just as its nice to know you can't accidentally knock the bezel clockwise with a unidirectional bezel.
On other "sport/field" watches -watches with 100M+ WR designed to be equally at home in water as on land (i.e. all Rolex Oyster, Omega AT)- I like having a screw down crown but I definitely don't need it (I don't miss it on the Hamilton Khaki Field or Tissot Gentleman for example).
On every other watch, especially if it's manual wind only, or a watch I'm likely to not have in general rotation, I don't want or need a screw down crown.
I'm ambivalent about them and wonder if they are a bit of a throwback. I mean what I want is 100m of water resistance, if a brand can engineer that into the watch so I don't have to do anything that is, by definition, better than another engineering solution that is dependent on the operator being involved - its basic hierarchy of risk control stuff.
I reckon we could make a good case about other technologies that are better suited. Panerai Luminors for example, without the need of threading, less opportunity as a failure point. Some other good points have been made the the "screw down" is more of a security thing than being anything that helps increase the performance of the watches water resistance. Very interesting subject. And thank you for the comment Pete! I hope you're well!
Except it might be water proof until you bump the crown, squeezing the gasket and letting water in.
Its funny, my IWC Novecento perpetual calendar as small gold dress piece for some reason has a screw down crown but only at 30m water resistance... yet my Defy EP21 has 100m WR but no screw down crown.
I don't understand why the SDC is so desired. My IWC Mark has a SDC with 60m WR. My Nomos Club doesn't yet has a 100 WR. Isn't WR all that's important?
What about the jlc Polaris date that is 200m water resistant but has a not screw down crown for the internal bezel?
Another fantastic video IDGuy. I agree that more watches should have screw down crowns. Every little bit helps when it comes to keeping water out of a watch. Another reason why Rolex 👑 is king.
It's such an interesting subject (and the comments have been fascinating) Owners taking their speedies diving etc. Ah, this hobby... Thank you as always Bluesy! Hope you're well, brother
Doesn't Rolex advertise that you can wear the submariner under water with the crown out? The gaskets keep the water out, the screw down stops the user from applying lateral force to the gaskets. The same with a lot of screw pushers on chronographs, the screw out stops the user operating the chronograph under water but has nothing to do with keeping water out. I have citizen pilot watches with internal bezel operated by crown rated to 200m, no screw down. I think with the right gaskets, screw down is just more surety that you don't move the crown under water.
Good question! Make it happen!
I’ve only got watches with screw down crowns but would like a push pull, the possibility of cross threading on a screw down is one of my biggest concerns every time I have to unscrew the crown. This issue is nonexistent with a push pull. And water resistance is covered by the gaskets and not the screw down crown. There are plenty of watches with push pull crowns that have wr of 150m and upwards.
The case is just as important 😎
The Patek 5107g has a screwed crown. The white gold Daytona in the video has screwed crown/pushers. The threading seems to be a nonissue.
Why don’t all field (tool) watches have a minimum water resistance of 200m? When you look at a Hamilton Khaki field watches, they have a water resistance of 50m. When you can buy cheaper watches such as the Casio G-Shock or the Citizen Promaster Tough for less and get better specs. I would think better water resistance on all tool watches would be a no brained.
With the screw down crown, with watches that have a 80 or more hours of power reserve, they don’t need to be wound everyday. So, the pain of unscrewing the crown is null. And it’s more insignificant when you look at the added protection it provides to the movement and the stem itself.
@@IDKline maybe. When I look at a Hamilton with a less water resistance and for the same amount at a Citizen and the Citizen has better water resistance and a threaded crown for the same price, I look at it as being lazy.
The Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic has a WR of 100mt, without screw down crown.
@@giusepperocchi2979 okay, less water resistance than my citizen and the Hamilton costs more. You would think at that price, they would offer 200m water resistance.
Well, I think 100mt is more than enough for every non diver watch. Anyway, it's much easier to seal quartz watches, because the crown is rarely used and the strain on the gasket is minimal. For the same reason, the manual winding Hamiltons are rated only 50mt despite being structurally similar to the automatic ones.
@@giusepperocchi2979 that’s a valid point. I will point out you’re still pulling out the crown on a Quartz watch just as much as you are on an automatic. Switching from DST to Standard time and visa versa to changing the date for those months that don’t have 31 days.
I do like to have a screw-down crown on my"diver" watch, but for other watches, I have no doubt about the seals alone being able to seal out any posible water that that watch might encounter. So I do not need or want a screw down crown on all my watches
if there's screw down crown on a manual wind watch, once it's fully wound and the main spring is as tight as possible, can you even screw the crown back in without breaking the main spring?
on higher end watches, like rolexes (and even some Oris), once you push the crown in a little bit to screw it in, it decouples from all functions and it is free-spinning. So a screwdown crown doesn't mean that you are winding the watch if you try to screw it in
Out of clumsiness I’ve side-swiped into the crown of my watch a few times. If it hadn’t been screw-down, I wonder if I would have broken it off.
Is there a technical reason that manual wind watches can’t have a screw down crown? Frankly I find non-screw down crowns to be a PITA since they frequently get pulled out reaching in to my jean pockets.
A screw thread, especially a short one, isn’t waterproof, water will find its way down the spiral. It may be used to screw down onto a gasket in the cap, as in any screw top container, or trigger some other sealing method - but in itself it is not waterproof, it will only slow down a leak.
I have a Seiko with 100m rating, so safe for swimming close to the surface, general water sports, not diving or scuba. However it doesn't have a screw down crown, not like my diver specific watches also rated at 100m or higher. So even though it has the rating, I'm scared to even give it a light wash in the sink under running water whereas my screw down crown watches I'll swim with them at the beach. I even have a 23 year old Timex Chronograph I bought new for $60, that is only rated for 30m, but has been surfing, swimming, showering and even countless times in a hot tub without a single issue. But it has a screw down crown.
That braclett is on the Speedy at 7:45 that looks like a beads of rice. Anybody know what it is off of?
I'm starting to wonder how much a screw down crown contributes to a watch's resistance, especially since you mentioned that the case back might be the more vulnerable area. That being said, I don't own any watches with a screw down crown right now, but I do think it would give me that sense of security, true or false. - Han
my watchmaker says it does nothing on water resist. Screwdown crown is only here to not change the time while diving
I've heard numerous times that it's actually irrelevant; a 100M WR watch is such regardless of if the crown screws down. Which is why I find it funny when some say a 50M watch is not swimable unless the crown screws down (often said of the Royal Oak; all 50M WR, some screw down, some don't)
The screw down crown comes into its own, however, if there's a risk of the crown being accidentally knocked open when in the water, which is why I do believe all dive watches need some form of crown lock, be that screw down or otherwise.
my question is: dows screw down crown protect the crown from water pressure changes while swimming? can it be replaced by crownguards? how sure manufacturers are about push-pull crown not coming up accidentally while jumping in water. generally watches are not made for swimming unless its a diver watch but the question is there. I'm an engineer and to me screwdown crown makes sense only if there's no other way to achieve our goal since it adds complications to s small component.
To be honest, I ALWAYS wanted to know Why Don't All Watches Have Screw Down Crowns, but nobody ever answered
Viton gaskets certainly help the equation unless it’s very , very cold ;)
I swear you know everything about everything Eric! Something else that I need to learn about now... sigh... ;) Hope you're well, sir
@@ID-Guy Sadly my knowledge is strictly limited to useless information. No need for anyone to know anything about gaskets never mind Viton v Nitrile variations. A great topic for dinner parties;)
I don't mind a push pull on dress watches. My only complaint would be, dive watches in 2020 with a push-pull system. Looking at you, Breitling.
A screw down crown is synonymous with a watch being waterproof. But there are more places water ingress can happen. The case back, the front, pushers etcetera. So either you go all the way and make a waterproof watch, or you go for a dress watch and stay away from the pool....especially after a few drinks. Also there are cheap watches, very cheap. When being in contact with water (or rain, or mist) you throw away your watch and buy a new one. Don't pretend you make a waterproof watch simply by putting a screw down crown on the watch.
Damasko have a built in lubrication cell in their crown stem which releases oils when the screw in crown is operated. What is worse, are too small crowns for aesthetic purposes.
What most people don’t realise is that 50m water resistance isn’t even good enough to swim with.
I don't think having a screw down crown = water resistant...
Panerai crown guard is the best proof...
Oh for sure, the Omega Niyad system and so many others. I guess just in "general" terms, a screwdown crown denotes "water resistance" there are many other technologies out there that do the same (and better) - great point about panerai
The Omega Speedmaster was worn on the moon and that necessitated them getting wet because the apollo capsules were splashed down into the ocean and then the crew recovered at sea.
Screw down crown only feels good on a expensive watch, and they feel gritty for cheap watches. I prefer non-screw down crown with good gaskets for watches under $500
Is the opposite of screw down a screw up? I think so I think so...🧐👨🏫☕
Another great video IDGuy! Oh I almost forgot, what was the air speed velocity of an unladed swallow I don't remember the answer ;)
Nefarion , African or European ? ;)
@@ericb8888 Hahaha as a king you have to know these kinds of things! Nee!
Hahaha! I thought more about the film and the follow up question was something like "Are we talking African or European Swallow?" God, I love that film... Hopefully see you on Saturday for some more banter, brother ;)
Everyone wants luxury sports models for an active life style. Normal people who have 1 watch need an all a rounder which should have 100 meters of water resistance-enter ROLEX!!
@I Even 30m's is fine for surface swimming too (dependant on the brand) actually crazy how some speedmaster owners wear them in saunas etc. with no problems at all. Reckon we need to recheck water resistance in a future video ;)
A simple 100m resistance is way more than reasonable. It also does give us more assurance (even though 300m is the standard) that you can do a lot more with less ;)
I like a watch that I can dress up or down, has good lume and good water resistance. I wish more watches had a screw down crown and had at least 100m of WR.
There are quite a few good options that fit those requirements at least partially, depending on your budget. The screw down crown gets less common the lower you budget goes, but I believe it's still possible to find.
As was pointed out in both the video and comments, however, a screw down crown isn't actually going to improve the WR of the watch (only security), so while I prefer the feature on 100M+ watches I don't actually consider it necessary unless it's a dive watch.
Is it not the screw down crown but the pressure on the rubber seals that actually give the crown it’s waterproofing?
Mido were using cork filled push / pull crowns in 1930 that were waterproof and could be useful for a dress watches needs.
I don’t think that the screw down crown is essential on all watches. Thin ones in particular may not be appropriate. On sports watches it is definitely advantageous. Who knows why manufacturers don’t adopt them for all watches? Expense, design......
An interesting video here my friend. Thanks to Mark for prompting the discussion. ✊
@@IDKline Thanks for your informative reply my friend. Respect. ✊
I suppose one thing I was trying to say in my initial comment was that I am a fan of manufacturers developing other systems for locking and applying pressure to crowns in order to waterproof them. Not just in the way that say Panerai and Ulysse Nardin have used large systems but maybe just some sort of crown housing, almost like but, not quite like 😂 that of a Ploprof!!! I know, bizarre.
There have been some excellent comments, brother. Owners diving with their Speedmasters etc. etc. I get the feeling that the "screw down" has more of a "security" element to it (assurance) - but most watches rated for even 50m's can take anything thrown at them. Very interesting subject. I reckon some more investigation is needed ;) Hope you're well, boet!
I think part of the appeal of Rolex is that all of their watches are indestructible by rational standards. It’s just an inherent component of their design, across any and all models
Lack of screw down is the reason I don't like the seiko SKX.
After years in the hobby, I now steer clear of any watch\brand that doesn't have screw down crowns and at least a 100m depth rating. Not are hard task as I prefer Rolex. I feel the same about cell phones. There should be no reason a cell phone today isn't water proof.
Most of the time I would not buy a watch if it doesn't have a screw down crown.
Why don’t certina use screw down crowns? They even make dive watches with push-pull crows. Crazy.
Is not crazy. Is people dumb enough to buy them, get water inside, and buy it again, the same watch. Is not crazy, is marketing for dumb people, and boy, they're abundant.
It's just incredible how many watches are out there, that would be perfect with a screw down crown. Especially all automatic field watches! bah
Are screw down crowns really essential. I am an engineer and I have to work with hydraulics. I have at times worked with systems where pressure is 3000 bar compared to 30 bar or 300 meters on a Rolex Submariner. All these machines have rotating parts that have oil at pressure and that oil has to be retained inside. So we use rotary oil seals or static oil seals if the shafts are not rotating. There is no need for threads or screwing down the rotating parts. The seals are located on polished cylindrical surfaces. Why do watches need screws? Is it more of marketing hype and gimmick?
seal behaviour close to ambient pressure is critical, not really comparable to high or very high pressure systems in which O rings perform well. Similarly temperature considerations (Challenger disaster) and material quality and age - most watches will never experience a maintenance cycle.
Your reasoning's sound.
Dude. Seikos?
I don't see why Rolex should have a patent on the screw down crown,Blancpain made a dive watch with this feature six months before Rolex jumped on the dive watch bandwagon...................
Area Man Furious that Every Watch Not Rolex
Hi IDGuy.
I've just sent you a business inquire on your registered e-mail.
Hope to hear from you
Sven Even
Forteller Watches
Looks like an unfilled market niche. We already have dress-divers, so why not "ruggedized" dress watches? I'd pay a few dollars more to have a screw down crown and case back on any and all of my watches.
Pointless for you, but not for me. I'd prefer to let the market decide.
@@IDKline I disagree.
Why fix something that isn't broke as the saying goes. Use them on divers, +/- sports and field watches, otherwise no.
Me, the most water I see is the shower so no don't really need it.
I own (and daily wear) a JLC Geophysic 1958. It is an automatic movement with a push/pull crown that is rated to 100m. I toured the JLC factory is Switzerland last year and specifically asked about this issue. They did reiterate that the watch was built in a way as to make a screw-down crown unnecessary to achieve the stated WR. Still….makes me nervous
What !!??
You should never take your 30 meter WR watch near a sink, let alone swimming!!
I suspect that ID guy does fully not understand the WR rating meaning 🤦🏻♂️
Correct me if am wrong, do you understand the WR rating meaning?
Be honest
100 metre WR should mean that you can go 100 m deep (tested to 150m), otherwise is a scam.
JAPD
That makes sense, but it only applies to divers
I don't quite care about the screw down crown. With the pandemic, I want my watches, even dress watches, can be sanitized with all kinds of disinfectants and be able to be washed under running tap water, without any issue.
Why does he ask this stupid question? Because he thinks a screw down crown is an essential and very valuable thing that makes any watch a quality one. Which is utter nonsense. Nontheless he complains: why does my Patek not have a screw down crown? 🙁 Why does my neighbour‘s cheap watch has one? 😒 Complain, complain, complain. He simply is overloaded with YT watch reviews. Quality. quality, quality. And suddenly he realizes that his $ 40 000.- watch has no $ 200.- skx like screw down crown!! 😡 How dare they, I want my money back! 😂 And if it would have it some day he would find out other complains. His Patek‘s crown can‘t sing, dance, make a cup of coffee.
„ I bought a $ 800.- Seiko diver“!!! 😊
„Oh no, dear! Didn‘t you know, it has no signed crown“!!! 😁 „Damned, I bought the wrong watch“. 😏 OMG 😂
"Why Don't All Watches Have Screw Down Crowns?" is simple. Becouse manufacturers see coments like in here, where majority of people think, a screw down crown is not need it. Actualy IS need it, but since majority says is not, gues what, we'll continue to have affordable waches that last 5 to 10 years. "Thank you" majority for that..! I saw a lot of videos with old watches restorations. All they have in common, as cause to stop working, was humidity, dust, and (having air coming in) lost of lubrification. Where those elements found an entrance? IS NOT THE CASE BACK. Majority says, a screw down crown is not need it for a watch worn just at the office, like work, is a place that water is nowhere, like they never gonna use the restroom, and wash theire hands after and accidentally wet the watch. Manufacturers need people that buys watches, once at 5 to 10 years, and a crown that is not scewing, give them plenty of hope, and when the majority says "is not need it" too, it feels to them, like a true blessing. Rolex doesn't need to bother with that, they DONT want you to buy theire watches once at 5 to 10 years. They rip you off once, but give you something, that majority refuse so gently, a watch that last a life time. Question for majority : is Rolex dumb for having screw down crowns? PS: screw down crowns, have a rubber gasket inside.
Why don’t they ? Because half the watches suck
Watches without screw down crown are LOSER