# Hydromax, tell me more



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

OK
So I bought one as its the deepest diving watch in the world and I have the DSSD the deepest auto in the world.

Tell me what to expect and your thoughts with the hydromax. I really dont know much about it and should have it before the weekend.


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

Umm, no one here owns one or knows anything interesting about them??



JYogi said:


> OK
> So I bought one as its the deepest diving watch in the world and I have the DSSD the deepest auto in the world.
> 
> Tell me what to expect and your thoughts with the hydromax. I really dont know much about it and should have it before the weekend.


----------



## Aqua Spearo (Oct 10, 2007)

You might want to ask on the Sinn forum. The pre Instrument watches are rebaged Sinns for the most part. The Hydromax is cool.. especially the little bubble. I wouldnt definately like one If I found a good price.


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

Really???
Thats interesting as why wouldn't Sinn have a watch that
dives as deep themselves? You think they would want to 
keep the title of the deepest dive watch made for themselves.

How long has the HydroMax been out and when did B&R part
ways with Sinn?


----------



## mthwatch (Mar 27, 2008)

I'm really not sure that its fair to say that they are "rebadged" Sinn's. I think its clear that BR used case and bracelet designs, and in some cases, even dial layouts from Sinn, but I think BR had a clear and different direction and market position from Sinn. BR is serious about producing watches for professional use. The Hydromax certainly helped cement that market position. Very cool watch and 100% Bell and Ross. The instrument watches put them on the map, but watches like the Hydromax give them credibility.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

:-s I just don't get it; why? A liquid filled timepiece that has a battery that supposed to last eight years and you have to send it to B&R for the 
change. You have a second sweep bounce and have to worry about bubbles on the dial.


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

Watchbreath said:


> :-s I just don't get it; why? A liquid filled timepiece that has a battery that supposed to last eight years and you have to send it to B&R for the
> change. You have a second sweep bounce and have to worry about bubbles on the dial.


Why???
Because its an amazing piece of engineering. 
Its the deepest diving watch in the world.
I have the Rolex Deep Sea Sea Dweller which is the
deepest auto in the world and tomorrow or Thur I will
have my Hydromax.

I am sure I could ask why about a few pieces in your collection
we all have our "why" pieces.

And as for B&R I think it makes quite a statement that they made
something capable of this before anyone else. To me that really 
shows they are a serious watch and not just a "name" or fashion
watch....

I didn't think this was one of their pieces with Sinn and I appreciate
you clearing that up.


----------



## mthwatch (Mar 27, 2008)

Agreed. The "why" argument is incredibly weak. Why bother with inaccurate automatic watches when quartz watches blow them away. In fact, why have a watch at all? My iPhone will suffice...

The Hydromax is a wonderful piece of engineering and the deepest diving watch in the world. Enough said. I think the Hydromax certainly has a place in your collection - a very cool coupling with the worlds deepest diving automatic. The Hydromax makes me proud to own a Bell & Ross, and if you want one, buy it!


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Nope, not the deepest. Several years ago the SDW (Swiss Divers Watch)
was rated deeper and was less than 1K USD.


mthwatch said:


> Agreed. The "why" argument is incredibly weak. Why bother with inaccurate automatic watches when quartz watches blow them away. In fact, why have a watch at all? My iPhone will suffice...
> 
> The Hydromax is a wonderful piece of engineering and the deepest diving watch in the world. Enough said. I think the Hydromax certainly has a place in your collection - a very cool coupling with the worlds deepest diving automatic. The Hydromax makes me proud to own a Bell & Ross, and if you want one, buy it!


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

Wasn't aware of the SDW till you mentioned it.
Interesting, it goes down deeper than the deepest known 
point in the ocean.

I think Ill be content with the B&R as my deepest diver
the SDW doesn't do much for me.

Also, of course I do not buy any watch for resale or in hopes it will
mature in value BUT if either one of these two are going to hold their
value after the new sale value drop I think it will be the B&R.

The B&R is nice as it comes with 3 bands

Sorry about the crappy pics but it was the camera in my phone...
Its soooo much easier as I can just Email myself the pics instead of 
having to upload them from the camera


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

That's the Sinn EZM-2


JYogi said:


> Really???
> Thats interesting as why wouldn't Sinn have a watch that
> dives as deep themselves? You think they would want to
> keep the title of the deepest dive watch made for themselves.
> ...


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

The Sinn EZM.2 Hydro is only water resistant to 500 m so 
they are not the same.


----------



## Dr.K (Mar 9, 2007)

JYogi said:


> The Sinn EZM.2 Hydro is only water resistant to 500 m so
> they are not the same.


Watches filled with oil are essentially water-proof. Water will not enter the watch at any depth achievable on Earth. I'm not sure where you saw the 500m depth rating. The numbers I've seen are more like 12,000m. Interestingly though, at 5,000m the pressure will crush the transistors inside all the quartz hydro watches. So while water will not enter the watch, it will stop working at 5,000m (which should be the least of your worries at that point).

When talking about the appeal of the hydro watches, people usually are drawn to the technological aspect of the design. A very practical feature of these dive watches is that the refractive index of the silicon oil is much closer to that of the crystal than air (which fills all other dive watches). This means that you can clearly see the dial under water at even the most acute angle. You can try this with your air-filled watch. Put it under water and look at the dial straight on. The start to slowly rotate the watch so that you're looking at the dial at an increasing angle. At some point, the dial will disappear as you pass the refractive angle. With an oil filled watch, you would be able to view the dial for much longer while rotating the dial away from yourself. You can also see this effect without putting the hydro watch under water, as in this pic I found on the web.


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

Well I must admit I am shocked at how much the Sinn sells for now.
I know they had a pretty fair price when they made them but the
only one I could find for sale now was someone asking $2000.

If I could find one at a fair price Id get it as that is a nice looking watch
and I am not usually a fan of Sinn.


----------



## publandlord (Aug 15, 2006)

JYogi said:


> Wasn't aware of the SDW till you mentioned it.
> Interesting, it goes down deeper than the deepest known
> point in the ocean.


Ha ha ha 

Sounds like the bragging rights just went postal. (Or at least, irrelevant.)


> I think Ill be content with the B&R as my deepest diver
> the SDW doesn't do much for me.


The Hydromax design is the same as the Marine/Demineur but with a caseback gasket to allow for temperature change. All are based on the design of the Sinn 809 (google for a pic).


----------



## Aqua Spearo (Oct 10, 2007)

yeah I didnt mean anything negative about it.. what you will find is that that Sinn also borrowed plenty of the ideas for the B&R team while they working for and with Sinn. The earlier watches are a collaboration of sorts, and then there was some soul searching going on when B&R produced watches like the Jump Hour PR.



mthwatch said:


> I'm really not sure that its fair to say that they are "rebadged" Sinn's. I think its clear that BR used case and bracelet designs, and in some cases, even dial layouts from Sinn, but I think BR had a clear and different direction and market position from Sinn. BR is serious about producing watches for professional use. The Hydromax certainly helped cement that market position. Very cool watch and 100% Bell and Ross. The instrument watches put them on the map, but watches like the Hydromax give them credibility.


----------



## Aqua Spearo (Oct 10, 2007)

nice pics.. anyway to get clearer ones? I had been thinking about trading my TH mcqueen monaco down for a hydromax + a little cash. nice wrist prescence. I might be completely wrong about a sinn vesion of this watch... I recall and oil filled watch and though they were the same, the EZM2 hydro only states 500M depth.. you can see the cool little bubble there.


----------



## WatchTimes (Jul 14, 2008)

Thats the same flyer I saw and why I said they were only rated till 500m

Here are a few more pics for you.

I am not going to use the rubber strap as Id have to cut it way down.
I also already have a Tissot T-Touch with a rubber strap.
The metal strap is nice and I wore it a little but I really like this one on the velcro strap, it is SOOO light (well compared to the SD and DSSD I am used to wearing but its not lightweight)


----------



## Aqua Spearo (Oct 10, 2007)

I like Sinn alot. I think you made the right choice getting the B&R version. I want one now!



JYogi said:


> Well I must admit I am shocked at how much the Sinn sells for now.
> I know they had a pretty fair price when they made them but the
> only one I could find for sale now was someone asking $2000.
> 
> ...


----------



## Aqua Spearo (Oct 10, 2007)

This doesnt really make any sense.. while the internal pressure will alter slightly, the external shell of the watch is taking the brunt of the force.. at 5000M, the transitors are not being subject to 500BAR. This watch is also tested and proven at 1100BAR so I fail to see any evidence of this.



Dr.K said:


> Watches filled with oil are essentially water-proof. Water will not enter the watch at any depth achievable on Earth. I'm not sure where you saw the 500m depth rating. The numbers I've seen are more like 12,000m. Interestingly though, at 5,000m the pressure will crush the transistors inside all the quartz hydro watches. So while water will not enter the watch, it will stop working at 5,000m (which should be the least of your worries at that point).
> 
> When talking about the appeal of the hydro watches, people usually are drawn to the technological aspect of the design. A very practical feature of these dive watches is that the refractive index of the silicon oil is much closer to that of the crystal than air (which fills all other dive watches). This means that you can clearly see the dial under water at even the most acute angle. You can try this with your air-filled watch. Put it under water and look at the dial straight on. The start to slowly rotate the watch so that you're looking at the dial at an increasing angle. At some point, the dial will disappear as you pass the refractive angle. With an oil filled watch, you would be able to view the dial for much longer while rotating the dial away from yourself. You can also see this effect without putting the hydro watch under water, as in this pic I found on the web.


----------



## dsarch21 (Aug 20, 2008)

removed by owner


----------



## ilan (Feb 4, 2009)

JYogi said:


> OK
> So I bought one as its the deepest diving watch in the world and I have the DSSD the deepest auto in the world.
> 
> Tell me what to expect and your thoughts with the hydromax. I really dont know much about it and should have it before the weekend.


If you look at the Bell & Ross forum on their website (in the "Service" menu) you will find horror stories of waiting at least 6 months to get a battery change. That is because the watch has to go back to the factory which made it, the only place where the oil can be dealt with correctly. I went to an authorized dealer which also restores and sells antique watches here in Paris and they said that they no longer carried the Hydromax and would strongly advise against buying it for this reason, as well as because of the random bubbles that appear when taking a plane trip. On the other hand, they highly recommended the Marine version, which is identical, except for the oil. As confirmation, I then went to another store nearby where the salesman actually recommended the Hydromax and then told us there was no problems with a battery change, he also told us that 1860 was in the 18th century, and couldn't recognize my wife's Longines as a recent watch.

The principle of the oil filled watch is essentially the same as that of a standard egg which cannot be broken easily under slowly increasing uniform external pressure. The point is that they have a solid and liquid interior which is essentially incompressible, the weakness of a regular watch being the compressible air between the dial and the glass. I'm pretty sure that you could sell supermaket eggs with the label 200m water resistant (or higher). So, as with the egg, that does not imply that the watch is very resistant to non-uniform pressure or sudden pressure change. Note that Bell & Ross did not give any ISO diver's rating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_6425 for this watch, these consisting of a variety of torture tests apart from uniform pressure. Comparing the general girth of this watch against professional divers watches rated to 1000m, for example, it does not seem as resistant, e.g., look at the relatively puny crown.

Also, this watch is disconcerting in its inability to handle negative air pressure, that is, the appearance of bubbles inside the case (this is confirmed as "normal" for this watch on the Bell & Ross website FAQ). It is normal that a watertight watch should handle altitude less well than a regular watch, since pressure cannot be equalized, but the hydromax starts getting symptoms during airplane flights which are usually regulated to 8000ft. If my calculations are correct, this is a .25 bar decrease in air pressure, so equivalent 2.5m depth of water *negative* pressure. Sensitivity to 2.5m uniform pressure is not very convincing for the world's most resistant watch to pressure.

The best recommendation if you have this watch is to sell it before the initial battery runs down.

-ilan

P.S. There is a good chance I will buy the Marine model (that's why I'm reading this forum), so nothing against the rest of the design.


----------

