CX Swiss Military 20,000ft Dive Watch: What Were They Thinking?

Has the Big and Bigger Watch Fad Finally Gotten Well and Truly Out of Hand?

Montres Charmex CX "Swiss Military" 20,000 ft diver side profile. €2,998.- (US$4300) will buy a big hunk of stupid.

You know how when you see pictures of ’70s fashions with 12-inch bellbottoms, enormous hairdos, platform shoes, and polyester leisure suits and all you can think (even if you lived through it) is, “Holy S#@t!  What were they thinking!?  Look at those pants for crying out loud!”

Take a good look here, because I’m betting we’ve now hit that point in the Big Watch™ fad that has been developing these past few years, in which watches containing the movements of the same size as previous years have been packaged in increasingly larger cases, with no clear practical benefit.

Vintage Rolex "Deep Sea Special", one of only 6 believed made for a special depth experiment. Photo: R-L-X.de

The CX “Swiss Military” 20,000ft diver is rated to an astonishing and astonishingly unnecessary 6,000m of water resistance.  And much like the Rolex “Deep Sea Special” experimental design of the’50s- ’60s (namesake of the current Rolex Sea-Dweller Deep Sea), it’s about the size of a golf ball.  Rolex of course had the sense and restraint to limit the production to some half-dozen examples for the experiment only, and wasn’t so brash as to introduce it as an actual production model.

Montres Charmex CX Swiss Military 20,000ft diver.

Add to that cheerful irony of branding a watch as “Swiss Military” when Switzerland is both historically neutral with very modest military capabilities, and of course is completely landlocked with little to no opportunity for any would-be military divers to use such watches.

The CX 20000ft.com website even has a video showing he watch being subjected to shotgun blasts, which the watch indeed survives relatively intact.  The advantage of such is quite beyond me though, as in all occasions when I’ve been subjected to gunfire and other assorted nastiness the thought of whether my watch might survive was usually the absolute furthest thing from my mind.  Irrational and pointless excess capability.

So here you have it folks, the watch that’s probably going to become the  “What the hell were they thinking!?” high water mark of the early 21st Century: an unwearable watch with technical specifications no one could ever need.  What were they thinking?  Look at those pants!

Links:

Be Sociable, Share!

By Rrryan on 29 December 2009 · Posted in Modern Watches

17 Comments | Post Comment

Kyle S says:

Thanks for some fresh perspective on this watch! It does seem a bit over the top and I think would be more impressive as a very limited edition watch.

Happy New Year to you and best wishes for 2010!

Posted on December 31st, 2009

Dean Grant Baker says:

It’s a man’s watch, for males with wrists that aren’t girly; perhaps you’ll like the watch better when you first: grow a set; then find a way to get them to drop.
As if you’ve ever been under fire, give me a flippin’ break.

The demonstration is to prove the watch’s ruggedness, something rael men seek and appreciate.
FYI bell-bottoms are all the rage with custom designs going for thousands, more than the watch in MANY cases.

Just proving how out of touch you are.

Switzerland has been ANYTHING BUT “historically neutral”, read a history book, one NOT written for the USA, that is.

Damn you really need to stop typing, you’re just embarrassing yourself.

I just read another POS hack job of yellow journalism you did over a Reactor piece.

You need to grow up, move out of your parent’s basement and kiss a girl before you’ll be man enough to wear a cx.

It is for real men that get their watches [and their women] wet.

I bet you use an Apple computer don’t you.
A 550 break hp engine is “pointless blah blah blah” too.
I bet you drive a hyundai

You sound like a woman; with Penis envy.

And YOU ARE THE ONLY person to have written anything negative about this World Record setting dive watch.

Tell us about the movement, etc, tell us about the fire truck hose test from an aircraft fire fighting truck, tell us that the Rolex Deepsea, which you laud is absolutely destroyed in fact it disentergrates. And when the DSSD is shot, it simply ceases to exist whilst the cx keeps ticking, and remains water resistant.

I bet you’re just one of those wannabee desk divers, that loves the R DSSD with the homosexualesque vanity ring that you paid 7K for whilst this comes in at 4.

You simply have ZERO knowledge of watches, and ZERO credibility as a watch journalist. Let alone a diver.

And just to finish: Ever heard of a lake Geneva? No? It’s in Switzerland, it’s over 310 metres deep.

So a Rolex Submariner selling for more than the CX won’t make it to the bottom of Rolex’s own national lake, but this watch selling for thousands LESS will.

You ARE an EPIC failure.

Posted on April 20th, 2010

Rrryan says:

My apologies for not responding sooner, but I’ve be extraordinarily busy of late and seem to have missed the notification email. I’ll try to post a more detailed response later but I wanted to address a couple of your points quickly:

1. Yes, I have been under fire in some faraway dusty places. We wore a variety of personal protective gear that came in handy on numerous occasions but a watch was not considered part of the protective system, and I can’t imagine how a half-pound monster like that would have been comfortable or useful. If there’s something in your tactical experience and expertise that might convince me otherwise, I’d be delighted to hear it.

2. I referred to the Switzerland in Europe, the one that has been officially neutral for the enormity of the most recent two centuries, the same ones in which the Swiss developed a reputation for fine watchmaking.

Again, thanks for your comment, and I’m glad you enjoyed reading the site.

Regards,

Ryan

Posted on April 24th, 2010

Noel says:

I’m with you Dean! It’s an awesome watch for sure. Besides, I want to know that if I drop it in the ocean for some reason, it’ll probably still be working when they find it. ” Whether its 20,000 feet underwater or 20,000 hours underwater, the CX military 20,000 will be there.
Noel McCully
Guinness World Record holder
“25,000 hours underwater in a diving helmet”

Posted on January 26th, 2017

Crispin says:

Who is DGB? Answer: A troll commenter in need of deleting:

http://www.cinema-suicide.com/2008/07/09/fear-itself-sucks/

And of course, in R’s own marketing literature, their famous watch, handsomely outperforms the 300 metre case rating, to further nullify DGB’s diatribe. Or worse am I stoking its ego?

Kudos to those Accutron commercials by the way ;)

Posted on May 24th, 2010

Rrryan says:

Yes, some quick Googling of his name reveals that DGB is a serial smear artist who seems to enjoy leaving a bad smell all over the net. I considered deleting his comments, but decided to leave them just so other search engine users might be able to see just what an irrational and unpleasant fellow he is.

Posted on May 29th, 2010

peter millan says:

I find DGB’s comment highly entertaining and educative. As far as i remember i have never seen or heard the noun “woman” used as an invective before.

Posted on June 11th, 2011

Alan Walker-Dutton says:

The only point to agree with the writer is the Military and Army issue. For a Country that didn’t take any part on WW1 or WW2 – they surely have a lot of Military products and brands. As pointed out in a famous film – in many centuries they have only been good at making the cuckoo clock.
In their defence, the Swiss male population take active army exercise every year, I believe, as old as 60.
I am male, my wrist is just over 8 inches and I love gadgets. I tried the watch on and, it is awesome. It is not the 3mm thick watch that one would wear at dinner parties but, even with a suit on, the watch is, for certain, an eye catcher.
There are really some ugly ***** ***** watches out there and I agree with Dean Grant on what he said about the article.
GREAT watches – SUPERB value for money. -full stop-

Posted on December 17th, 2010

CX Swiss Military 20,000ft Dive Watch | citizencalibrewatches says:

[…] The CX “Swiss Military” 20,000ft diver is rated to an astonishing and astonishingly unnecessary 6,000m of water resistance.  And much like the Rolex “Deep Sea Special” experimental design of the’50s- ’60s (namesake of the current Rolex Sea-Dweller Deep Sea), it’s about the size of a golf ball.  Rolex of course had the sense and restraint to limit the production to some half-dozen examples for the experiment only, and wasn’t so brash as to introduce it as an actual production model. The CX 20000ft.com website even has a video showing he watch being subjected to shotgun blasts, which the watch indeed survives relatively intact.  The advantage of such is quite beyond me though, as in all occasions when I’ve been subjected to gunfire and other assorted nastiness the thought of whether my watch might survive was usually the absolute furthest thing from my mind.  Irrational and pointless excess capability. […]

Posted on June 20th, 2011

P Buddery says:

So who is Dean Grant Baker? Can he dive to 6000m? Can he dive to 600m? According to the internet, the maximum depth attained by a scuba diver as of 2005 was 330m, and recreational divers are limited to 40m.

What is the fire truck hose test, Dean? Bernoulli’s equation, when calculated out for a jet of water travelling at high speed does not give a huge pressure increase. Buckle your Casio on a piece of wood and hit it with the fastest water you can arrange. Yes, all real watch collectors own Casios, at least in my version of the world.

And this stuff about girls? A girl and a great lump of metal on a wrist are two different things. Girls overly impressed by material possessions aren’t worth worrying about.

550 brake hp, misspelled as “break”? Oh Dean, if you own a car like this, take it out one night and floor the throttle. How long can you do this? Those things shooting past are trees or houses, not that it really matters at very high speed. So do you actually drive your car to its limits, Dean, or do you just trundle about slowly and enjoy the fact that your car is too scary/macho/manly? My car has 126 hp which – police permitting – gets used.

Concerning the watch, it appears to be impractical to me. Thick, no doubt heavy; it seems like a good idea spoilt by too much waterproofing. I like the 7750 movement, but this watch looks like a clown watch. Having said that, it can’t be too ridiculous or we would see rappers wearing them.

Posted on November 19th, 2012

Liam says:

message for the masses these watches are really horrible

Posted on July 25th, 2013

Liam Jones says:

Not so good watches here fellas

Posted on July 25th, 2013

happy chappy says:

I really don’t like this website

Posted on July 25th, 2013

happy chappy 2 says:

Not happy about these watches

Posted on July 25th, 2013

Stefan Vorkoetter says:

Gotta love the “Explosion” video. “High end watch manufacturers don’t subject their watches to real world tests. We’re about to change that.” Blowing up a watch is a real world test?

Posted on August 12th, 2013

Al says:

Come on folks, with all that’s going on in the world does it really matter that much about a watch. WHO CARES!!!!!!!

Posted on April 13th, 2014

Bubba Mudriple says:

What many people probably just don’t get when looking at watches like this is that even if one doesn’t dive, it’s nice to know there are still products out there that go above and beyond.
Watches like this, as impractical as they may seem for every day use, are still found interesting to a great many people as being symbolic of mans engineering capabilities. After all, we’re the earths only species that went to the moon. To create a watch capable of reaching depths of 20,000 feet may not be comparable, yet it’s still an engineering masterpiece in itself. It’s bulk is simply a byproduct of this.

Why put a crono movement in a dive watch? Will deep sea fish races be timed to a micro second? Why not put one in there? Overkill is the name of the game with watches like this. This is a “because we can” watch. Anyone who doesn’t like or understand that still needn’t sit up on some high horse and put it down.

That being said, the watch isn’t for me, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t for someone else. If the case were about 10mm thinner I’d consider one, but still find it pricey to my own standards, even though for what it is the price seems fair.

I actually prefer dive watches although I don’t dive, and regularly wear an old 150m Citizen 21j automatic lately. Thick and bulky in comparison to most dress or sport watches, dive watches still offer several advantages even if you don’t dive. To begin with, the screw down back and crown seal out moisture and keep cases air tight. I’ve been working on watches for years and those with screw down crowns generally seem to run longer before needing a CLA. Also, a screw down crown has less or no chance of snapping off of the watch. If you’ve ever busted the crown off a watch moving furniture as I havethen a dive watch may be for you. And finally, because my eyes aren’t the greatest, I find I can actually read the dials of most dive watches due to generally larger hands, markers and dials.

By the way, 550 horsepower aint nothing til you pop the clutch on an engine with 550 foot pounds of torque. There’s nothing like the feeling of all your internal organs becoming one. Anyone can drive fast.

Posted on March 24th, 2015