ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Jackxv · 23 March 2010, 05:10 AM

My heart was broken today :

The new Tudor Chrono is equipped with a Eta 2892 with a DD 2054 module.

The watch is assembled and testes in the Rolex facility.

I'll pass on this one, don't like the module and its service possibilities.

Nicko · 23 March 2010, 05:19 AM

So, I'm not quite sure I understand. Is this a bad thing becuse of the ETA Movement?

karmatp · 23 March 2010, 05:23 AM

It is a Tudor, not a Rolex. Were you expecting a Rolex movement also, that is the reason they are so much cheaper. Nothing wrong with a ETA movement IMHO, solid movements.

ParisDakarBmw · 23 March 2010, 05:25 AM

Confused

Noonan · 23 March 2010, 05:26 AM

I'd prefer that to a modified 7750.

Jackxv · 23 March 2010, 05:29 AM

The 2892 is a good movement but the module is almost unservicable.
When there are defects in it it's easier to change it than service it.

My indepedant watch maker will not service a module movement.

Jack

Nicko · 23 March 2010, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackxv

The 2892 is a good movement but the module is almost unservicable.
When there are defects in it it's easier to change it than service it.

My indepedant watch maker will not service a module movement.

Jack

Thanks for the clarification...

cronin · 23 March 2010, 05:32 AM

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

Nicko · 23 March 2010, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronin

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

Prince · 23 March 2010, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronin

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

LOL! That sounds like a RADO to me!

Colorao · 23 March 2010, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronin

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

x2!!!!!!!! Yeah

CoopJr · 23 March 2010, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronin

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

AstroBoy · 23 March 2010, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronin

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

Now...That's an idea!

a very small hamspster i bet!

Rscmaine · 23 March 2010, 06:10 AM

I had a Doxa with a 2892 movement that was as accurate as get out. If the modular aspect is that big a concern you can buy and entire spare 2892 movement from Otto Frei for $186 and simple throw away that entire module every 5 years.

Sounds pretty simple to me.

Jackxv · 23 March 2010, 06:15 AM

The problem is not the 2892, that pretty reliable. The module is not, that is the extra plate produced by Dubois et Depraz.

Jack

GMTcrazy · 23 March 2010, 06:34 AM

So how much does a new module cost, since you say you can't service it???

GT

zillap · 23 March 2010, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronin

I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

DRAWTOOL · 23 March 2010, 05:40 AM

This is all about as clear as mud to me, what exactly is a DD 2054 module?

Jackxv · 23 March 2010, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRAWTOOL

This is all about as clear as mud to me, what exactly is a DD 2054 module?

The Eta 2892 is a perfect normal, low profile, automatic high beat movement but not a chronograph.

On top op this movement there's a extra plate with a chronograph parts placed on it.
This is a completely different idea of a chronograph movement in comparisson to a 7750 or the high end chronograph movements with column wheel.

I wasn't expecting a Rolex movement but neither a Omega Speedmaster reduced one.....

The Valjoux 7750 is much more reliable as the 2892 with DD.
All the cheaper Swatch group auto Chrono's use this movement and module.

Offcourse the watch is assembled and QC by Rolex in their headquarters that might be the part to pull over potential buyers.

Redirecting the counters on Valjoux 775X and the date at 6 would've been virtually impossible.

Jack

mpkRolex · 25 March 2010, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackxv

The Eta 2892 is a perfect normal, low profile, automatic high beat movement but not a chronograph.

On top op this movement there's a extra plate with a chronograph parts placed on it.
This is a completely different idea of a chronograph movement in comparisson to a 7750 or the high end chronograph movements with column wheel.

I wasn't expecting a Rolex movement but neither a Omega Speedmaster reduced one.....

The Valjoux 7750 is much more reliable as the 2892 with DD.
All the cheaper Swatch group auto Chrono's use this movement and module.

Offcourse the watch is assembled and QC by Rolex in their headquarters that might be the part to pull over potential buyers.

Redirecting the counters on Valjoux 775X and the date at 6 would've been virtually impossible.

Jack

How does it compare with the 4130 on the Daytona in terms of accuracy and stability?

Jackxv · 26 March 2010, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpkRolex

How does it compare with the 4130 on the Daytona in terms of accuracy and stability?

The 4130 is one of the best chrono movements around.
Very, Very reliable and serviceble.

It can compete with AP, Jaeger, PP and all the other high end chrono's.

Jack

Tylden Reed · 26 March 2010, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackxv

The Eta 2892 is a perfect normal, low profile, automatic high beat movement but not a chronograph.

On top op this movement there's a extra plate with a chronograph parts placed on it.
This is a completely different idea of a chronograph movement in comparisson to a 7750 or the high end chronograph movements with column wheel.

I wasn't expecting a Rolex movement but neither a Omega Speedmaster reduced one.....

The Valjoux 7750 is much more reliable as the 2892 with DD.
All the cheaper Swatch group auto Chrono's use this movement and module.

Offcourse the watch is assembled and QC by Rolex in their headquarters that might be the part to pull over potential buyers.

Redirecting the counters on Valjoux 775X and the date at 6 would've been virtually impossible.

Jack

Hi Jack. I've often fully serviced both the ETA and the Val. 7750 ( I own a Longines with Cal 7751 - with moon phase ) and would agree with you that, when it comes to servicing, the 7750 is far superior to the ETA 2892 + DD module. In my opinion it is also stronger. Tylden.

acce1999 · 26 March 2010, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tylden Reed

Hi Jack. I've often fully serviced both the ETA and the Val. 7750 ( I own a Longines with Cal 7751 - with moon phase ) and would agree with you that, when it comes to servicing, the 7750 is far superior to the ETA 2892 + DD module. In my opinion it is also stronger. Tylden.

Tylden, could you elaborate a bit on "stronger"? Do you find it to be stronger in terms of capability to take shocks, or in longevity/intervals between service (parts not breaking as easy), or in terms of power reserve, or in terms of accuracy/consistency? (Perhaps all of them)

Best,

A

Jackxv · 27 July 2010, 07:51 AM

The first problems with the Tudor have appeared in Germany.

the above posts.....

Jack

outtatime · 23 March 2010, 06:58 AM

I'm in the camp of 'hampster wheel' too...I really could care less when it comes to what movement is in my watch, as long as it keeps excellent time, is an automatic and, well...are those two things!

mpkRolex · 25 March 2010, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outtatime

I'm in the camp of 'hampster wheel' too...I really could care less when it comes to what movement is in my watch, as long as it keeps excellent time, is an automatic and, well...are those two things!

The hampster will go on for two years with warranty.

Soon after two years if the hampster decides to take a break you are out of luck.

mfer · 25 March 2010, 04:56 AM

I don't get it? Why didn't they just use a Val 7750? Disappointed.

TheBluePrince · 25 March 2010, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfer

I don't get it? Why didn't they just use a Val 7750? Disappointed.

Because the chrono layout and functionality is wrong.

If these things break it's gonna be the RSC way to fix them or no-way. And after the 2 year warranty that's gonna be £££ i recks.

Safetrends · 25 March 2010, 07:18 AM

Tudor = Tudor

Rolex = Rolex

Tudor + Rolex = Tulex

Rolex + Tudor= Rudor

AstroBoy · 26 March 2010, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Safetrends

Tudor = Tudor

Rolex = Rolex

Tudor + Rolex = Tulex

Rolex + Tudor= Rudor

...a poet!...

23 March 2010, 05:10 AM	#1
Jackxv "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 969	Broken heart My heart was broken today : The new Tudor Chrono is equipped with a Eta 2892 with a DD 2054 module. The watch is assembled and testes in the Rolex facility. I'll pass on this one, don't like the module and its service possibilities.

23 March 2010, 05:23 AM	#3
karmatp "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Real Name: Trevor Location: Arizona Posts: 5,740	It is a Tudor, not a Rolex. Were you expecting a Rolex movement also, that is the reason they are so much cheaper. Nothing wrong with a ETA movement IMHO, solid movements. __________________ My grails:

23 March 2010, 05:29 AM	#6
Jackxv "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 969	Speedmaster The 2892 is a good movement but the module is almost unservicable. When there are defects in it it's easier to change it than service it. My indepedant watch maker will not service a module movement. Jack

23 March 2010, 06:10 AM	#14
Rscmaine "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Nat Parkinson Location: Maine, USA Watch: me pull a rabbit.. Posts: 1,196	I had a Doxa with a 2892 movement that was as accurate as get out. If the modular aspect is that big a concern you can buy and entire spare 2892 movement from Otto Frei for $186 and simple throw away that entire module every 5 years. Sounds pretty simple to me. __________________ When the alien spaceships actually landed, to everyone's surprise, it turned out that the world's governments had not been hiding anything. They were just as clueless as the rest of us!

23 March 2010, 06:15 AM	#15
Jackxv "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 969	Not.. The problem is not the 2892, that pretty reliable. The module is not, that is the extra plate produced by Dubois et Depraz. Jack

23 March 2010, 05:19 AM	#2
Nicko Banned Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Not here anymore Posts: 4,787	So, I'm not quite sure I understand. Is this a bad thing becuse of the ETA Movement?

23 March 2010, 05:25 AM	#4
ParisDakarBmw Banned Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Paul Location: New Haven, CT Watch: 116610 Sub-C Posts: 6,552	Confused

23 March 2010, 05:26 AM	#5
Noonan Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: US Watch: 3570.50 Posts: 2,156	I'd prefer that to a modified 7750.

23 March 2010, 05:32 AM	#8
cronin "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Drew Location: . Posts: 299	I dont care if there is a hampster on a wheel inside I still love that watch!

23 March 2010, 06:34 AM	#16
GMTcrazy Banned Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Makati/FL Posts: 301	So how much does a new module cost, since you say you can't service it??? GT

27 July 2010, 07:51 AM	#24
Jackxv "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 969	Problems The first problems with the Tudor have appeared in Germany. the above posts..... Jack

23 March 2010, 06:58 AM	#25
outtatime "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jon Location: Toledo, OH Watch: Deepsea Posts: 1,136	I'm in the camp of 'hampster wheel' too...I really could care less when it comes to what movement is in my watch, as long as it keeps excellent time, is an automatic and, well...are those two things!

25 March 2010, 04:56 AM	#27
mfer "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Real Name: Mik Location: USA Posts: 13,724	I don't get it? Why didn't they just use a Val 7750? Disappointed. __________________ member#3242

25 March 2010, 07:18 AM	#29
Safetrends Banned Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: David Walz Location: San Diego CA USA Watch: my hand. :) Posts: 9,156	Tudor = Tudor Rolex = Rolex Tudor + Rolex = Tulex Rolex + Tudor= Rudor

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)