How fast is "too" fast?

[Wooddog44]

I recently received, as a fifth anniv. present from my wife, a K series SS Submariner. I love it and am not "complaining" but merely looking for info from those more knowledgeable.
As a test I synched it with an internet time site yesterday at noon and today, at noon, it had gained approx. 8 seconds.
Is that a lot, a little, nominal, a problem?
I know that the stated Rolex parameters are -1 to +5 seconds and that it can be calibrated to a greater level of accuracy if I send it to Rolex but to be honest, now that I have it, don't want to part with it even for a couple of weeks.
It is under warranty for a year but is that amount of time gain even worth worrying about?

[toph]

some would worry - it should be no more than +6 seconds. that is there claim so i would have it checked because if the timing is out- you must ask why?. go and have it regulated before the warranty is up

[Art161]

I would give it a few months to "settle down." If it's still running fast by more than 5 seconds per day, send it in for regulating.

[Tools]

Depends a great deal on the internet time site you used..

You should set it to a known time standard (such as WWV, or Time.gov) and take note of the change after about a week, divide by he number of days to get a better average of how it performs each 24 hrs..

I like to be within 5 seconds per day before I think about regulation and I prefer to be within 2.

I do have some older watches that are out a bit more than that, but no Rolex..

[ratae1950]

Nice gift. I'll forward the post to the missus.

[Marrk]

time.gov and TRF show the exact same time. Is that your understanding, Larry?


For the OP, if it is a new watch, doesn't the consensus say to let it wear in a little? Or am I talking Voodoo Watchonomics again?

Originally Posted by Tools

Depends a great deal on the internet time site you used..

You should set it to a known time standard (such as WWV, or Time.gov) and take note of the change after about a week, divide by he number of days to get a better average of how it performs each 24 hrs..

I like to be within 5 seconds per day before I think about regulation and I prefer to be within 2.

I do have some older watches that are out a bit more than that, but no Rolex..

[scottschoe]

Originally Posted by Marrk

time.gov and TRF show the exact same time. Is that your understanding, Larry?


For the OP, if it is a new watch, doesn't the consensus say to let it wear in a little? Or am I talking Voodoo Watchonomics again?

TRF time looks to be your specific computer, while time.gov is the 'official' time. As long as you keep the site you use constant, I see no problems.

[ROA]

Originally Posted by Tools

Depends a great deal on the internet time site you used..

You should set it to a known time standard (such as WWV, or Time.gov) and take note of the change after about a week, divide by he number of days to get a better average of how it performs each 24 hrs..

I like to be within 5 seconds per day before I think about regulation and I prefer to be within 2.

I do have some older watches that are out a bit more than that, but no Rolex..

i always see posts saying watch is fast/slow...if one says it is slow by 2 seconds per day, for example. does that mean it is 1 minute slow per month (2 times 30 days?) or does it mean at any point in time, watch is late by 2 secs? in my case, my SD is late by 2 secs then after a few days, 3 secs, then back to 2, etc...the lag does not accumulate on a daily basis...could u clarify what -2 means please?

[Wooddog44]

Thanks, I thought that might be a better gauge.
Checking today (Thursday) at noon it has picked up 13 seconds in 48 hours so "hovering" a bit above +6. Will see what it is on Tuesday of next week.

[DaveInLA]

My 3130 movement (Explorer I) really starts to speed up as the power reserve is dwindling down. For the first 24 hrs, it's only +2-3s, but over the next 16-20 hrs(watch stationary), it becomes +8 seconds total. I know a lot of other movements do this, but are Rolex movements known for this as well?

[Marrk]

Dave,

Your comment is extremely interesting to me because it raises the question of the relationship between the power reserve and the power coming directly off the rotor. I would like to know from which the movement draws its power.

BTW, my 14060m has the same calibre movement as the Expy I and I have not observed the same +/- phenomenon that you have observed.

Mark

Originally Posted by DaveInLA

My 3130 movement (Explorer I) really starts to speed up as the power reserve is dwindling down. For the first 24 hrs, it's only +2-3s, but over the next 16-20 hrs(watch stationary), it becomes +8 seconds total. I know a lot of other movements do this, but are Rolex movements known for this as well?

[Doug507]

Originally Posted by DaveInLA

My 3130 movement (Explorer I) really starts to speed up as the power reserve is dwindling down. For the first 24 hrs, it's only +2-3s, but over the next 16-20 hrs(watch stationary), it becomes +8 seconds total. I know a lot of other movements do this, but are Rolex movements known for this as well?

I find this possibility utterly fascinating, and your post utterly timely. I recently acquired a 14060M non-COSC (3130 movement) and I have been carefully monitoring its accuracy. THe first couple weeks I wore it 24/7 and it ran an average of 5.2 seconds fast per day. Since then, I've noticed it has started gaining more and more, up to 8 seconds/day now.

The only thing that's changed is that I have been wearing other watches some of the time, so my Sub sits on my dresser for hours. I couldn't figure out what was going on... until your post.

Is that what's going on here?

[Jedi]

Mark,

The rotor does not provide power to the movement in the way you're thinking (from how I interpret your post). The rotor provides wind to the mainspring each time it is activated by the movement of your wrist. It takes about 600 or so revolutions of the rotor to wind up the main spring.

The main spring is the power source, or where power is stored in the movement. As it unwinds, it drives the various wheels in the movement which then have hands connected to them so we can tell the time on the dial.

The main spring needs to be checked otherwise it will unwind in a matter of minutes. This checking is accomplished via the escapement. The balance spring when loaded by the pallet fork (driven by the escape wheel which takes power from the main spring), oscillates. In a Rolex movement, this is 28,800 times an hour or 8 beats a second.

The mainspring is optimised to deliver constant or linear power for around 24 hours after it's been wound. Time keeping would tend to suffer after this period if the watch is not wound, manually or otherwise as the main spring then starts to uncoil at a different torque level which then causes the movement to run quicker.

[Marrk]

Lee,

That's a brilliant and clear explanation. Thank you! I'm going to read it over and try to urge my simple brain toward understanding it.

In the meantime, does it make sense for me to ask: Why doesn't the rotor (assuming adequate rotor movement) bring the mainspring up to the capacity that it would have with a manual wind? Then, the watch could run at the efficiency that you attribute to the 24 hr. period after a manual wind.

Or am I yet again missing something?

Many thanks,

Mark

Originally Posted by Jedi

Mark,

The rotor does not provide power to the movement in the way you're thinking (from how I interpret your post). The rotor provides wind to the mainspring each time it is activated by the movement of your wrist. It takes about 600 or so revolutions of the rotor to wind up the main spring.

The main spring is the power source, or where power is stored in the movement. As it unwinds, it drives the various wheels in the movement which then have hands connected to them so we can tell the time on the dial.

The main spring needs to be checked otherwise it will unwind in a matter of minutes. This checking is accomplished via the escapement. The balance spring when loaded by the pallet fork (driven by the escape wheel which takes power from the main spring), oscillates. In a Rolex movement, this is 28,800 times an hour or 8 beats a second.

The mainspring is optimised to deliver constant or linear power for around 24 hours after it's been wound. Time keeping would tend to suffer after this period if the watch is not wound, manually or otherwise as the main spring then starts to uncoil at a different torque level which then causes the movement to run quicker.

[Jedi]

Mark,

If the watch starts out fully wound, say from manual winding, daily wear from say morning through to night, and an 'average' level of activity say walking, opening doors, driving, high fiving, dealing cards...you get my drift should be sufficient to keep the movement within optimal parameters. Lying it down for say 7 hours from bedtime till morning and then putting it on again should also keep it within optimal parameters.

[Andad]

The TRF clock takes its time from your computer clock and is only as accurate as your own time server and the update cycle that you have set it for. Best to sync you computer to a time server just before you check your Rolex or you will never know where you are. My computer clock goes out otftime sync faster than some of my watches.

[swatty]

Get a Seiko

Seriously, you can better than +8 secs, I'd get it regulated

[Jedi]

And I'd like to add that my trusty old SubDate isn't too trustworthy at the moment, running +8/day... it's going back in as it's under service warranty... just ... have... to.... find... the time....

[DaveInLA]

Sorry for being a little slow, I'm still a little unclear on whether Rolex movements speed up as power reserve dwindles. The Seiko 7S26, for example, is notorious for doing this. Mine will be +2s for the first day, and then will end up +20 seconds 3 days later when lightly worn.

[swatty]

Originally Posted by DaveInLA

Sorry for being a little slow, I'm still a little unclear on whether Rolex movements speed up as power reserve dwindles. The Seiko 7S26, for example, is notorious for doing this. Mine will be +2s for the first day, and then will end up +20 seconds 3 days later when lightly worn.

My experience is Rolex do the same , but maybe not as fast as that ,

[nko51]

If it was bought brand new from an AD, take it back and have him deal with it. The standard is -4 to +6 seconds per day.

[Z-Sub]

Originally Posted by nko51

If it was bought brand new from an AD, take it back and have him deal with it. The standard is -4 to +6 seconds per day.

Yes and that's the COSC's standard. However, Rolex has stricter standards and that's why they call Rolex "superlative" chronometers.

[stuttgart]

8 sec a day seems little off...

[JJ Irani]

For me, any Rolex more than 1 sec. fast per day is unacceptable....but then that's me!!

[diamondgirl]

+ or - 4 to 6 seconds a day is in acceptable range. If it is running 8 seconds fast I would have it checked out. It is a K serial which means Mid 2001. It is possible that it has not been overhauled so I would suggest having it looked at now while it is under the dealers warranty (it would not be under Rolex warranty at this point).

[DaveInLA]

Does the COSC certification only apply when the watch is worn regularly?

I've been tracking the accuracy for 60 hrs now (2 1/2 days exactly), and it's +12s. I haven't worn it, but I have wound it once so far. In summary, +2-3s after 24hrs, +6s over the NEXT 16-20hrs (still running on original PR), then I wound it. At 48hrs from when I started tracking it, itwas +10s, which is technically +5/day, but again, it did a lot better the first day than the second day (+7-8s).

[DaveInLA]

Just checked my Explorer I, +13 seconds after exactly 3 days (72 hrs). One handwind during this time. Could be better, but could be worse, I suppose.

[Doug507]

I recently acquired a Y-series 14060M (non-COSC) and have been carefully tracking its accuracy (3130 movement). When I wear it 24/7 it runs an average of 5.3 sec/day fast. Recently I began wearing it occasionally, and it runs 8 sec/day fast. I haven't wound it since I bought it. It's been driving me nuts...

Sooo... what am I doing wrong? Do I really need to wind it? This was neve an issue with my 1986 GMT Master II...

[Marrk]

I tracked my new Z-series 14060m COSC for 30 days. It lost an average of 2.11 seconds per day. I did not notice any speeding up or slowing down.

Originally Posted by Doug507

I recently acquired a Y-series 14060M (non-COSC) and have been carefully tracking its accuracy (3130 movement). When I wear it 24/7 it runs an average of 5.3 sec/day fast. Recently I began wearing it occasionally, and it runs 8 sec/day fast. I haven't wound it since I bought it. It's been driving me nuts...

Sooo... what am I doing wrong? Do I really need to wind it? This was neve an issue with my 1986 GMT Master II...

[Art161]

Originally Posted by Doug507

I recently acquired a Y-series 14060M (non-COSC) and have been carefully tracking its accuracy (3130 movement). When I wear it 24/7 it runs an average of 5.3 sec/day fast. Recently I began wearing it occasionally, and it runs 8 sec/day fast. I haven't wound it since I bought it. It's been driving me nuts...

Sooo... what am I doing wrong? Do I really need to wind it? This was neve an issue with my 1986 GMT Master II...

Maybe you are doing something wrong when you are not wearing it. It will run faster if you leave it face up. It will run slower if you leave it on edge with the crown down. It will run even slower if you leave it on edge with the crown up.