Service question

[Indy27]

Is it common for a Rolex service center to keep the old parts they replace?

[ma2045]

Yes. Rolex isn't like Omega which allows you to see the work that has gone into your watch by the old parts returned. With Rolex you have to pay for a new part whether it's advised or mandatory and they still keep the old part even though its your property. And they give you a cheap laminated 2 year warranty card where as other brands give proper plastic cards
The swines.

[Indy27]

Seems unfair, I simply want them back as proof of what has been replaced should I decide to sell at a later date.

[ma2045]

Well a service card from a RSC is the highest level of proof that it's been brought back as close as possible to factory spec. Make sure you get a paper receipt that'll give a break down of parts replaced however. Something I had to pester for when mine went in for service.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Indy27

Seems unfair, I simply want them back as proof of what has been replaced should I decide to sell at a later date.

Showing somebody used parts isn't proof of anything, except that you have some old parts.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Tools

Showing somebody used parts isn't proof of anything, except that you have some old parts.

Returning as opposed to showing the old parts does lend weight to to claimed scope of work.
I understand your rationale, but to take your argument to its ultimate conclusion. Eventually one will run out of parts if they're pulling them out of a bin if they're returned.
As Omega do it as a matter of policy it lends another level of transparency to the service offered. After all how else can one justify the scope of work even if it doesn't stand as testament to the quality of the work performed
In that regard it's similar to going to a local mechanic.

A long time ago, the industry was treated with suspicion because there were all sorts of outcomes with watch servicing just as it was and still is with car servicing and repairs. Especially given the fact that it was customary to ask another person if they knew of a good watchmaker when their watch was acting up.
I suppose it a legacy of days gone by when cars were serviced every 3000 Miles and watches were serviced every 3 years religiously.

In contrast, we must simply trust that Rolex has done "something" or anything other than the claim they serviced a watch.
The level of transparency matters

[J_1964]

Originally Posted by Tools

Showing somebody used parts isn't proof of anything, except that you have some old parts.

Good Point.

[ltmgeller]

Yes, I believe some will return them but charge you more for the parts they do replace.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Indy27

Seems unfair, I simply want them back as proof of what has been replaced should I decide to sell at a later date.

In practice you won't need proof.
Firstly, a service by Rolex along with the 2 year Rolex service warranty card ought to be all the "proof" one could need that the watch has been maintained in a propper fashion. A copy of the receipt will certainly underpin that
Secondly, movement parts are replaced on a routine basis as part of a service.
Anything else which may be a result of accidental damage and outside of the normal quote will be listed in the quote which you will receive prior to accepting the scope of work and giving the go ahead.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Dirt

In practice you won't need proof.
Firstly, a service by Rolex along with the 2 year Rolex service warranty card ought to be all the "proof" one could need that the watch has been maintained in a propper fashion. A copy of the receipt will certainly underpin that
Secondly, movement parts are replaced on a routine basis as part of a service.
Anything else which may be a result of accidental damage and outside of the normal quote will be listed in the quote which you will receive prior to accepting the scope of work and giving the go ahead.

Have to agree afraid today there are many Rolex hysteria things on the net that bare no reality to the real world. As you state all anyone would need after any RSC service is the service warranty irrespective if any worn out parts were changed or not.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by Tools

Showing somebody used parts isn't proof of anything, except that you have some old parts.

This.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by padi56

Have to agree afraid today there are many Rolex hysteria things on the net that bare no reality to the real world. As you state all anyone would need after any RSC service is the service warranty irrespective if any worn out parts were changed or not.

And this.

[ThatSubGuy]

Alright, so we replaced a broken camshaft sensor in your vehicle - should be all good now.

"Can I please have the broken parts you replaced.. I want to keep them"

[UltraVires]

There is the 'Ship of Theseus' angle with having something like a watch repaired. Having all the components of something that has been with you for what might be a lifetime seems like a relatively reasonable thing to ask for, even if they might be spent or broken.

My first 'nice' watch (sadly not a Rolex) was a gift from my parents, over time, as I have had it serviced, I have thought about whether there will come a point where it is not so much the watch that they got me, as the case that they got me with a substantially new movement inside. I'm not so sentimental as to want to keep the parts, but I can see it as being an issue for others, if they wanted to keep the original watch they had as complete as it possibly could be.

[Toms]

Originally Posted by Indy27

Seems unfair, I simply want them back as proof of what has been replaced should I decide to sell at a later date.

I always feel fortunate that Rolex accepts my money, and I try not to burden them with my inconsequential desires.