At what point do you worry about accuracy?

[GGGMT]

Originally Posted by rcwatchcollector

Yeah I’m talking Rolex specifically. I’ve recently gotten into AP. The time accuracy is horrible. I’ve gotten used to Rolex performance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What’s the specs on AP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rcwatchcollector]

Originally Posted by GGGMT

What’s the specs on AP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by GGGMT

What’s the specs on AP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+3 sec, +/-5per day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGGMT]

Originally Posted by rcwatchcollector

+3 sec, +/-5per day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting. Are you me AP falling outside that spec


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rcwatchcollector]

Originally Posted by GGGMT

Interesting. Are you me AP falling outside that spec


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My new 43 mm offshore is 15 to 18 sec fast per day. I just sent it in for service. Had it for 3 weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kenny G]

I’m not really picky about it since I have multiple watches but mine have been within spec.

If they weren’t, I still wouldn’t want the watch opened unless it was a problem…maybe around 15-20s/day I’d consider it…

[vliberman]

Daily accuracy under the conditions of intended use is the most important aspect of mechanical watches to me. Nothing to do with caring about a few or 10 seconds per day, rather the sign of craftmanship to me. I could care less about hand finishing of movement or other such jazz that watchmakers often use to mask inability to produce accurate timepieces. Between my wife and i we own 5 Rolexes and they are impeccable.

[kane818]

if it was worse than +/0 5s per day i would start to care. but that's only if i ever actually noticed it

[GGGMT]

Originally Posted by rcwatchcollector

My new 43 mm offshore is 15 to 18 sec fast per day. I just sent it in for service. Had it for 3 weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Eeesh. That’s gotta be anomaly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[joli160]

I count in minutes and not in seconds.
When about 3 or 4 minutes wrong I normally adjust it.

[Goatrope]

10-15 seconds. I only have one Rolex at the moment. If I happen to glance at the second hand while it's approaching 12, I'll peek at my phone for a reference. If both devices advance to the same minute at about the same time, I'm good. If they're out of sync by more than 10-15 sec, I reset the watch. About once per week I need to reset it, if it's the only watch I'm wearing that week, otherwise I'm rotating over to another watch, and will reset when I'm restarting the Rolex in a few days.

[Andad]

At what point do you worry about accuracy?

11AM every second Sunday.

[RRGHOST1]

My Longines Hydroconquest was a better timekeeper than my Pepsi GMT or my TT Blue Sub. Never been that bothered about it tbh !

[KeobNepo]

I brought mine in when I noticed inconsistancy. The watch was running behind a lot, but also winning back seconds in less then an hour. RS did a full service and picked it up last 27 October, so that's 12 days ago. Since then I gained 7 seconds, which is more then fine.

Up to +/- 5 seconds a day would not bother me.

[Driver8]

Got to be honest folks, but I do find some of these responses quite curious.

I really don't understand why accuracy apparently isn't important to many people. Part of the reason for buying a Chronometer-rated watch (in fact, it's the ONLY reason to buy a Chronometer-rated watch) is for timekeeping reasons. You pay a chunk extra for that certification after all. For me, a watch's timekeeping is just as important as the finishing on the dial, or the quality of the clasp mechanism, etc. In fact, it should really be even more important as telling the time is a watch's sole purpose. It's all part of the package that you're paying for.

In my opinion, if you get annoyed if there are dial printing issues, or if the hands don't all line up at noon, or if the clasp is a bit loose (and let's be honest, why wouldn't you!?), then you should be equally annoyed if a watch is overly out of spec with regards to timekeeping. Yes there are obviously far more important things in life than a watch's timekeeping, but the same can be said of any material object. But the fact remains that things you buy should be expected to perform as advertised - nothing more, nothing less.

So with regards to Rolex watches I expect them to keep, on average, to +/-2 secs per day. Why? Because that's what they're advertised at, and that's what I paid for. Now obviously due to the hassle and time involved with sending a watch to RSC for regulation, then I do accept slightly outside of that (i.e. COSC or thereabouts), but when you get past that (and especially when you start getting close to +/- 10 secs a day), it's completely unacceptable. JMO.

[Mystro]

FYI: +or- 10 seconds a day is deplorable as even the most pedestrian automatic can be regulated within those standards.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Mystro

FYI: +or- 10 seconds a day is deplorable as even the most pedestrian automatic can be regulated within those standards.

Well even the Chinese made Seagull ST 19 movement when correctly regulated can run well inside COSC spec even the new Rolex spec cost of movement under $100.

[joli160]

Originally Posted by Driver8

Got to be honest folks, but I do find some of these responses quite curious.

I really don't understand why accuracy apparently isn't important to many people. Part of the reason for buying a Chronometer-rated watch (in fact, it's the ONLY reason to buy a Chronometer-rated watch) is for timekeeping reasons. You pay a chunk extra for that certification after all. For me, a watch's timekeeping is just as important as the finishing on the dial, or the quality of the clasp mechanism, etc. In fact, it should really be even more important as telling the time is a watch's sole purpose. It's all part of the package that you're paying for.

In my opinion, if you get annoyed if there are dial printing issues, or if the hands don't all line up at noon, or if the clasp is a bit loose (and let's be honest, why wouldn't you!?), then you should be equally annoyed if a watch is overly out of spec with regards to timekeeping. Yes there are obviously far more important things in life than a watch's timekeeping, but the same can be said of any material object. But the fact remains that things you buy should be expected to perform as advertised - nothing more, nothing less.

So with regards to Rolex watches I expect them to keep, on average, to +/-2 secs per day. Why? Because that's what they're advertised at, and that's what I paid for. Now obviously due to the hassle and time involved with sending a watch to RSC for regulation, then I do accept slightly outside of that (i.e. COSC or thereabouts), but when you get past that (and especially when you start getting close to +/- 10 secs a day), it's completely unacceptable. JMO.

For me a watch is just a beautiful engineered piece of jewelry. My expectations are different.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by padi56

Well even the Chinese made Seagull ST 19 movement when correctly regulated can run well inside COSC spec even the new Rolex spec cost of movement under $100.

I know. Even my basic ETA2892-2 in my Bell & Ross 03-92 military ceramic keeps a +3 a day after being regulated by Rikki.

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by joli160

For me a watch is just a beautiful engineered piece of jewelry. My expectations are different.

I agree about beautiful engineering, but for me the acid test of it being beautifully engineered is it doing what it's supposed to do, both in looks and in function. I guess we're all different though.

[alphadweller]

These days I'm fine with +10/-10 s/d. I rotate, so no big deal. Beyond that bracket, it's a visit to the RSC.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by rcwatchcollector

...At what point do you worry about accuracy?...

Usually around 5:00 pm.

[matthew P]

My two daily wear watches get worn I. Rotation enough that they never stop.
For them I monitor the accuracy and adjust once a month just to check where they are at.
With resting position adjustment both end up about +\- 8 seconds per month but they are usually fast. As long as they are consistently within that envelope I’m happy with performance and assuming they don’t need a service.
Rest of the month I barely check accuracy.
And in my other pieces….. vintage or dress I just set wear/ put back away with out checking


..Explorer & Spring Diver - I’m just here for the photos..

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by padi56

Well even the Chinese made Seagull ST 19 movement when correctly regulated can run well inside COSC spec even the new Rolex spec cost of movement under $100.

Originally Posted by Mystro

I know. Even my basic ETA2892-2 in my Bell & Ross 03-92 military ceramic keeps a +3 a day after being regulated by Rikki.

Exactly. And that's why I don't think it's unreasonable to expect our Rolexes to be regulated as such, and thus conform to the factory stated tolerances.

One of my most accurate watches is my Ginault Ocean Rover 2 that runs an exceptionally well-regulated elaboré grade SW200. About +0.5 secs/per day on average.

[Calatrava r]

Every modern watch should run within + or - 3-4 seconds a day, regardless of the cost.

[Fahoo Forays]

Originally Posted by Driver8

Got to be honest folks, but I do find some of these responses quite curious.

I really don't understand why accuracy apparently isn't important to many people. Part of the reason for buying a Chronometer-rated watch (in fact, it's the ONLY reason to buy a Chronometer-rated watch) is for timekeeping reasons. You pay a chunk extra for that certification after all. For me, a watch's timekeeping is just as important as the finishing on the dial, or the quality of the clasp mechanism, etc. In fact, it should really be even more important as telling the time is a watch's sole purpose. It's all part of the package that you're paying for.

In my opinion, if you get annoyed if there are dial printing issues, or if the hands don't all line up at noon, or if the clasp is a bit loose (and let's be honest, why wouldn't you!?), then you should be equally annoyed if a watch is overly out of spec with regards to timekeeping. Yes there are obviously far more important things in life than a watch's timekeeping, but the same can be said of any material object. But the fact remains that things you buy should be expected to perform as advertised - nothing more, nothing less.

So with regards to Rolex watches I expect them to keep, on average, to +/-2 secs per day. Why? Because that's what they're advertised at, and that's what I paid for. Now obviously due to the hassle and time involved with sending a watch to RSC for regulation, then I do accept slightly outside of that (i.e. COSC or thereabouts), but when you get past that (and especially when you start getting close to +/- 10 secs a day), it's completely unacceptable. JMO.

This, all day. It's not a Casio.

[Gab27]

I expect it to perform as-advertised or close to as-advertised, with the understanding that there can be some deviation in performance based on individual usage conditions. In the case of Rolex, their testing methodology for +2/-2 is designed to simulate real world wear, and so I think it is reasonable to expect the watch to perform somewhere close to this, or at least within COSC tolerance specs. My watch does this and has done it for the last 2.5 years of daily wear and so I am quite happy with it.

I don't think it is unreasonable to expect something to come relatively close to meeting its advertised specifications.

[codecow]

Originally Posted by rcwatchcollector

For a Rolex. Anything past 10sec day is annoying and I would get it serviced. Luckily all my Rolex watches are within 1 sec. Amazing. This is what truly impressed me about Rolex. The sheer accuracy. I don’t see how they do it making so many watches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you like that and you think it’s really impressive you’re missing out.

https://www.citizenwatch-global.com/...100/index.html

[Smobews]

Originally Posted by Driver8

Got to be honest folks, but I do find some of these responses quite curious.

I really don't understand why accuracy apparently isn't important to many people. Part of the reason for buying a Chronometer-rated watch (in fact, it's the ONLY reason to buy a Chronometer-rated watch) is for timekeeping reasons. You pay a chunk extra for that certification after all. For me, a watch's timekeeping is just as important as the finishing on the dial, or the quality of the clasp mechanism, etc. In fact, it should really be even more important as telling the time is a watch's sole purpose. It's all part of the package that you're paying for.

In my opinion, if you get annoyed if there are dial printing issues, or if the hands don't all line up at noon, or if the clasp is a bit loose (and let's be honest, why wouldn't you!?), then you should be equally annoyed if a watch is overly out of spec with regards to timekeeping. Yes there are obviously far more important things in life than a watch's timekeeping, but the same can be said of any material object. But the fact remains that things you buy should be expected to perform as advertised - nothing more, nothing less.

So with regards to Rolex watches I expect them to keep, on average, to +/-2 secs per day. Why? Because that's what they're advertised at, and that's what I paid for. Now obviously due to the hassle and time involved with sending a watch to RSC for regulation, then I do accept slightly outside of that (i.e. COSC or thereabouts), but when you get past that (and especially when you start getting close to +/- 10 secs a day), it's completely unacceptable. JMO.

Exactly!

[Garry1]

I'm not overly concerned about accuracy because I rotate my watches, but hence it works +/- a minute a day that's fine by me.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

I’ve never reached a point where I’ve had to worry about accuracy. I have a few winders and watches in active rotation spend some time on those but probably no more than a few weeks at a time, except for my 226570 which I’ve pledged to keep running indefinitely specifically to see if it presents with any symptoms. Everything else gets set when it comes out of the box and stops when it goes back in the box. I check accuracy against a time app every few days while wearing and have never observed any uncharacteristic variations on any watch (except for one ETA driven Panerai, fixed with a service). After twenty-four years of Rolex ownership and eight years of active acquisition everything’s good so far.