Thoughts on Preventative Service

[dkg1616]

Originally Posted by dafuture

Glad I asked, this has certainly been informative. The Explorer is definitely staying with me until it stops doing its job.

Thanks all!

Great choice!

[blue lion]

I figure if I keep my watches (and vehicles) serviced regularly they will serve me well.

[lexmann]

The Rolex manager at one of the AD's in Vancouver says that only when the watch is running very slow then it's time to get it serviced. Because the lubricant Rolex uses now are much better in quality.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by 77T

I realize it is commonly accepted that Rolex has done this over time. But can you point us to a written guarantee?

I only know of government regulations (e.g. 10 years here in USA) - but have not seen a written guarantee by Rolex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Short answer is no I can’t.

I have seen/heard it during presentations while at Rolex and as you say it is commonly accepted as well.

But it’s fair to say the ‘guarantee’ is little more than their word. Parts will run out when they run out. That could be sooner or a little later. But I don’t doubt that they mean what they tell their watchmaker network.

[VicLeChic]

An overhaul will take care of anything broken due to wear and tear for a flat fee which defeats the idea of preventative maintenance as opposed to a car for instance where not changing the oil could break the engine and write off the car.

[77T]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

Short answer is no I can’t.

I have seen/heard it during presentations while at Rolex and as you say it is commonly accepted as well.

But it’s fair to say the ‘guarantee’ is little more than their word. Parts will run out when they run out. That could be sooner or a little later. But I don’t doubt that they mean what they tell their watchmaker network.

Thanks - I agree Rolex has performed well in this area. And a track record is what counts.

My guess is the DJ is the longest lasting model still in current production, and the widest owned model globally - which will have some parts available for even more than 30 years. As long as the demand for parts stays strong there is a motive to keep making them for the repair centers and parts account holders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Headshrinker]

My first nice watch was purchased while I was a senior in high school. That was more than forty years ago and my Omega Moon Watch still runs very well.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by 77T

Thanks - I agree Rolex has performed well in this area. And a track record is what counts.

My guess is the DJ is the longest lasting model still in current production, and the widest owned model globally - which will have some parts available for even more than 30 years. As long as the demand for parts stays strong there is a motive to keep making them for the repair centers and parts account holders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is true to an extent. Take the 30xx series. It is highly likely their stock will extend beyond the 30 year mark. But it is unlikely they will produce parts indefinitely (particularly since they actively say they won’t).

The 31xx series is about to be retired so the 30 year count down will start on that, and in just under 30 years the 32xx is likely to be replaced. They can’t keep everything historic in production as well as constantly innovating new calibres.

To come full circle, this is why preventative maintenance is a good thing on watches that are of a certain age. Once parts are gone they are gone.

[SN13]

The only time I ever opted for preventative maintenance was on a working watch that was 27 years old and had never been serviced...

[Halitosis]

When I took my 8 year old GMT in for a service (purchased second hand but keeping good time) the AD gave me a funny look and asked twice if I'm sure I want it serviced... I now have a new approach to servicing!

[BT1985]

Once it hits the 10 year mark I will get a service. Not a hard and fast rule by any means but just a good round number that works for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

This is true to an extent. Take the 30xx series. It is highly likely their stock will extend beyond the 30 year mark. But it is unlikely they will produce parts indefinitely (particularly since they actively say they won’t).



The 31xx series is about to be retired so the 30 year count down will start on that, and in just under 30 years the 32xx is likely to be replaced. They can’t keep everything historic in production as well as constantly innovating new calibres.



To come full circle, this is why preventative maintenance is a good thing on watches that are of a certain age. Once parts are gone they are gone.

Excellent points.

Just an idea for discussion’s sake alone. Preventative maintenance costs over the next 30 years is costly. Perhaps $3000 using today’s routine costs.

Rolex doesn’t sell “crash kits” to owners (a crash kit is a collection of routine overhaul parts plus the key gears, pinions, barrel, etc. - the ones probe to damage).

So would it be more cost effective for owners of the older models to buy a 30xx or 31xx parts movement off eBay and stock it?

Here’s why I ask...

I faced this dilemma while resurrecting my Dad’s 50+ y.o. Omega Seamaster. Omega no longer made the parts my watchmaker needed. I found a working movement of the same caliber and bought it from a watchmaker.

Even if Omega had been still making the parts, my watchmaker said the costs would’ve been 2x of what I paid for the donor movement.

While this idea seems strange, I know vintage and antique car restorers routinely harvest and stockpile parts like that at swap meets etc. maybe a business model lurks underneath the burgeoning vintage watch collector demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[toxicavenger]

If it is broke, fix it. If it is not then wear it.

[77T]

Originally Posted by toxicavenger

If it is broke, fix it. If it is not then wear it.

Pretty much...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Car32]

Originally Posted by 77T

Excellent points.

Just an idea for discussion’s sake alone. Preventative maintenance costs over the next 30 years is costly. Perhaps $3000 using today’s routine costs.

Rolex doesn’t sell “crash kits” to owners (a crash kit is a collection of routine overhaul parts plus the key gears, pinions, barrel, etc. - the ones probe to damage).

So would it be more cost effective for owners of the older models to buy a 30xx or 31xx parts movement off eBay and stock it?

Here’s why I ask...

I faced this dilemma while resurrecting my Dad’s 50+ y.o. Omega Seamaster. Omega no longer made the parts my watchmaker needed. I found a working movement of the same caliber and bought it from a watchmaker.

Even if Omega had been still making the parts, my watchmaker said the costs would’ve been 2x of what I paid for the donor movement.

While this idea seems strange, I know vintage and antique car restorers routinely harvest and stockpile parts like that at swap meets etc. maybe a business model lurks underneath the burgeoning vintage watch collector demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Very interesting discussion and something I always wondered about given the popular notion of handing down a Rolex (or any mechanical) to the next generation, which I would like to do. What happens in 50 years when there’s no parts? Doesn’t the value proposition of treating a mechanical like an heirloom fall apart because of that? Given Patek’s marketing slogan of being a caretaker for the next generation rather than an owner, do they have some kind of guarantee on part availability?

It’s one reason I’m attracted to Rolex, I figure because they’re an independent foundation, the chances of them being around and having parts in 50+ years is much higher than any of the corporate owned brands.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by blue lion

I figure if I keep my watches (and vehicles) serviced regularly they will serve me well.

This is a factor that can't be ignored.

It comes down to personal preferences and getting the BBC alliance right with what one can afford.
The only down side to more regular servicing is the potential for some damage to occur to visible components.
In my experience this has never happened (that I know of) to any of my Rolex watches when placed into the RSC's care.
It's always been some other issue that's not normally discussed on the forums, which has eventually been dealt with to mutual satisfaction by the original RSC, or another.

With my daily wearer DSSD, it has not been polished despite having one service under its belt and in all likelihood may not be polished until after another couple of services.
It's already scratched gouged and dinged as it is from living a very happy but full life so I wouldn't notice any further minor marks on the case from the RSC. Even if I looked that closely at it.
I'm just happy it's working just fine

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by Car32

Very interesting discussion and something I always wondered about given the popular notion of handing down a Rolex (or any mechanical) to the next generation, which I would like to do. What happens in 50 years when there’s no parts? Doesn’t the value proposition of treating a mechanical like an heirloom fall apart because of that? Given Patek’s marketing slogan of being a caretaker for the next generation rather than an owner, do they have some kind of guarantee on part availability?

It’s one reason I’m attracted to Rolex, I figure because they’re an independent foundation, the chances of them being around and having parts in 50+ years is much higher than any of the corporate owned brands.

Many brands, and Patek are one of them guarantee to repair any watch they have ever made. If parts are no longer available they simply make them. You can imagine that there is a but coming. The cost associated with this is more than substantial. Which is again why preventative maintenance is not a terrible idea on a watch that contains a discontinued calibre.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

Many brands, and Patek are one of them guarantee to repair any watch they have ever made. If parts are no longer available they simply make them. You can imagine that there is a but coming. The cost associated with this is more than substantial. Which is again why preventative maintenance is not a terrible idea on a watch that contains a discontinued calibre.

there is some sort of Rolex vintage service offered in Geneva i think. It comes up from time to time but i know virtually nothing about it. I have heard its application only and they "may" service certain vintage timepieces. Patek or AP will do it as long as you pay for it so there is a clear difference.

TBH though its the biggest turn off for me about Rolex. So many people are under the illusion they are buying a legacy piece to pass down. Having your kid or grandkid getting it serviced by the manufacture generally isn't happening. Then they have to navigate the mine field of independent watchmakers and odds are they won't know the first thing about watches, just that they want to restore their grandfathers watch. Probably won't work out too well with no knowledge of where to send it.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by 77T

Excellent points.

Just an idea for discussion’s sake alone. Preventative maintenance costs over the next 30 years is costly. Perhaps $3000 using today’s routine costs.

Rolex doesn’t sell “crash kits” to owners (a crash kit is a collection of routine overhaul parts plus the key gears, pinions, barrel, etc. - the ones probe to damage).

So would it be more cost effective for owners of the older models to buy a 30xx or 31xx parts movement off eBay and stock it?

Here’s why I ask...

I faced this dilemma while resurrecting my Dad’s 50+ y.o. Omega Seamaster. Omega no longer made the parts my watchmaker needed. I found a working movement of the same caliber and bought it from a watchmaker.

Even if Omega had been still making the parts, my watchmaker said the costs would’ve been 2x of what I paid for the donor movement.

While this idea seems strange, I know vintage and antique car restorers routinely harvest and stockpile parts like that at swap meets etc. maybe a business model lurks underneath the burgeoning vintage watch collector demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It is quite common to cannibalise movements where parts are no longer available. But prevention is always better than cure. In 20-30 years there will be a lot of demand for 'cheaper Rolex models' with 15xx and 30xx to cannibalise, and the cost will grow and grow.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

there is some sort of vintage service offered in Geneva i think. It comes up from time to time but i know virtually nothing about it. I have heard its application only and they "may" service certain vintage timepieces.

TBH though its the biggest turn off for me about Rolex. So many people are under the illusion they are buying a legacy piece to pass down. Having your kid or grandkid getting it serviced by the manufacture generally isn't happening. Then they have to navigate the mine field of independent watchmakers and odds are they won't know the first thing about watches, just that they want to restore their grandfathers watch. Probably won't work out too well with no knowledge of where to send it.

That's right, they do have a restoration department and it often seems to be in the lap of the gods whether or not they will accept a particular watch.

I take consolation from the fact for the most part our watches will outlast us

[Token74]

Keen to hear from Padi on this one, as pretty sure he would never do anything just because someone says he should, and he knows what he’s talking about.

I was once told that changing your car oil every 3k miles would keep an engine going forever. I followed this advice with a car that I kept for 7 years and clocked up over 250k miles. Never had a single problem with the engine! Didn’t stop the body work falling apart though!!

I’ve not done this with a car since, as I only keep a car for a year at a time these days, but I wonder whether the same principle applies to Watch oils.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by Token74

Keen to hear from Padi on this one, as pretty sure he would never do anything just because someone says he should, and he knows what he’s talking about.

I was once told that changing your car oil every 3k miles would keep an engine going forever. I followed this advice with a car that I kept for 7 years and clocked up over 250k miles. Never had a single problem with the engine! Didn’t stop the body work falling apart though!!

I’ve not done this with a car since, as I only keep a car for a year at a time these days, but I wonder whether the same principle applies to Watch oils.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The advice given by brands and/or watchmakers is only that, advice. Nobody is telling anybody to do anything.

Truth be told no high volume brand is prepared with the internal staffing numbers nor externally trained network to accommodate every product they have ever produced at a fixed interval of 5-10 years.

[peterskinner]

Every manufacturer, without exception, recommends regular service. But what do they know......they just design and build the things.

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

Every manufacturer, without exception, recommends regular service. But what do they know......they just design and build the things.

It is also worth pointing out that servicing a watch is not exactly a cash cow for the brands. Stores that forward the watch to a brand get the best deal because they received a generous cut for no actual work, just being a drop box.

The slice the brand receives has VAT charged on it, and has to pay for the salary of every person that handles the repair before reaching the watchmaker, and parts. Plus you get a warranty meaning when someone is unhappy with +2.8sd it has to be corrected again, for free.

The reason I mention this is to highlight that the advice given to service regularly is not 'just so they can get another £500 from you' every few years.

[Rolex fan 61]

Originally Posted by bonovox

I've never sent a watch in that wasn't "broke." Meaning it stopped altogether, had no power reserve, or was keeping very sloppy time. I've had service centers scratch dials and bracelets. If it's not broke, don't fix (service) it is my motto.

Fully agree

[Car32]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

there is some sort of Rolex vintage service offered in Geneva i think. It comes up from time to time but i know virtually nothing about it. I have heard its application only and they "may" service certain vintage timepieces. Patek or AP will do it as long as you pay for it so there is a clear difference.

TBH though its the biggest turn off for me about Rolex. So many people are under the illusion they are buying a legacy piece to pass down. Having your kid or grandkid getting it serviced by the manufacture generally isn't happening. Then they have to navigate the mine field of independent watchmakers and odds are they won't know the first thing about watches, just that they want to restore their grandfathers watch. Probably won't work out too well with no knowledge of where to send it.

Thanks Tyler and Watchmaker for the insight, disappointing to know that other brands provide the repair guarantee but not Rolex.

[ROLEXster]

Originally Posted by joli160

The costs are the same 5 years, 10 years or 15 year because a Rolex service includes the exchange of wear parts even if they are not worn i.e. main spring, seals.

Nothing to gain

Not true anymore
(At least in Vancouver, don't know if this is true elsewhere)

I took my 16610 to my AD for service last April.
They said watches from 0-10 yrs old = $800 for service
10+ yrs old is $1250

There was a 3rd tier as well, but I don't remember what the price was.

So, I'll bring in my Daytona for service at 9 yrs-11m-30days
I think the price for Daytona less than 10 yrs old is $1200 cad
More than 10 yrs was about $1600 if I remembered correctly.

[No SUBctitute]

I don't need anyone opening my case and taking my watch apart unless its not working appropriately.

[joli160]

Originally Posted by ROLEXster

Not true anymore
(At least in Vancouver, don't know if this is true elsewhere)

I took my 16610 to my AD for service last April.
They said watches from 0-10 yrs old = $800 for service
10+ yrs old is $1250

There was a 3rd tier as well, but I don't remember what the price was.

So, I'll bring in my Daytona for service at 9 yrs-11m-30days
I think the price for Daytona less than 10 yrs old is $1200 cad
More than 10 yrs was about $1600 if I remembered correctly.

You are talking about your local AD, which is not to be confused with an official RSC. They just pull you for an additional 800 on an older watch. Skip those guys

[OysterBracelet]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

there is some sort of Rolex vintage service offered in Geneva i think. It comes up from time to time but i know virtually nothing about it. I have heard its application only and they "may" service certain vintage timepieces. Patek or AP will do it as long as you pay for it so there is a clear difference.

TBH though its the biggest turn off for me about Rolex. So many people are under the illusion they are buying a legacy piece to pass down. Having your kid or grandkid getting it serviced by the manufacture generally isn't happening. Then they have to navigate the mine field of independent watchmakers and odds are they won't know the first thing about watches, just that they want to restore their grandfathers watch. Probably won't work out too well with no knowledge of where to send it.

The Geneva restoration department will offer servicing facilities for any Rolex watch, but the cost can be astronomical and for the majority of pieces, it doesn't make economic sense.

That being said, if you are looking to drop $20,000 on a service for a particularly valuable Cosmograph, for example, the accompanying paperwork can (to some) be worth that fee alone.