+2/-2 seconds per day

[cbalster]

This is the standard for Rolex timepiece accuracy since 2016. Does any other fully automatic movement come close?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by cbalster

This is the standard for Rolex timepiece accuracy since 2016. Does any other fully automatic movement come close?

Well I have a Chinese made Seagull ST manual wind movement total cost was £60 and with very careful regulation got that running to a consistent +2 seconds a day for many years of wearing.And this new average -2+2 seconds is more marketing than anything.The bare uncased movements are still tested at the Swiss COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds to get the Swiss chronometer certification.Rolex now further tests movements in there cases many at a time on a machine in a controlled environment to this new -2+2 spec.But on the wrist there are many variables to overcome so the results while testing on a machine could differ slightly to wearing on the wrist.But for any purely mechanical watch to run within a few seconds or little over the Swiss chronometer spec considering there are 86400 seconds in a day is a mechanical marvel.

[m j b]

Sure, my Omega Seamaster is within that spec. I also have another brand which cannot be mentioned here, which has a modified ETA movement and after a bit of fiddling with the regulation, is now within 2 seconds a day.

[Juan Luis]

Almost any watch can be regulated to high standards. But many will lose the adjustments in a short time.

[peterskinner]

We are asking too much of a mechanical watch. Rolex make a great product, and they do achieve high levels of precision. But, on the wrist, in a wide variety of situations, they are unlikely to consistently hit the Rolex claim. That’s achieved in a factory, in artificial conditions. If you read the Rolex claims, they never state a guaranteed level of timekeeping on the wrist.....
For real precision, something like a quartz GS at ten seconds a year gives perspective. And it will be achieved. But it lacks the romance of a mechanical device, with all those springs and gears.

[Fred48]

I have 15 watches in my collection, from a $500 seiko to a 1948 birth watch to a $7500 Explorer, and they all run close to or better than +/- 2 spd. Self regulation is a wonderful thing.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by cbalster

This is the standard for Rolex timepiece accuracy since 2016. Does any other fully automatic movement come close?

Yes of course, I have several that run better than that

[Rado63]

I own both Omegas and Tagheurs that easily operate in that range. Nothing new in today's mechanical watch world. Supposedly Zenith Defy Labs makes the worlds most accurate mechanical watch accurate within 0.3 seconds per day.

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by cbalster

This is the standard for Rolex timepiece accuracy since 2016. Does any other fully automatic movement come close?

Taking into account the consistancy of the many brands of timepieces here, they virtually all do... or should i say CAN if they were regulated accurately.

[RyanJ]

Yep. Don't fall for the marketing hype.

Rolex makes great movements but so do many other manufacturers.

[Likestheshiny]

Yeah, this is less the movement and more the attention to adjusting and regulating the movement.

Note that Rolex went from -4/+6 to -2/+2 without changing the movement.

That said, Rolex still gets credit for making movements that can be tuned to excellent accuracy, for putting in the effort to perform and verify that tuning, and for backing the higher accuracy up in the warranty. Rolex generally isn't seen as much of a trendsetter in the watch space ("Evolution, not revolution), but their five-year warranties and higher accuracy specs definitely impacted the industry and forced others to follow.

[Xerxes77]

Yes my Hublot with ETA 7750 movement work + 5 sec per month......
This ETA movement’s it’s good to not undervalued because they pass the time tests....

[nachopc]

My 16520 APH Dial 2016 is +- 0,7 spd

Amazing !!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Chewbacca]

As others have said, if they're promising it, hold them too it. But its not a big deal today. Any mech watch can come within cosc which is why many brands are moving away from cosc.

Its the swiss watch industry equivalent of certified organic.

[SearChart]

I have an ETA in a Hamilton that runs perfectly fine within that spec, consistent at less that +1 a day.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by padi56

Well I have a Chinese made Seagull ST manual wind movement total cost was £60 and with very careful regulation got that running to a consistent +2 seconds a day for many years of wearing.And this new average -2+2 seconds is more marketing than anything.The bare uncased movements are still tested at the Swiss COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds to get the Swiss chronometer certification.Rolex now further tests movements in there cases many at a time on a machine in a controlled environment to this new -2+2 spec.But on the wrist there are many variables to overcome so the results while testing on a machine could differ slightly to wearing on the wrist.But for any purely mechanical watch to run within a few seconds or little over the Swiss chronometer spec considering there are 86400 seconds in a day is a mechanical marvel.

A marvel indeed
We can't be dismissive of the achievement around the new Rolex accuracy standard though
It's a logistical far cry requiring a great deal of commitment, going from an uncased movement with a 10 second tolerance to a cased up movement with a 4 second tolerance.
Let alone applying that same tolerance to "on the wrist, day to day" performance with the hope of maintaining that accuracy over the long term
It's also a testament to the older 31xx movements which are held to the same tolerance

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Likestheshiny

Yeah, this is less the movement and more the attention to adjusting and regulating the movement.

Note that Rolex went from -4/+6 to -2/+2 without changing the movement.

That said, Rolex still gets credit for making movements that can be tuned to excellent accuracy, for putting in the effort to perform and verify that tuning, and for backing the higher accuracy up in the warranty. Rolex generally isn't seen as much of a trendsetter in the watch space ("Evolution, not revolution), but their five-year warranties and higher accuracy specs definitely impacted the industry and forced others to follow.

True in part
But the real truth of the matter is that Rolex actually followed Omega, both in extending service intervals and applied accuracy standards.
It was virtually the equivalent of an arms race between them where Rolex has upped the anti even more

[HogwldFLTR]

My Grand Seiko spring drive seems to be doing better than that, fwiw. It is fully automatic as well!!! So far within +/-1 second!!!

[Oceanblue]

My Omega Seamaster Pro is well within the +2, whereas my Omega Seamaster 300 runs at +5. My Rolex have always run in the same range. No complaints on either front. I like to own two from each brand, and there's always variance from one to the other. Doesn't bother me.

[irate.alien]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

We are asking too much of a mechanical watch. Rolex make a great product, and they do achieve high levels of precision. But, on the wrist, in a wide variety of situations, they are unlikely to consistently hit the Rolex claim. That’s achieved in a factory, in artificial conditions. If you read the Rolex claims, they never state a guaranteed level of timekeeping on the wrist.....
For real precision, something like a quartz GS at ten seconds a year gives perspective. And it will be achieved. But it lacks the romance of a mechanical device, with all those springs and gears.

Completely agree. All these tests are done on timegraphers, basically in a laboratory. Even if you average +/- 2 seconds across all six positions, wandering around on your wrist all day is another thing entirely.

[BaliBryan]

I have an OP 39 that is exactly spot on since February 3.


Almost 8 months dead accurate

[Onequik135i]

My 16710 is -+1 dial up just about since Ridley had it serviced and regulated earlier this year.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by cbalster

This is the standard for Rolex timepiece accuracy since 2016. Does any other fully automatic movement come close?

Yep. Grand Seiko VFA (Very Fine Adjusted) mechanical watches were guaranteed to run +2/-2 per day when introduced around 1970.

https://watchesbysjx.com/2018/03/a-d...onometers.html

[SparklesMcgraw]

My Explorer is a few weeks old and runs +/- 6 seconds per day slow consistently. Gonna leave it for a few months and see if it improves. Not too bothered as it is in a rotation so not worn daily. I had hoped for better brand new out of the box though.

[18078pres]

18078 from 1980 serviced in 2010 running plus one since. Daily watch all about careful regulation .