Do you consider the service cost in relation to the price, when buying a watch?

[patrike]

When I buy a new watch I assume I will keep it for life. We all know that´s probably not going ta happen, but let´s pretend.

Let´s say I will live for another 50 years, I will service the watch every 5 years. That´s 10 times I have to do a service, and let´s say the service will cost an average of $ 1000 each time.

That´s $ 10 000 in service costs.

Do you guys relate this cost to how much the price of the watch is when you buy it? Is it reasonable that the total service price might be higher than the actual value/price of the watch?

I guess this might apply more to PP or AP watches, but a Daytona work as an example...

I don´t know if I got it all wrong, but in my mind buying the watch should be the most expensive part of owning a fine watch.

[doubleinfive]

If I can afford the watch, I can afford the service cost. When I get to the point when the current cost (non cumulative) of servicing the watch is greater than it's perceived value or original price, I will just get a new watch...

[mjclark32]

I wouldn't unless I was buying a watch that needed immediate servicing.
Spread it out, $200/year for your $10,000 watch isn't bad. My BMW needs an oil change for $120 every few months.

[sierra11b]

I do but hopefully will never have to pay quite that much each time. Some of the AP service quotes I've read here send chills down my spine so similar watches are out of my range for now.

What really troubles me is parts inventory from a maker and the idea of actually making it to 50yrs. You may never have to worry about service costs equaling the MSRP of a watch, at least through RSC, which is why private accounts are so important as they're usually cheaper. Plus a private maker will only do what's absolutely necessary vs. what RSC deems mandatory for way more $$$$.

I think people sometimes get caught-up in the idea that a big shop means watch longevity, and with shops like PP or JLC it might at a premium. But it may very well put you at a disadvantage decades from now, especially if that watch has an in-house movement with a dwindling parts supply. This is why Tudor often appeals to me... Although I don't see parts for a 3135 movement drying up anytime soon my crystal ball suggests a Tudor Pelagos/Black Bay will probably have readily available and cheaper service alternatives for much longer.

A good example of a small shop is Dornbluth & Sohn. People think that because it's a small family run shop it has the potential to be unstable and they're right to some degree, at least in its infancy as it's no Patek (yet). But the fact my watch (99.1) holds a Unitas base design means that I have a watch that I can potentially service. It may not be a replaced with a decorated piece that matches the Dornbluth factory decorations, but my grandchildren will probably have a working watch that didn't break the bank to service. But with my same logic, although I'm sure the new completely in-house Dornbluth Quintus is a great movement that I would love to own, what would happen if the worst happened with Dirk Dornbluth at the helm with his company still being so young? I'm sure RGM could do the job but they'd have a right to to throw the book at me on costs.

[gwalker]

Only if I was buying a used watch that needed a service would I consider the cost of a single service and ask the seller to at the least, split the cost of a service if he wouldn't pay for the full service.

I don't consider the cost of services when I buy new watches. If I can pay for the watch I can pay for the service. If you really think about it a luxury watch only costs $0.25-$0.75 a day to wear. Not a big deal. I know that my new AP will be ~$1000 a service but its part of owning very expense watch. Also I'd much rather pay $1k every 6-7 years than wait for the AP to break and end up with a bill 5x that much.

[beshannon]

No.

I have never stopped to think about it.

[strafer_kid]

I think service cost must be a consideration to a point - I am still thinking of picking up Deepsea, although I read somewhere that the service cost for these might be much higher than other Rolex - I realise that the Deepsea has only been out a short while, so maybe few if any have ever been serviced yet. Anyone any thoughts?

[zeuloa]

Extend you service interval to 7 years and that should be about $7100. I'm sure for this amount of money in 50 years you will not be able to purchase a 50 year old watch in the condition that yours will be in. Keep in mind that in 50 years the watch should be worth much more.

[Chewbacca]

more so on a used or vintage rolexe ... if i'm buying new, i don't typically care when the ether is running at the ad.

[RolexDivers]

I just take very good care of my watches. I baby them too much --- even put scotchtape on the clasp when deskdiving --- so I hope I will not need servicing --- the more you take care of them, the less likely you will need servicing. Even when I take my watch off, unless it is a g-shock, I put a tissue paper on the table and the watch goes on top of the tissue paper. I just like to see and feel the NEWNESS of my watches, as much as possible.

[Rocco22]

Nope, everything with moving parts needs some type of service to keep it functioning.never stopped me from buying cars or watches.

[Rolexpilot]

No need to service it every 5 years. It is altogether possible for a watch to run for 50 years without servicing at all.

Waste of money. A service when it quits will not cost any more than a routine service, at least not at an RSC. They will overcharge you regardless.

[mjclark32]

Originally Posted by Rolexpilot

No need to service it every 5 years. It is altogether possible for a watch to run for 50 years without servicing at all.

Waste of money. A service when it quits will not cost any more than a routine service, at least not at an RSC. They will overcharge you regardless.

Between this and this, https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=256740

Im just not so sure...

[zeuloa]

Originally Posted by RolexDivers

I just take very good care of my watches. I baby them too much --- even put scotchtape on the clasp when deskdiving --- so I hope I will not need servicing --- the more you take care of them, the less likely you will need servicing. Even when I take my watch off, unless it is a g-shock, I put a tissue paper on the table and the watch goes on top of the tissue paper. I just like to see and feel the NEWNESS of my watches, as much as possible.

It's just like a car - you can keep it in the garage, not drive it in the rain, wash and polish often enough, but engine still needs a service.

[gwalker]

Originally Posted by Rolexpilot

No need to service it every 5 years. It is altogether possible for a watch to run for 50 years without servicing at all.

Waste of money. A service when it quits will not cost any more than a routine service, at least not at an RSC. They will overcharge you regardless.

I've seen you post this a few times and that's terrible advice. I want to see ANY mechanical watch that's actually worn regularly that will keep good time (or even run for that matter) after 50 years. It's your watch so do what you want but to suggest mechanical watches don't need regular service is just wrong. My mom never had her watch services for 23 years until it stopped. It was almost $3k to get it fixed. Do you just drive your car until the engine locks up?

As for the price of service on APs they aren't but a little more expensive than the price of a Daytona service. The basic service price for my AP ROO 44mm is $1080-1160 and it also has a date. I think the cost of a Daytona all gold service is around $800-850. Really not much difference APs get very expensive when talking about older models that need many parts replaced.

[montres1]

i know it's not rolex content, but who wouldn't send their watch for service when it is done like this, 5 minute worth watching; watch spa :)

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by zeuloa

It's just like a car - you can keep it in the garage, not drive it in the rain, wash and polish often enough, but engine still needs a service.

Parts wear and they wear faster without lubrication, not to mention the seals that will dry out. I had to replace a crown that was worn. Lubrication might have prevented that. Besides a watch that was 12 seconds slow is now on the second.

[Feras]

I should but i didnt :-)

[GradyPhilpott]

I planned to have my Explorer serviced at 7 years, as is advised, but I was discussing this with my watchmaker recently and he mentioned the fact that now that I have three Rolex watches, each watch is getting considerably less wear and tear, except if I use a winder.

I said that I don't use a winder, but I will give the "resting" ones a wind when I change watches.

So, given the fact that I've worn my DJ and my Sub more than my Explorer since I bought them I would expect that at 7 years the Explorer's service may not be critical, depending on the future wear of that watch.

In fact, when I got the DJ, I wore it almost exclusively for two years before I bought the Sub and since I bought the Sub, I've worn it almost exclusively for 10 months.

The Explorer just sits most of the time with a wind every 4-8 weeks.

I suspect that the rotation will gradually become more egalitarian as time goes on and I rediscover the appeal of each watch again.

As for considering the price of service at the time of purchase, I gave it some thought, but concluded that maintenance is a necessary part of ownership and that I should just suck it up and "pay the piper."

I think that all too often owners think of service as a chore with little benefit and, of course, there is the "if it ain't broke" crowd.

I look at maintenance as a means to keep my watches working at peak performance and as a means to reduce more expensive repairs later on.

As the "mechanic" in the old Purolator ads used to say, "You can pay me now, or you can pay me later.

[Roller07]

No i do not. Just like when i buy a car i don't worry about how much it will cost to upkeep.

[RolexDivers]

Originally Posted by zeuloa

It's just like a car - you can keep it in the garage, not drive it in the rain, wash and polish often enough, but engine still needs a service.

Yes, the engine still needs service --- the oils just get old in there--- so I figure that if my 14yr old sub is keeping time like an atomic clock, and I have never serviced it, then I might as well wait it out. BUT unlikea car's engine, where we have combustion going on and waste products being generated and high heat and friction components, the insides of a rolex are just the opposite kind of environment ---pristine and sealed...

[patrike]

I guess it's a very strange way of thinking. But if the total service cost adds up to ~ $ 10 000 over the time of owning it, I would much rather buy $ 15 000 than a $ 9 000 watch...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RolexDivers]

As for servicing, I would find a reputable watchmaking shop to do the work --- I would not send it to the RSC ---- there are many mom and pop competant watchmaking stores that I would take it to ---- then for about one third the cost of RSC, I can get my watch serviced ---- that means, I can get 3watches serviced for everyonesent to RSC.

My biggest instructions to the watchmaker would be to replace the oils and seals --- I do not expect anything else to be busted or worn out.

[Rikki]

I was taking a highend Ford sports car for a test ride in 1974 and as I drove I asked what kind of mileage it got the salesman laughed and said bring it back to the lot this is not the car for you. I had just bought a new Datsun 260Z about 6 months earlier and was wondering what V8 power would be like I think the saleman crapped his pants when I romped on it. Rikki

[doubleinfive]

Originally Posted by Rolexpilot

No need to service it every 5 years. It is altogether possible for a watch to run for 50 years without servicing at all.

Waste of money. A service when it quits will not cost any more than a routine service, at least not at an RSC. They will overcharge you regardless.

My wife is wearing an early '60s 6694 that she inherited from her late father. We brought it to an AD in July to have the caseback engraved with the both their names.

The AD mentioned that the watch has not been serviced in almost 50 years and they suggested that one be done immediately. I asked him if the watch has not been serviced all these years and is working just fine, why does it need one now?

In any case, we decided to have the service done and the AD did not charge us for it. Well, not exactly. The AD (not knowing what the overall cost of the service was going to be) decided to include the "open ended" service cost of my wife's 6694 in the price of a new "Tuxedo" DateJust that I purchased during that visit.

Long story short, the cost to service my wife's 50-year old Oysterdate was very close to zero...

[phelix_da_kat]

Only if it was second hand and there were no recent service papers included.
Would prefer less than 2 years since the previous service date.

[psv]

Not on Rolex, but I do on PP and AP.

[Annan]

No....not on a new Rolex. Regular maintenance is just part of the privilege of owning one. For a pre-owned model, yes. I want/expect that it has had a recent (within the last 2 years) service if the watch is 5 or more years old. If not, the price will have to be lowered by at least $500.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Rolexpilot

No need to service it every 5 years. It is altogether possible for a watch to run for 50 years without servicing at all.

Waste of money. A service when it quits will not cost any more than a routine service, at least not at an RSC. They will overcharge you regardless.

This is among the worst advice I've read here, but this member is not alone in his philosophy.

If you wait for fifty years to get a service on a Rolex, Rolex is likely to issue you a "death certificate."

I could assume that philosophy, because most definitely, my Rolex watches will perform longer than my life expectancy, but nonetheless, I'd like to know that I will pass on my watches in the best condition possible.

As to the price of a service being the same after something breaks as it would be if done on a prescribed schedule is utter nonsense.

The more parts that are replaced the more the cost is going to be.

Yes you save money on the services not performed, but sooner or later, the neglect will catch up with the owner, which granted may be one's progeny.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Rolexpilot

No need to service it every 5 years. It is altogether possible for a watch to run for 50 years without servicing at all.

Waste of money. A service when it quits will not cost any more than a routine service, at least not at an RSC. They will overcharge you regardless.

Remind me not to fly in one of your planes.