Which one is rugged and reliable ?

[cbrenthus]

Wow, this thread makes me want to run out and buy a no date sub, throw a nato strap on it, and use it for rugged stuff like kayaking, surfing, skating, etc...

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Good question, I wondered about that too

Originally Posted by Solar

How does KIF differ from Incabloc, or are they the same with different trade names?

Chris

Have a look at this thread in our own Rolex links & resourses both shock systems are similar some say the KIF slightly better.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=3278

[Ragu]

Hey Nick,
I truely enjoy reading and learning from your posts!
With your endorsement of the 16040M which I happen to own I would wager others will now seek to purchase also.
I can't see the date without my reading glasses so for me the clean uncluttered look of the Sub no-date was an easy choice.
Thanks for all your info!

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

Since you have been around a lot of watches and worked on a lot and have pretty good opinion, would like to ask you a question: which mechanical watch out there do you believe is the most rugged and reliable watch made? Able to survive the harshest environments and sports?

This message was received as PM but I'll take liberty to answer this question publicly. For three reasons: In real life most watch owners or owners-to-be rarely take time to do their research BEFORE parting with money. In most cases they buy a particular watch based on 1/brand name 2/price 3/input received from salesman. Hardly a good reason to buy a tool watch !
Secondly, if you apply my "watchmakers reasoning" you should have no difficulties picking up the winner when considering other watch brands or watches for other specific purposes. The third reason: this is darn flattering so I couldn't resist it.

Assuming we are talking here Rolex watches, I am approaching this dilemma in following fashion:

1. ruggedness and durability: cross off your list all solid precious metal and gold/steel models. Only steel models are made / built to last;
2. waterproofness : although 100m WR is fairly good rating - especially in case of Rolex watches- cross off all the watches rated to less than 300m;
3. functionality and reliability: in this case, less it better. Number of moving parts is indirectly proportional to reliability. Say goodbye to all Chrono, GMT and date models.

Once you have applied the above principles to the Rolex stable of watches, you are left with one model only - a finely contoured, robust, reliable and excellent value-for-money Submariner 14060M. A true Rolex classic of timeless design. And please don't be fooled with 'non chronometer' rating. If properly adjusted and serviced on regular basis, 14060M is very much capable of performing within chronometer specifications.
The only negative is rathe under-engineered bracelet with flimsy end-pieces and outdated clasp. I find this bracelet of only ordinary-to-moderate quality; neither good nor bad therefore barely adequate to be associated with this fine Submariner.

Thanks for reading!
Nicholas Hacko

Nice post, Nicholas!

One question:

The SD has a date (so in theory, that would make the watch a bit complicated). But what about the Helium Vent?? Do you think that the HV might be a vulnerable spot on the SD? (after all, it IS some kind of "hole" in the otherwise solid case)??

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Spacedweller

Nice post, Nicholas!

One question:

The SD has a date (so in theory, that would make the watch a bit complicated). But what about the Helium Vent?? Do you think that the HV might be a vulnerable spot on the SD? (after all, it IS some kind of "hole" in the otherwise solid case)??

Now think about it the SD is Rolex highest rated water proof watch rated to 4000 ft thats a lot of water pressure.And basically the HV one way valve don't have any moving parts as such, and hardly some sort of hole.Comex divers have been using them for years,and myself have never ever heard of any problem with the HV ever, the SD is one very strong and rugged watch.And there are a lot bigger holes than the HV, the case back and where the crystal is they are biggest holes in the case ring.

[watchnut]

So Nick, As you have torn down many watches, what is your recommendation on frequency of service? My AD says 8 years or so, possibly because he feels he would sell less watches if told that a $500 + service was to be needed every 4-5 years. Also, as someone mentioned on another thread, what about a watch that has been sitting in a showcase at the dealer for 2-3 years. The clock doesn't start (no pun intended) when the cash changes hands, does it? Thanks for all your info, it's very enlightening!

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

hi Padi -
I do agree with all except for above (quoted).



The non-balance jewels you are referring to -circled in blue- are actually not
shock protection jewels (or better known as incabloc).
They are just ordinarily jewels but with addition of jewel cap, fastened with
spring. So when you assemble the movement you can access bearing jewels
to apply oil. I personally don't like capped jewels for two reason: there is
no engineering advantage vs. open bearing and it is impossible
to visually inspect oil and jewel without removing the jewel cap first.

Normal non-cap jewel is visible right between green and blue circle (pallets bridge). Rolex movement cal 3XXX is fitted with incabloc shock proof device on balance wheel (green, shock proof) and escape wheel. Other wheels are much more robust and would not break easily, therefore no need for shock proofing.

Here is a photo from my collection showing removed cap jewell
- the dot in the middle is oil

Last fall I restored this ETA 2360 used in a ladies watch from the 50's (I think) and it had cap jewels on the train.



At the time I wondered why it had that style of jewel, as it appeared that the pivots had a shoulder on them to limit end shake, yet they also had the jewel. It seemed like a "belt and suspenders" approach.

I had much less trouble oiling those than I did the balance cap jewels - everything was so small it was very hard to handle.

[Nick Hacko]

.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

...if you considering buying a watch that is brand new and unused but sitting in the shop for 3 or more years make sure to have it overhauled at sellers cost before you part with cash.

WOW!! Do you think that if you are getting an oder (say, a P-series) NOS Rolex from an AD, you could tell him that you would buy the watch only on the condition that he completely services it?

JJ

[mikey]

Nick, you know everything about Rolexes. What was your first Rolex?

[Nick Hacko]

.

[JJ Irani]

Thanks for the info, Nick!! That's why I always make sure my AD gets me the very latest in the current series......fresh out of the oven so to speak!!

[Blue Bull]

Buy the GMT II and the 14060M,now,before they disappear from the ADs stock.In a few years time a very late/last example of these models,may be worth a bit more ..

I shouldnt have sold my GMT II.Should have kept it.

[BondandBigM]

A friend of mine back in the UK bought a non date sub in the early 80's, he wears it every day and it is still going strong. That was partly the reason I bought my first Rolex two have came and went, a GMT and a date Sub, so as soon as I had enough together again I bought the LV as my daily watch and didn't think twice about it.

Bond

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

Hi David -

oiling .... is an art form!
Here is very brief answer to your question.
Oil is required to reduce friction between pivot / arbour and bearing (jewel).
Imagine if you could design and build timepiece with no or very little friction
between moving parts OR by using materials that are 'self lubricated' - then theoretically your watch would need no servicing. Ever! This is a dream of every watch manufacturer in the world! (We are talking mechanical watches, not LED) Unfortunately this is still not practically possible, at least outside laboratory. Mind you, both principles have been successfully employed
in larger timepieces like clocks.

Hi Nick, great stuff. It is interesting that JLC has just released a new watch called the Master Compressor Extreme LAB. It is said to be the first watch ever to be produced without oil and grease lubricants. Therefore no deterioration of lubricants and no specified service interval schedules. Although after time any mechanical device will require service. The downside is the new watch will be made in limited numbers of 5 per year and will sell for about $200,000+ each.
Nevertheless, it does seem to be remarkable technical innovation.

[syahriltaher]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

Hi Chris - appreciate your feedback, don't worry 99% of Rolex owners never
had chance to see what is hidden under the case back. You are the honest one to admit which is really cool. Let me know what would you like to see
(watch reference number or movement calibre) there is a good chance I may have it on file - I'll post them here
Few photos of ladys Ref 6917 enclosed - something I incidently found on my HDD tonight.














take care mate Nick

Hi Nick,

Thank you very much for your wonderful posts in this forum. And for me your posts add a significant technical insight of luxury watches, especially Rolex.

Do you have in your file the pictures of the movement of my 18238 YG President and my SS GMT Master II?

I would highly appreciate it if you can post the pictures of the movement of the above models as I never see it since I purchased the watch...

Regards,

[padi56]

Originally Posted by syahriltaher

Hi Nick,

Thank you very much for your wonderful posts in this forum. And for me your posts add a significant technical insight of luxury watches, especially Rolex.

Do you have in your file the pictures of the movement of my 18238 YG President and my SS GMT Master II?

I would highly appreciate it if you can post the pictures of the movement of the above models as I never see it since I purchased the watch...

Regards,

Cal 3155 as in your 18238 Daydate.both reference web pictures.




Cal 3185 as in the GMT 11.

[Solar]

I have a Sea Dweller and A GMT II (3135 and 3185); I'm told these are solid, long lasting workhorse movements, with little adornment (cotes de geneve, guilloche, etc). Is it true that movement texturing traps dust and prevents same from entering the movement?

One of my colleauges finally got his 20 GMT in for its first service last month or so!!!!! It was starting and stopping, no wonder. Its back from service with a new crystal, polished case and bezel insert to come, looks new again.

Anyhow, I intend to wear my two and take them for service around the 7 year mark, barring any other problems.

Best, and thanks again Nick for the excellent and informative posts! These are the best forums to me......

Chris

[kingblackbolt]

Nick, I am also a big Omega fan can you post any info you may have on the internal workings of the Omega Seamaster America's Cup Limited Edition Reference 2533.50.00? Not 100% sure but I believe it is a modified version of the standard SMP correct? I've been really enjoying your posts keep up he good work and keep it coming buddy!

[JJ Irani]

That's a beauty, Ren!! You do realise that that's a White Gold bezel?

[kingblackbolt]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

That's a beauty, Ren!! You do realise that that's a White Gold bezel?

Indeed I do sir and oh so reminiscent of the SS Plat YM's bezel would'nt you say?

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by kingblackbolt

Indeed I do sir and oh so reminiscent of the SS Plat YM's bezel would'nt you say?

Yes, I would....very nice, especially since I've seen one in person!!

[kingblackbolt]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Yes, I would....very nice, especially since I've seen one in person!!

Don't have that honour yet but we will see...

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by kingblackbolt

Don't have that honour yet but we will see...

One interesting question comes to mind about that OMEGA Pt. bezel.

Is only the insert Pt. or are both, the insert and bezel Pt.....just like in the YM?

JJ

[kingblackbolt]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

One interesting question comes to mind about that OMEGA Pt. bezel.

Is only the insert Pt. or are both, the insert and bezel Pt.....just like in the YM?

JJ

Good question my friend unlike the Rolex I don't believe they make everything 100% solid correct?

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by kingblackbolt

Good question my friend unlike the Rolex I don't believe they make everything 100% solid correct?

Au contraire, my friend. Rolex centre links are hollow, whereas those are solid.

On the Pt. issue, as far as I can see, only the INSERT seems to be made of Pt. I'm pretty sure the bezel is steel....but I could be wrong. Maybe an OMEGA AD would be able to corroborate that.

JJ

[Goodwatch]

I've always been a great fan of Citizen dive watches. They fit the bill completely. Owned several models and they are bomb proof. 200 meters water proof means that they REALLY are 200 meters water proof. (As if I need this ).

[kingblackbolt]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Au contraire, my friend. Rolex centre links are hollow, whereas those are solid.

On the Pt. issue, as far as I can see, only the INSERT seems to be made of Pt. I'm pretty sure the bezel is steel....but I could be wrong. Maybe an OMEGA AD would be able to corroborate that.

JJ

From the pics I posted and other ones I've seen it sure looks that way... a gold bezel and insert would increase the price substantially no? Any Omega experts out there ring in on this?