Is That "SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER..." Mean A Lot To You?

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by briantheartist

Rolex are the only ones allowed to be "Superlative" because their watches are more accurate than others certified by COSC (standard is -4 to +6 sec per day)
Rolex is -1/+5 sec per day (-1/+3 sec per day with parachrom hairspring in 5 professional and milgauss) or so they claim....

Sorry friend but this is total baloney. Show me where they claim different rates for the parachrom spring models please.

You need to learn more about COSC and how Rolex fits in. Your assertion is one I have never heard before. There is no "Superlative" COSC rating, it a BS Rolex term only (see below). COSC is COSC and a Rolex, Panerai / Breitling, etc either pass or fail the spec. The only variations are for small movements (under 20mm) and, of course, the quartz spec.


COSC is like a Consumer Reports endorsement, basically bogus. COSC is basically "owned" by Rolex as they are the major customer by far. Rolex watches are no more accurate than others like PP, AP, Lange and VC that couldn't be bothered wasting time with a COSC endorsement, they hold themselves to a higher standard.

From Chroncentric:
How is a "Superlative Chronometer" different from a "Certified Chronometer" or just "Chronometer?"
The term "Superlative Chronometer" is a trademark of Rolex. The addition of the word "Superlative" in front of the official designation of Chronometer is merely a Rolex marketing angle to give a more distinguished sound to the chronometer status of their products. All watches that have earned the privilege of bearing the official Swiss designation of "Chronometer" have been held to and met the exact same C.O.S.C. standards. Any words added before or after the official designation of "Chronometer" are merely fluff--there are not any different grades or levels of chronometer certification.

Likewise, "Certified Chronometer" also means nothing different than just "Chronometer." It is a redundant phrase--since Chronometer status is a certification--that is used like "verde green" or "hot water heater" to ensure that the reader clearly and quickly understands the point.



Read up of COSC, it's a joke.

Couple of links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSC

http://forums.watchuseek.com/showthr...ear#post456460

[briantheartist]

Originally Posted by BigHat

Sorry friend but this is total baloney. Show me where they claim different rates for the parachrom spring models please.

You need to learn more about COSC and how Rolex fits in. Your assertion is one I have never heard before. There is no "Superlative" COSC rating, it a BS Rolex term only (see below). COSC is COSC and a Rolex, Panerai / Breitling, etc either pass or fail the spec. The only variations are for small movements (under 20mm) and, of course, the quartz spec.


COSC is like a Consumer Reports endorsement, basically bogus. COSC is basically "owned" by Rolex as they are the major customer by far. Rolex watches are no more accurate than others like PP, AP, Lange and VC that couldn't be bothered wasting time with a COSC endorsement, they hold themselves to a higher standard.

From Chroncentric:
How is a "Superlative Chronometer" different from a "Certified Chronometer" or just "Chronometer?"
The term "Superlative Chronometer" is a trademark of Rolex. The addition of the word "Superlative" in front of the official designation of Chronometer is merely a Rolex marketing angle to give a more distinguished sound to the chronometer status of their products. All watches that have earned the privilege of bearing the official Swiss designation of "Chronometer" have been held to and met the exact same C.O.S.C. standards. Any words added before or after the official designation of "Chronometer" are merely fluff--there are not any different grades or levels of chronometer certification.

Likewise, "Certified Chronometer" also means nothing different than just "Chronometer." It is a redundant phrase--since Chronometer status is a certification--that is used like "verde green" or "hot water heater" to ensure that the reader clearly and quickly understands the point.



Read up of COSC, it's a joke.

Couple of links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSC

http://forums.watchuseek.com/showthr...ear#post456460

....It's what my Rolex Rep told/showed me

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by briantheartist

....It's what my Rolex Rep told/showed me

Well now you know he can't be trusted to tell you the truth. What did he show you? Nothing exists to make this point regarding "Superlative" being a COSC spec.

Don't feel bad, ADs pass more bogus info than the truth.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by Bilbox

All the more since COSC tests movements OUT OF THE CASE while Jaeger Lecoultre test the watch.

True. And for 1,000 hours, to boot! COSC tests for 15 days only (360 hours).

Originally Posted by BigHat

(...)COSC is like a Consumer Reports endorsement, basically bogus. COSC is basically "owned" by Rolex as they are the major customer by far.(...)

From Chroncentric:
How is a "Superlative Chronometer" different from a "Certified Chronometer" or just "Chronometer?"
The term "Superlative Chronometer" is a trademark of Rolex." (...)

Well, although Rolex is the biggest supplier of COSC rated watches, still the COSC institute is independent and would not slip any Rolex movement easier through control than any other movts.

Excellent excerpt from Chronocentric, btw.!

[bsodmike]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

Well, although Rolex is the biggest supplier of COSC rated watches, still the COSC institute is independent and would not slip any Rolex movement easier through control than any other movts.

Excellent excerpt from Chronocentric, btw.!

True, but the fact remains - the movements are tested outside the watch.

COSC is far too relaxed a form of testing to be taking seriously. It is similar to the THX rating of speakers - many of the top tier "serious" audio brands such as B&W do not even bother applying for certification.

[Perdu]

Originally Posted by briantheartist

Rolex are the only ones allowed to be "Superlative" because their watches are more accurate than others certified by COSC (standard is -4 to +6 sec per day)
Rolex is -1/+5 sec per day (-1/+3 sec per day with parachrom hairspring in 5 professional and milgauss) or so they claim....

I think your Rolex Rep. is pulling your chain.

[Jimbits76]

I want a non cosc 14060 for my boy....in fact the last of the non cosc!!!!! that way when he's 21 he gets a sweet vintage sub!

If only 'er indoors agreed!

J

[SSD]

I don't really mind seeing the COSC printing on the dial, despite the crowded conditions on the Sub or other watches. What really counts for me it that the movement is so!

Yet, I still have a great admiration of the non-COSC 14060 and especially the 5513.

[DSJ]

Hey TR, a belated CONGRATS on post 3K!

Class of December 2007 Representing!

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by DSJ

Hey TR, a belated CONGRATS on post 3K!

Class of December 2007 Representing!

Thanks a lot, David!!! I'm glad to be a part of the class of December 2007.

[ROLEX MAN]

For me the less the better!

would love a hand wind daytona!

[Bilbox]

Originally Posted by Trurolexer

Hi, yes is that words "SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED" mean to you? Do you like that words? Are you buy a Rolex because that words? Or you think that a lil' bit too much?
Me, I don't really care about that words. I choose the old model written "Officially Chronometer...". More nice to me. What about you?
Please your reply here. Thanks Guys!!!



Best Regards, TR.

It means too many useless informations on a dial.

Why not adding the number of jewels, the material of the case and the color or the dial ?

Who cares if it is certified ? If I want a watch as accurate as possible, I will take a quartz.

[f16570]

COSC
Claims Of Superlative Chronometers

[jmjm]

You pay for the extra large Polo logos on shirts, might as well get all you can that you've paid for.....

[Magik]

ROLEX are the only letters that mean anything to me on the dial.

I guess I take my watch being COSC for granted.

[Rawhyde]

I like the "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified" on the dial. I think it looks good and has a has a really neat "archaic language" cache to it.

The funny thing is that it is meaningless. I have one watch with those words on the dial, a Z series TT Blue Submariner. The Sub gains about 5-7 minutes per week. I have a Tudor Chronograph that keeps much better time, and my lowly Air King is accurate within 6 seconds per month.

Rawhyde

[Lol-x]

It might be that after the COSC testing and compliance that Rolex tunes their movements again before shipping to be between -1 to +5 seconds. I've heard that before from RSC.

The truth is who knows exactly what is going on behind those closed doors in the Willy Wonker (Rolex) Chocolate Factory

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

It might be that after the COSC testing and compliance that Rolex tunes their movements again before shipping to be between -1 to +5 seconds. I've heard that before from RSC.

The truth is who knows exactly what is going on behind those closed doors in the Willy Wonker (Rolex) Chocolate Factory

lol!!!

[ral]

I kind of like have the words "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified"... but than I have a Datejust, so without that the space would be blank. I guess Sub and Sea-Dweller owners would feel differently since it already a bit busy down there....

@Rawhyde

It is not to hard to fix that problem. Maybe your AD can even get it done for free.

[Spark]

I'm not fussed either way as most good Swiss houses make COSC grade movements anyway whether sent for testing or not, but as already mentioned the movement is tested as just a movement with hands and I believe even without the rotor fitted, so it isn't really a good test of the watches accuracy.
I personally would rather see the Geneve seal like Patek and Vacheron etc...
That is a true sign of quality, but still unecessary.
It is really only saying ''THIS WATCH KEEPS GOOD TIME'' if it didn't they shouldn't be selling it.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

It might be that after the COSC testing and compliance that Rolex tunes their movements again before shipping to be between -1 to +5 seconds. I've heard that before from RSC.

The truth is who knows exactly what is going on behind those closed doors in the Willy Wonker (Rolex) Chocolate Factory

Maybe this article called "Inside COSC" sheds some light on the matter.

Official COSC specs are minus 4 to plus 6 seconds. But some companies have their own "official" COSC specs, for instance Omega, giving you information about how the company in question would test the movements by themselves after getting them back from COSC testing.

Interesting note in the article, btw. I qoute:

"According to Rolex, the rejects are fixed and sent back to COSC until they pass. "We don’t use COSC to tell us how good our movements are," said a source deep inside the Wilsdorf foundation. "We test them ourselves. All we want is the chronometer certification. It’s for marketing."

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

Maybe this article called "Inside COSC" sheds some light on the matter.

Official COSC specs are minus 4 to plus 6 seconds. But some companies have their own "official" COSC specs, for instance Omega, giving you information about how the company in question would test the movements by themselves after getting them back from COSC testing.

Interesting note in the article, btw. I qoute:

"According to Rolex, the rejects are fixed and sent back to COSC until they pass. "We don’t use COSC to tell us how good our movements are," said a source deep inside the Wilsdorf foundation. "We test them ourselves. All we want is the chronometer certification. It’s for marketing."

Thanks for reposting this link. Posted it during the "debate" on a GMT-IIC losing 2 secs in six months (as I recall). I still find this to me the most shocking paragraph in the story:

Even more amazingly, at less than 20mm, the Rolex 2235 falls into the smallest category where the tolerances are at their widest, yet performs well within the tightest allowances reserved for pocket-watches. Almost 200,000 of these movements passed the COSC test in 2001.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by BigHat

Thanks for reposting this link. Posted it during the "debate" on a GMT-IIC losing 2 secs in six months (as I recall). I still find this to me the most shocking paragraph in the story:

Even more amazingly, at less than 20mm, the Rolex 2235 falls into the smallest category where the tolerances are at their widest, yet performs well within the tightest allowances reserved for pocket-watches. Almost 200,000 of these movements passed the COSC test in 2001.

Agreed.....the ladies 2235 calibre is still considered by many as the best movement to come out from Rolex!!

The ladies 29 mm, mid-size 35 mm YM and all the lady DJs are fitted with this calibre.

JJ

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Agreed.....the ladies 2235 calibre is still considered by many as the best movement to come out from Rolex!!

The ladies 29 mm, mid-size 35 mm YM and all the lady DJs are fitted with this calibre.

JJ

Can you explain to me a bit, JJ why that cal. 2235 is the best movement?

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

Interesting note in the article, btw. I qoute:

"According to Rolex, the rejects are fixed and sent back to COSC until they pass. "We don’t use COSC to tell us how good our movements are," said a source deep inside the Wilsdorf foundation. "We test them ourselves. All we want is the chronometer certification. It’s for marketing."

Very interesting Bo!!! Thanks for sharing.

[ral]

While the Geneve Seal is impressive (and I would really love to own even the most humble Patek), qualifying for this seal is more concerned with the quality and finishing of the watch movement. The precision of the timekeeping mechanism itself is not tested.

[Baptistman]

I simply link those words to Rolex. Its almost like a Rolex trade mark imo.

[topcat30093]

Bo,once again you have proved yourself as a authority in information about wtches.
Thanks for the article I found it very interesting to read.
I liked the comment that you high lighted in red.
Talk about being vain or bragging!!!!