Rolex 1680 - Accuracy

[dave_dave]

Hi all,
Have purchased a recently serviced 1680.
Was over the moon with the watch until I noticed it runs 4 sec slow per day when left on the table facing up. And 12 sec fast per day when on the wrist.
Is this normal for a 1680?
Thank you.

[Dan S]

You really can't generalize about an entire reference for a 50+ year old watch. It depends so much on the condition of the movement, how it was maintained, and how thoroughly it was serviced/repaired/regulated. If you want it to keep better time, it might be possible, but you will need to find a watchmaker that is really willing to inspect every bit of the movement with a microscope, and repair/replace as necessary. It could cost more than you want to spend. Most vintage watch enthusiasts really don't care that much.

[996marty]

Sounds like you have a really nice watch and the fact it’s running off slightly for me is nothing to be concerned about. After all it’s a vintage watch and being concerned with it being slow by 4 seconds or fast by 12 is a little over the top. Enjoy it for what it is

[dave_dave]

Ahhh makes sense.
I was under the impression the cal 1575 was a robust workhorse and with it being serviced, it should fall in range of cosc.
Watch is still under warranty - would it be unreasonable to ask for it to regulated?
Or just leave it as that is how the vintage watches work (sorry it's my first vintage watch and I have no idea).

[996marty]

Originally Posted by dave_dave

Ahhh makes sense.
I was under the impression the cal 1575 was a robust workhorse and with it being serviced, it should fall in range of cosc.
Watch is still under warranty - would it be unreasonable to ask for it to regulated?
Or just leave it as that is how the vintage watches work (sorry it's my first vintage watch and I have no idea).

If it was me I’d just leave it. I laughed when I first read your post because I’ve got an old Tudor submariner that probably loses 2-3 minutes a day but I just live with it and enjoy it for what it is

[DarknerImperator]

Like car engines,even the movements need an overhaul..
If an engine runs out of oil, it breaks !
Same thing with a movement, especially if we use it every day...;)

[Pete17]

My red sub from 1970 runs beautifully. +2secs per day.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by dave_dave

Hi all,
Have purchased a recently serviced 1680.
Was over the moon with the watch until I noticed it runs 4 sec slow per day when left on the table facing up. And 12 sec fast per day when on the wrist.
Is this normal for a 1680?
Thank you.

I'd have a watchmaker put it on a timegrapher for a quick look at the secs/day in a couple of positions as well as the amplitude and beat error. He'll tell you if it needs a service from those numbers. Otherwise just buy one on Amazon for $120 and watch a few relevant vids on YouTube.

[brandrea]

Do you have any service information on the watch?

Adam’s advice is the route I’d go.

Well honestly, I’d just take it in to a watchmaker to have it tested and skip the timeographer

[Yachtbuoy]

My '77 1603 runs within the +2/-2 spec

[77T]

The movement's performance reflects a lot of things - some mechanical, some environmental.

Presuming it was properly serviced, the different results show how it handles the various different positions while on your wrist.

A final thought, sometimes a watchmaker reuses a part that needs replacing. S/he won't know until an owner returns it due to imprecise performance. A pivot jewel perhaps had been damaged due to an earlier owner's failure to service the watch over the decades - maybe going without lube for years - and thus the decent performance in static mode, but poorer performance IRL action.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Robison347]

In the late 1970s I was starting my career as an engineer, and I bought one of those watches new. At the time, I had a Seiko quartz watch that I’d gotten to replace a broken Timex. The Seiko had impressed me with its incredible accuracy - remember, in 1975, quartz watches were still a novelty.

All the while, I knew the reputation of Rolex. One thing I also knew was that I’d be giving up the accuracy of the Seiko for the opportunity to wear such a prestigious watch. I took for granted accuracy of 1-2 minutes a day from inexpensive Timex and Bulova watches, and I knew the Rolex would be a lot better, but I didn’t know how much better till I bought my first one.

In those days every Rolex watch came with a timing certificate showing the test results for that particular watch, and mine was 4-6 seconds a day in the various positions. Today, you ask if 4-12 seconds a day is ok, but back then that was very impressive.

At the Rolex dealer, some watches were chronometers and met the 6 second standard, and others were not. When I got married, I got my wife a Date model, which was not a chronometer and was never better than 10-15 seconds a day.

Most of the guys at work still had mechanical watches when I got that Rolex. We had all been impressed with the accuracy of quartz watches, but as engineers, we understood the principles of operation and knew any quartz oscillator would deliver very good accuracy compared to a mechanical movement. That made the accuracy of my new Rolex that much more amazing.

Several of us knew the phone number of the National Bureau of Standards in Ft.Collins, Colorado by heart. That was the standard to set you watch to, if you were finicky. 303-499-7111. That number still works today, and I still call it.

Within a few years, that Rolex drifted to 10-12 seconds a day and I had to get it regulated. But many people just wore them like that, because in that day, that was still very good time keeping.

Now it’s 50 years later. When those watches were new, it was just a matter of setting them to achieve that accuracy. In your case, there may be worn parts to replace, and that opens another door - is the place that serviced it qualified to identify and change such parts? Not all jewelers who service these watches are.

If you sent that watch to Rolex, I believe they can now return it to you with the modern accuracy of +/- 2 seconds a day, but it may cost $1500 for the work to get it there. If some other person did the work, they may or may not have the ability to achieve that, warranty notwithstanding.

In my experience, the accuracy you see it pretty typical for movements of that period.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by Robison347

Several of us knew the phone number of the National Bureau of Standards in Ft.Collins, Colorado by heart. That was the standard to set you watch to, if you were finicky. 303-499-7111. That number still works today, and I still call it.

Just to add slightly to this. The radio transmitter broadcasting the time is in fact near Fort Collins, but the only thing in Fort Collins is a broadcast station. The atomic clock itself is of course at the NBS (now NIST) lab in Boulder. We don't like to give Fort Collins any credit if we can avoid it. :-)

[Fredrik]

Originally Posted by dave_dave

Ahhh makes sense.
I was under the impression the cal 1575 was a robust workhorse and with it being serviced, it should fall in range of cosc.
Watch is still under warranty - would it be unreasonable to ask for it to regulated?
Or just leave it as that is how the vintage watches work (sorry it's my first vintage watch and I have no idea).

It can be regulated within cosc if it is properly serviced.
My -78 1680 currently runs at +20s/month. I usually wear it a couple of months after a service and then I go back to have it tightly regulated and telling them how it runs with my wearing habits.

[0nly5iv3Digits]

If it was recently serviced, it just needs a regulation. Like the post above. Have it regulated. You'll get +/- 2s/day no problem with the right regulation.

[dave_dave]

Thank you all for your input.

I called the shop and was advised to bring in the watch for the watch maker to regulate. Was advised by the shop owner that the watch should run -4 and +6 seconds per day.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by dave_dave

Thank you all for your input.

I called the shop and was advised to bring in the watch for the watch maker to regulate. Was advised by the shop owner that the watch should run -4 and +6 seconds per day.

The Rolex after-sales rate tolerance document specifies an average rate of -1 / +10 s/d for the 1575. Rolex measures the caliber in 5 positions with a professional timegrapher.

[studioal]

I was under the impression the cal 1575 was a robust workhorse and with it being serviced, it should fall in range of cosc.

Almost any watch can be regulated to within COSC spec, however, not all watches are built with parts designed to meet COSC spec. There is a huge difference in how well those parts are made, tolerances, etc. So therefore, your 1680 is running well given the movement isn't a COSC certified movement.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by studioal

Almost any watch can be regulated to within COSC spec, however, not all watches are built with parts designed to meet COSC spec. There is a huge difference in how well those parts are made, tolerances, etc. So therefore, your 1680 is running well given the movement isn't a COSC certified movement.

Shouldn't a 1680 be COSC-certified. Mine say chronometer on the dial. Or is this a distinction between what Rolex means by "superlative chronometer" vs COSC.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by studioal

Almost any watch can be regulated to within COSC spec, however, not all watches are built with parts designed to meet COSC spec. There is a huge difference in how well those parts are made, tolerances, etc. So therefore, your 1680 is running well given the movement isn't a COSC certified movement.

No.
The caliber 1575 (inside the 1680) is a certified chronometer COSC (Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres) movement.

[hm1time]

I thought the old standard was between -4 and +6 seconds/day; and the newer standard was -2/+2, or at least that’s what I recall reading.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Shouldn't a 1680 be COSC-certified. Mine say chronometer on the dial. Or is this a distinction between what Rolex means by "superlative chronometer" vs COSC.

These watches aren't certified chronometers for life. Parts slowly wear down and need replacement and unless one replaces all the movement parts necessary to have a "like new" movement with chronometer accuracy, one should not expect it - but, some vintage watches do keep fairly accurate time and within Rolex chronometer specifications.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by springer

These watches aren't certified chronometers for life. Parts slowly wear down and need replacement and unless one replaces all the movement parts necessary to have a "like new" movement with chronometer accuracy, one should not expect it - but, some vintage watches do keep fairly accurate time and within Rolex chronometer specifications.

Absolutely, I never expect that level of performance. I was just responding to the person who suggested that the movement wasn't COSC-certified. IIRC, 1680s were all chronometers when manufactured.

[studioal]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Shouldn't a 1680 be COSC-certified. Mine say chronometer on the dial. Or is this a distinction between what Rolex means by "superlative chronometer" vs COSC.

I had 5513's on the mind. But I think my overall sentiment leans more towards not expecting factory-COSC performance out of a 50+ year old watch, unless the watchmaker was very scrupulous about replacing any and every part that showed some level of wear.

Side question: If you buy a watch that is COSC certified, what is a reasonable amount of time to expect that movement to still be within those accuracy parameters? I have a 2022 BB58 that is drifting toward the low end of COSC at -5 spd on average. Seems pretty early for it to be doing that.

[cascavel]

I bought a 1680, new, in 1980. From the day I bought it it ran about 4 minutes fast per month and I wore it every single day for the next 25 years. I had it serviced by Rolex in NYC in 2005 and when I got it back it ran 4 minutes fast per month.

[SOG DIVER]

A 1969 red 1680 Submariner purchased in Hong Kong at the China Fleet Club
has kept excellent time through the decades. Almost as accurate as a 1960 version of a gilt-dialed 5512.
But, as they become older as discussed, COSC watches and their accuracy will be affected
through subjective wear and varied service. It is a tribute to Rolex quality that they continue to function as intended.

A respected CW-21 who has contributed to this forum has indicated to me that the metals found in vintage Rolex reference calibers are superior to the metal quality in today's models.
A review of modern vehicles and their composition will help to reinforce that finding.