Any truth to this?????

[Widows Son]

Stopped by my watch/clock repair shop this afternoon. I needed the braclet adjusted on my mid 80's TT OP Date. I was wearing my 1991 AK at the time. We started talking about repairing watches. He said that he wasn't impressed with the newer Rolex's (10 years and newer). He said that the movements weren't as precise as the older ones and didn't keep as good of time. Any truth to this??? He doesn't sell new watches so he wasn't bad mouthing new Rolex's to sell more of something else. just got me thinking.....

[roadcarver]

I dunno about that. My SD (D serial) is keeping within COSC. Is there a reason that he gave as to why he's come to that conclusion?

[Leighton]

Must be the old "they don't make 'em like they used to" mentality. My GMT II-C runs about + 0.25 seconds per day....

[RW16610]

Originally Posted by Leighton

Must be the old "they don't make 'em like they used to" mentality. My GMT II-C runs about + 0.25 seconds per day....

Lol that is what it seems like to me. Rolex only continues to make improvments, a watch that is properly oiled and adjusted should be fine and if placed in the correct position at night you should have no worries at all. I don't know but i'm loving the new ones.

[Vanessa CW21]

Originally Posted by Widows Son

Stopped by my watch/clock repair shop this afternoon. I needed the braclet adjusted on my mid 80's TT OP Date. I was wearing my 1991 AK at the time. We started talking about repairing watches. He said that he wasn't impressed with the newer Rolex's (10 years and newer). He said that the movements weren't as precise as the older ones and didn't keep as good of time. Any truth to this??? He doesn't sell new watches so he wasn't bad mouthing new Rolex's to sell more of something else. just got me thinking.....

Everybody has a right to his own opinion, but I believe this guy has not very much knowledge about the newer updated movements. Maybe he isn't properly trained to work on them, and it might scare him to actually repair one. Doesn't mean the movements are of less quality. It might be his own quality that is lingering. No offense.

[Chris B]

Originally Posted by Leighton

Must be the old "they don't make 'em like they used to" mentality.

Spot on


Girls were prettier, days were longer & sunnier too

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Imho, the new movements are superb.

The new movts. are much more consistant in terms of deviation caused by various positions. Therefore, the "Positional Correction" rules seen in the FAQ's more applied to the old movts. than the new ones.

[oneillba]

Originally Posted by Chris B

Spot on


Girls were prettier, days were longer & sunnier too

I was much handsomer too... at least that's what I keep telling myself. :-)

[f16570]

Opinions are like a*seholes.
Everybody's got one.
Mine is +1 a day. Clearly inaccurate for a mechanical wacth.

[warrenmich]

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=41724

My GMTIIc won't even lose 2 mins a year if it keeps this pace!

[vukotab]

Well, from my experience... I had Z-series Explorer II and OP Date with legendary 1570 caliber inside of it.
1570 was much more accurate than newer movement. And, which is most funniest thing, it was more consistent than Expy, both of them were in COSC range, but Expy used to run faster 2-3 minutes per month, while OP Date was losing maximum one minute per month!
But, both of them were great watches, bless them!!!

[Welshwatchman]

A case of "nostalgaritis" on the part of the old bloke, I reckon.

[timetravel125]

Originally Posted by Chris B

Spot on


Girls were prettier, days were longer & sunnier too

I concur! When I was growing up, skies were bluer, bread were tastier, and people were more respectful...

Before I discovered TRF, I asked the question, whether old watches were better made than the newer models--from another Rolex Forum, I was flamed, and since then I had been traumatized and scarred.

Accuracy between vintage vs. newer models is another can of worms. We get different opinions, so it is moot.

[watchnut]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

Imho, the new movements are superb.

The new movts. are much more consistant in terms of deviation caused by various positions. Therefore, the "Positional Correction" rules seen in the FAQ's more applied to the old movts. than the new ones.

I have got to get these glasses changed! When I first read over this answer I thought it said "postcoital correction"! Makes sense from the deviation in positions standpoint.

[Perdu]

Some of Rolexs' movements haven't changed in 20 years. I think the cal. 3135 last got an update in 1988, right?

[Widows Son]

Originally Posted by roadcarver

I dunno about that. My SD (D serial) is keeping within COSC. Is there a reason that he gave as to why he's come to that conclusion?

He just said that the gears weren't cut as precisly as years ago.

[dfn8tly]

I have the difficult task of adjusting my GMT-II by one or two minutes maybe three times a year.

Perhaps his memory is similar to mine where I've been known to intone "The older I get the better I was". (Quote from another Forum member)

[Leighton]

Originally Posted by watchnut

I have got to get these glasses changed! When I first read over this answer I thought it said "postcoital correction"! Makes sense from the deviation in positions standpoint.

Oh man, my side is killing me from

[RossInIllinois]

I never found any of my Rolex's to be really accurate time keepers.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by watchnut

I have got to get these glasses changed! When I first read over this answer I thought it said "postcoital correction"! Makes sense from the deviation in positions standpoint.

You mean coitus interuptus?