Timekeeping

[bobby81]

I recently purchased a Rolex Daytona 116503 last month to be exact. It was bought new I don't know if I have a problem or not. It's running fast by about five to eight seconds a day is this acceptable. I think I heard somewhere that the new Daytona's were accurate to +2-2 a day. Do you think I should leave it in to a RSC or am I nitpicking

[Atleo]

It's a racing watch. It's supposed to be fast! I'm kidding, I haven't a clue what is acceptable in this regard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Etschell]

Plus 2 minus 4. Send it in if under warranty.

[Eva123]

Let your watch to settle. Wear it for few months and then see what is actual result of timekeeping. According, to Rolex new standards watch should run -2 / +2 s/day. However, by reading this forum I get impression that some Rolex are keeping time within +1 / - 1s/day, however, everything depends on watch regulation and wearing habits.

For example, when I bought brand new DJII last year it was keeping time within + 2 / +2 s/d, then after some time I noticed that it runs +5 / 6 s/day. After 1 year it runs around +2/ 3 s/day. Yes, this is slightly higher than Rolex standard, however, for me it is fully acceptable and I will definitely will not spend time and efforts sending watch for regulation.

[HogwldFLTR]

If you have to pay shipping then, no. If you will regret not having it for a month then, no. Otherwise, why not.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by bobby81

I recently purchased a Rolex Daytona 116503 last month to be exact. It was bought new I don't know if I have a problem or not. It's running fast by about five to eight seconds a day is this acceptable. I think I heard somewhere that the new Daytona's were accurate to +2-2 a day. Do you think I should leave it in to a RSC or am I nitpicking

What the new spec means in the real world first the bare uncased movement is tested at the COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds over any 24 hour period to get the COSC certifaction. And in the first 10 days of testing the movement could vary by up to 10 seconds on any single 24 hour period and still pass the COSC test. After movement is shipped back to Rolex perhaps stored for weeks, months, or even a year before its matched to a case.Rolex then further tests on a timing machine to this new -2+2 AVERAGE spec,what does this mean well at time of testing on a machine the movement did comply to the new spec.But this is not a guarantee movement will perform exactly the same every day for life.It's not like they have put some sort of magic phoo phoo dust in the case to make them run better .As most movements are basically the same as the 3 series first brought out in 1988, and 4 series out in 2000,fact all the Rolex movements since the 15 series could with careful regulation match this new average daily spec. As it's all down to how well the movement is regulated ,and how the watch owners wearing habits reflect in the daily running of the watch.

Gravity affects mechanical watches the most thats why they are tested in 5 different positions.And in those different positions there will be very slight deviations in the timekeeping.Remember this the escapement of a mechanical watch in 24 hours pushes the gears 432,000 times.On the wrist the movement is constantly affected by the earth's gravity, metal expansion and contraction, temperature variations, subtle changes in lubrication and friction,mainspring power-reserve, shocks, and so on.The fact is that no mechanical watch made will keep perfect time, very close yes but perfect no and remember there are 86400 seconds in a day so will 2 or 3 seconds difference really matter only for the marketing, as brands like Omega started -2+2 so Rolex had to follow.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by padi56

What the new spec means in the real world first the bare uncased movement is tested at the COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds over any 24 hour period to get the COSC certifaction. And in the first 10 days of testing the movement could vary by up to 10 seconds on any single 24 hour period and still pass the COSC test. After movement is shipped back to Rolex perhaps stored for weeks, months, or even a year before its matched to a case.Rolex then further tests on a timing machine to this new -2+2 AVERAGE spec,what does this mean well at time of testing on a machine the movement did comply to the new spec.But this is not a guarantee movement will perform exactly the same every day for life.It's not like they have put some sort of magic phoo phoo dust in the case to make them run better .As most movements are basically the same as the 3 series first brought out in 1988, and 4 series out in 2000,fact all the Rolex movements since the 15 series could with careful regulation match this new average daily spec. As it's all down to how well the movement is regulated ,and how the watch owners wearing habits reflect in the daily running of the watch.

Gravity affects mechanical watches the most thats why they are tested in 5 different positions.And in those different positions there will be very slight deviations in the timekeeping.Remember this the escapement of a mechanical watch in 24 hours pushes the gears 432,000 times.On the wrist the movement is constantly affected by the earth's gravity, metal expansion and contraction, temperature variations, subtle changes in lubrication and friction,mainspring power-reserve, shocks, and so on.The fact is that no mechanical watch made will keep perfect time, very close yes but perfect no and remember there are 86400 seconds in a day so will 2 or 3 seconds difference really matter only for the marketing, as brands like Omega started -2+2 so Rolex had to follow.

I understand what you are saying Peter, but if you bought car that was suppoed to do zero to 60 in 5 seconds and it took 8 you'd be pretty pissed
off.

Rolex advertise the OP's Daytona as +2/-2 seconds per day after casing. No caveats, no *asterisk leading you to 3 pages of detailed description as to why that may not be the case. No mention of the word "average".

As a consumer you have every right to expect your watch to perform within those advertised specifications. It's not just "marketing" and if it doesn't perform to those specs whilst under warranty and Rolex fail to regulate your watch to within those specs during that period they are effectively misleading consumers and are in breach (in the UK) of Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations.

If, like you (and me), you accept that if your watch is running sensibly and there's no reason to mess with it for a few seconds a day here and there, thats fine. But if you don't perhaps have the same level of understanding as to what can effect accuracy, then there is no reason to accept less than what Rolex state the watch will achieve

[1rolexowner]

To me, much of the reason for owning a Rolex is the craftsmanship of the case, bracelet...the entire package. Two, three, five sec/day plus or minus is acceptable. Mine runs about 5 sec a day fast. That is about 2.5 min/month time gain. So, every month I set it 2 min behind time so it is within 2 min for 2 months. If you need better accuracy than that, buy quartz.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Devildog

I understand what you are saying Peter, but if you bought car that was suppoed to do zero to 60 in 5 seconds and it took 8 you'd be pretty pissed
off.

Rolex advertise the OP's Daytona as +2/-2 seconds per day after casing. No caveats, no *asterisk leading you to 3 pages of detailed description as to why that may not be the case. No mention of the word "average".

As a consumer you have every right to expect your watch to perform within those advertised specifications. It's not just "marketing" and if it doesn't perform to those specs whilst under warranty and Rolex fail to regulate your watch to within those specs during that period they are effectively misleading consumers and are in breach (in the UK) of Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations.

If, like you (and me), you accept that if your watch is running sensibly and there's no reason to mess with it for a few seconds a day here and there, thats fine. But if you don't perhaps have the same level of understanding as to what can effect accuracy, then there is no reason to accept less than what Rolex state the watch will achieve

Sorry no watch manufacturer can guarantee any movement to perform to this -2+2 spec every single day for life,there are far to many variables while on the wrist.Yes they state the movement is capable of -2+2 but show me anywhere where the state they guarantee it.And regarding the car test take what they say the car will do miles to the gallon.In the real world its doubtful if many achieved it ,why just to many variables in every drivers driving habits.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by padi56

Sorry no watch manufacturer can guarantee any movement to perform to this -2+2 spec every single day for life,there are far to many variables while on the wrist.Yes the state the movement is capable of -2+2 but show me anywhere where the state they guarantee it.

Its not for life - but a consumer has the right to expect that performance and Rolex have obligation to regulate the watch to those specs whilst its under warranty. They don't state the movement is capable of -2+2. The state the precision is -2/+2.

They don't have to state its guaranteed for it not to be legally misleading. Just as they don't have to state they guarantee anything. Rolex state the OP's watch is steel and 18ct yellow gold. They don't make any guarantees that its 18ct gold, but if it was found to be 9ct - how would you feel about that?

Cars are different - MPG is quoted as tested under certain permeters (and there is usually a disclaimer/caveat attached)

It may seem pedantic, but in law it amounts to the same thing if the reality is different to what is advertised.

If Rolex didn't expect +2/-2 , then they would have a disclaimer attached. The only other reasons for not having one would be stupidity or bad advice (both of which are highly doubtful)

The issue here isn't the watches themselves. It's consumer expectation which is entirely justifiable on the basis of how Rolex themselves market their watches.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by Devildog

As a consumer you have every right to expect your watch to perform within those advertised specifications. It's not just "marketing" and if it doesn't perform to those specs whilst under warranty and Rolex fail to regulate your watch to within those specs during that period they are effectively misleading consumers and are in breach (in the UK) of Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations.

So then how often do you send it in?

Weekly, monthly . . .?

[speedmaster73]

-2/+2...all marketing fluff.....just like 72 hr power reserve...fluff.....

-4/+6 COSC more than suffice....40+ hr power reserve more than suffice

meanwhile my ETA BASED IWC Aquatimer 2000 has run a consistent +1 per day since 2010

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Its not for life - but a consumer has the right to expect that performance and Rolex have obligation to regulate the watch to those specs whilst its under warranty. They don't state the movement is capable of -2+2. The state the precision is -2/+2.

They don't have to state its guaranteed for it not to be legally misleading. Just as they don't have to state they guarantee anything. Rolex state the OP's watch is steel and 18ct yellow gold. They don't make any guarantees that its 18ct gold, but if it was found to be 9ct - how would you feel about that?

Cars are different - MPG is quoted as tested under certain permeters (and there is usually a disclaimer/caveat attached)

It may seem pedantic, but in law it amounts to the same thing if the reality is different to what is advertised.

If Rolex didn't expect +2/-2 , then they would have a disclaimer attached. The only other reasons for not having one would be stupidity or bad advice (both of which are highly doubtful)

The issue here isn't the watches themselves. It's consumer expectation which is entirely justifiable on the basis of how Rolex themselves market their watches.

They state the precision is -2/+2 that could be perfectly correct at time of testing on the timeograph machine.But do they state it will perform exactly the same while on the wrist. They state it's been tested to -2+2 precision just like what they state at the COSC tested to a AVERAGE -4+6 seconds.Now I applaud Rolex now for testing the movement while in its own case thats a good thing.But they must have some sort machine to test many many at a time at Rolex HQ. As it would be almost impossible to regulated every single movement by hand considering around 850000 plus movements are used each year. And they still have the word chronometer on the dial so they are still tested at the COSC to the -4+6 average spec to be a certified Swiss chronometer .

[904VT]

Since you should still be under warranty, I would wear it a few months and see what it does over a longer time period. If you're not happy then at that point, perhaps send in for regulation.

My two most recent modern Rolex, a 116610 and 116520 are both dated/purchased (AD card) Feb 2016 and have consistently ran at about + or - 1 second/day and have been extremely accurate. That being said, I'm sure yours could be regulated to closer to the +2/-2 specs if needed, so no need to stress too much in the interim IMO.

[kauffee]

You have every right for it to be within the +2/-2 that Rolex guarantees. While it may not be a lifetime guarantee, it's certainly a guarantee while it's under the 5 year warrantee. Rolex will regulate it under warrantee if you send it in.

This would definitely bother me enough to send it in. I'd probably wear it for a month or two just to enjoy it and see if it settles. Also play with nighttime positioning. By laying it down in different positions overnight I can keep my Sub to essentially +/- 0.

[Chiboy]

I sincerely doubt that any poster on here EVER has suggested that a Rolex should be within +/- 2 seconds every single day regardless of conditions. But many people I know tend to lead somewhat similar lives day in and day out. And I have found that if my watch is 5 seconds a day fast on Monday, it is around 5 seconds a day fast on Tuesday. So while I understand that gravity, perhaps elevation, activity level, and a thousand other factors can affect the speed a watch runs, it is not in my opinion so outlandish to expect that a watch advertised as +/- 2 seconds live up to standard or be easily regulated to do so.

I will never understand why this is so anathema to some people. If you don't care if your watch is off by a minute a week, great! If perhaps you wear your watch every day and would prefer not to have the time differential build up to five minutes a month, or you just enjoy the idea that a fine mechanical watch that you just spent a pile of money on can be as accurate as they say it will be, have it regulated without shame or scorn.