New Rolex, not +2/-2

[N5XTC]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

My 3235 gains about 3 seconds a month




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

that is an absolutely gorgeous watch!!!!!!

[N5XTC]

i can tell you this, they tested my sub on machines, it performs different on the wrist. wear it for a few weeks and track it by hand. i bet she locks in within specs after awhile. if not, you have her regulated.

[904VT]

Did it even get a chance to run on a full power reserve yet? Give it some time to see how it behaves over normal cycles. You have 5 years of warranty

[fastship1009]

give it some time.

[Ricky Rolex]

My Explorer was running +4 a day at first and I though ouch but I’ve worn it almost every day and after about a month it’s literally running +2 a day exactly.

I think once it settles down and gets into a rhythm of sorts it becomes more accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocket launcher]

Should have bought an Air-King It's probably magnetised... Air-Kings have anti magnetic properties...

There is more to worry about in this world than +2-2 you should really be thinking ..I should have bought an Air-King.

[Rado63]

Remember you have a five year warranty from Rolex. I would wear the watch and when not in use , keep on the winder then start logging the seconds lost or gained and if it isn't within the spec, then send it in.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Rado63

Remember you have a five year warranty from Rolex. I would wear the watch and when not in use , keep on the winder then start logging the seconds lost or gained and if it isn't within the spec, then send it in.

No, forget the bloody stupid winder.
That only adds another layer of complexity to the issue that has absolutely no bearing on reality.

To the OP.
Wear the watch as much as possible for a few months whilst keeping an eye on it's accuracy if you need to.
But don't do anything about it until then.
Also consider that if you send the watch in early, it may come back with some damage that may be unacceptable to you which could be more problematic.
Remember there's 86 blah blah blah thousand seconds in a day and a few here or there is not going to stop the sun from coming up. Enjoy the watch

[Jostack]

So, are you trying to say that Rolex builds their watches to a standard that they themselves set, and uses a testing methodology for that standard that in no way represents real world usage?

That I would find comical.

I grow tired of people constantly making excuses for poor timing of Rolex watches. They are absolutely capable of running within the +/-2spd spec on wrist. I have other mechanical watches that are built to a lesser standard and yet they somehow manage to operate far better than that standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[peterskinner]

Rolex don’t need excuses; and anyone who believes rivals make a more precise watch is free to buy one. Good luck.
A little test. Wear your Rolex for a few days, note the level of precision . Let a friend wear it for a few days....do you expect the results to be the same? And are you claiming that the level of precision can be independent of use? That gravity, state-of-the-wind, friction, temperature and velocity need not make any difference?
You, my friend, need quartz.

[Jostack]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

Rolex don’t need excuses; and anyone who believes rivals make a more precise watch is free to buy one. Good luck.
A little test. Wear your Rolex for a few days, note the level of precision . Let a friend wear it for a few days....do you expect the results to be the same? And are you claiming that the level of precision can be independent of use? That gravity, state-of-the-wind, friction, temperature and velocity need not make any difference?
You, my friend, need quartz.

I would not expect the results to be the same. I don’t expect it to vary by a huge margin. I do own quartz, and spring drive. I’m not comparing Rolex to spring drive or quartz. I’m comparing it to a Tudor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by Jostack

They are absolutely capable of running within the +/-2spd spec on wrist.

For what period of time?

[Jostack]

Originally Posted by beshannon

For what period of time?

I think that is a question for Rolex. I’m waiting on mine to return from RSC. Then I will be able to provide some data on that. I see many posts on these forums that indicate people’s Rolex perform to very good specs.

I have a black bay that has been averaging zero spd over the last year+.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Jostack

I think that is a question for Rolex. I’m waiting on mine to return from RSC. Then I will be able to provide some data on that. I see many posts on these forums that indicate people’s Rolex perform to very good specs.

I have a black bay that has been averaging zero spd over the last year+.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you have a watch that has been averaging zero spd over the past year plus. How do you measure averaging zero spd, so your watch has not deviated even by 1 second in over a year of running,was this testing done on fantasy island.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

-2+2 is an average of five tested positions. Dial up, dial down, crown down, crown left and crown up.

Did you test in five positions and take the average or just test one position?

Should be stickied

Originally Posted by Jostack

I think that is a question for Rolex. I’m waiting on mine to return from RSC. Then I will be able to provide some data on that. I see many posts on these forums that indicate people’s Rolex perform to very good specs.

I have a black bay that has been averaging zero spd over the last year+.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So the OP posted that his watch was +4 and your response was that it should run +2/-2.

Your watch is "zero" per day but what is the average over time? If your watch was +4 today and -4 tomorrow are you still happy?

Based on your comments you should be very unhappy.

[Jostack]

Originally Posted by padi56

So you have a watch that has been averaging zero spd over the past year plus. How do you measure averaging zero spd, so your watch has not deviated even by 1 second in over a year of running,was this testing done on fantasy island.

Yes of course. It is a fantasy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Jostack

So, are you trying to say that Rolex builds their watches to a standard that they themselves set, and uses a testing methodology for that standard that in no way represents real world usage?

That I would find comical.

I grow tired of people constantly making excuses for poor timing of Rolex watches. They are absolutely capable of running within the +/-2spd spec on wrist. I have other mechanical watches that are built to a lesser standard and yet they somehow manage to operate far better than that standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you work for Omega


But you know how accuracy tests are conducted right? It’s not how the OP conducted. That’s the equivalent of solving a mph question with a kph answer.

[Dsmith1974]

Originally Posted by Jostack

So, are you trying to say that Rolex builds their watches to a standard that they themselves set, and uses a testing methodology for that standard that in no way represents real world usage?

That I would find comical.

I grow tired of people constantly making excuses for poor timing of Rolex watches. They are absolutely capable of running within the +/-2spd spec on wrist. I have other mechanical watches that are built to a lesser standard and yet they somehow manage to operate far better than that standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Poor timing? Come on..!

It’s 4s brand new. Will probably be 2s within six months and three seconds within twenty years.

People taking they’re watches back to the store because it’s one or two seconds over in the first few weeks. It’s like someone buying a Range Rover (4x4) and then getting upset because they got out accelerated by a Porsche.

[pickettt]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

Poor timing? Come on..!

It’s 4s brand new. Will probably be 2s within six months and three seconds within twenty years.

People taking they’re watches back to the store because it’s one or two seconds over in the first few weeks. It’s like someone buying a Range Rover (4x4) and then getting upset because they got out accelerated by a Porsche.

I hardly think that’s the gripe concerning Range Rovers.......I digress, sorry. Carry on.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by pickettt

I hardly think that’s the gripe concerning Range Rovers.......I digress, sorry. Carry on.

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

Poor timing? Come on..!

It’s 4s brand new. Will probably be 2s within six months and three seconds within twenty years.

People taking they’re watches back to the store because it’s one or two seconds over in the first few weeks. It’s like someone buying a Range Rover (4x4) and then getting upset because they got out accelerated by a Porsche.

I own a L322 Supercharged and somehow you both are correct

[Dsmith1974]

Originally Posted by pickettt

I hardly think that’s the gripe concerning Range Rovers.......I digress, sorry. Carry on.

Well OK. lol. My first inclination was to cite an Isuzu Trooper or a Land Rover Mk III. But in the interests of worldwide recognition I settled on the RR (which up until the mid 90s I’m sure was as bullet proof as any).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Terrakot]

In the current situation of global SS Rolex market you must be happy to own Submariner even if it not ticking at all

[gunhose]

I'm new here but I've owed Rolexes for the past 30 years and Ive lurked here for almost as long. Accuracy one these watches vary so much the longer you own it. Your watch will very dependingon how active you're in a day. Your watch will behave differently when it's at full wind and when the power is almost depleted. Thats why Rolex stipulates AVERAGE !

[Rolexoman]

My DJII gains 1 SPD while resting in any position in my static winder but while wearing it gains 3-4 SPD, my Tudor BB so far only gains 1 SPD and i can keep it there by different resting postilions but no matter what resting position my DJII never changes so as stated wear the watch and enjoy and don’t get caught up in CCTS ( constant checking time syndrome )

The big thing here as stated is consistency, as long as it’s off the same off all the time and not like +4 then -4 as stated

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by Jostack

If on wrist performance one day is +4 and the next day is -4, I would find that concerning. That is a big variation given similar conditions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Rolexoman

My DJII gains 1 SPD while resting in any position in my static winder but while wearing it gains 3-4 SPD, my Tudor BB so far only gains 1 SPD and i can keep it there by different resting postilions but no matter what resting position my DJII never changes so as stated wear the watch and enjoy and don’t get caught up in CCTS ( constant checking time syndrome )

The big thing here as stated is consistency, as long as it’s off the same off all the time and not like +4 then -4 as stated

If the watch gains +4 in one position and loses -4 in a different position that would be comfortably within tolerance. If there is a variation of -4 one day and +4 another day in the same position then there is a problem.

Also note you cannot compare static testing positions with performance in wear. Actual performance on the wrist varies second by second depending on the position of the watch and motion of the wearer. Certain actions can cause the watch to (normally) gain time, like running, tennis, golf, clapping your hands. Anything that vibrates through your wrist will have an instantaneous and temporary effect on the hairspring.

Long story short; the watch is not designed or expected to never deviate beyond the set standards. The standards are for ideal conditions.

[Jostack]

Originally Posted by watchmaker

If the watch gains +4 in one position and loses -4 in a different position that would be comfortably within tolerance. If there is a variation of -4 one day and +4 another day in the same position then there is a problem.

Also note you cannot compare static testing positions with performance in wear. Actual performance on the wrist varies second by second depending on the position of the watch and motion of the wearer. Certain actions can cause the watch to (normally) gain time, like running, tennis, golf, clapping your hands. Anything that vibrates through your wrist will have an instantaneous and temporary effect on the hairspring.

Long story short; the watch is not designed or expected to never deviate beyond the set standards. The standards are for ideal conditions.

I don’t understand why this topic seems so controversial. I never said I expect no deviation. I’m gauging timekeeping on averages. As such, by taking advantage of known resting position tendencies, you can effect the average to keep better time. I don’t think I’m breaking any news with this. It is not magic. I know some people don’t care at all about accuracy, and that’s fine. I get it. But you don’t have to be ‘anti-accuracy’.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Muxi]

Mechanical watches sometimes vary its accuracy over days especially if not worn daily. My white c500 is usually +2 when worn daily. But if I rotate, it slows down for some reason, maybe losing -1 or -2. Then when I start using it again for consecutive days it will begin to catch up. My newer black c500 is consistently +1 per day. My newly serviced 509 is +.25 sec per day in a winder.

[mattesq]

Give it a few months - new movements take a bit of time to "run-in". If it continues to deviate, or is out of spec RSC will regulate.

Congrats on the new Sub!

[ROLEXster]

Like others have said, give it some time.
Or my case, my 14 yr old sub running almost +/- 0
My Daytona also about +/- 0
If you are concerned after awhile, get it regulated.

[fsprow]

Just travel more and you’ll need to reset your watch often enough that a few seconds won’t mean anything. Please also read up on precision versus accuracy.