GMT II Losing Time?

[SC197]

Hi everyone, running into a "minor" issue here...

I got the new GMT II about 5 months ago, and for 3-4 months it was extremely accurate. I was essentially wearing it daily, months would go by and I would be off within a minute to actual.

However, lately I've been noticing that my watch has been losing about 5 seconds daily. I've tried everything (manually winding it more frequent, setting it down in different positions) and nothing seems to work. I personally hate it when my watches are slow (rather it be quick than slow). Just wondering if anyone has had the same experience?

Also, would this be something worth sending it into RSC or should I wait until much later? I want to say I really dont use my watch to tell time and its really there as an accessory, but something about knowing it not keeping accurate time still bugs me.

[zion_rasta]

That’s COSC. It would be a waste to send it to service. My GMT LN is +6 consistently no matter what, after service or 5 year use.

[Macnavara]

Originally Posted by zion_rasta

That’s COSC. It would be a waste to send it to service. My GMT LN is +6 consistently no matter what, after service or 5 year use.

It should be +/- 2 secs per day si id get it looked at whilst under warranty

[No SUBctitute]

I totally agree with you on fast being much better than slow. If this is your only watch (and you don't rotate) then after a month your watch will be almost 3 minutes slow. That's annoying.

That said, its only been running slow a bit more than a month. So, you might want to give it several months or more to see if it settles into a different accuracy level. It is curious that you have tried different resting positions and they have NO affect on the accuracy. Is the new movement so good that different resting positions don't affect it? Thoughts?

If more time and various positions don't change the accuracy--and if its your daily watch--then I wouldn't put up with 3 minutes slow per month (cue a senior TRFer talking about how many seconds there are in a day ). Get a recommendation for a solid AD watchmaker or independent watchmaker and have it regulated. If its running consistently, then a regulation should be able to speed it up a little.

[PepsiBezel]

It should be +/-2 s/d — that’s the Rolex standard for new models. I had a watch that was running slower than the standard, and fortunately lived near an RSC. They took it in, checked it, and regulated it to +0,6 s/d for me. It only took a few days for them to do this and return it to mr — all under warranty.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by HarryFlashman

It should be +/-2 s/d — that’s the Rolex standard for new models. I had a watch that was running slower than the standard, and fortunately lived near an RSC. They took it in, checked it, and regulated it to +0,6 s/d for me. It only took a few days for them to do this and return it to mr — all under warranty.

Look this -2+2 seconds standard all it means in the real world is that the movement was tested in a controlled on a machine many at a time,and time of testing it met this average -2+2 precision test.This dont mean it will be exactly the same every day for life all it means it was tested, just like when they test at the Swiss COSC to get the chronometer certification.And no matter what they regulate too on machine dont always mean it will perform exactly the same on the wrist.As on the wrist there are many many variables to overcome like wearers wearing habits, gravity,mainspring-power reserve,different temperatures,shocks on the wrist,plus many others.So in the real world for any purely mechanical watch to perform to within a few seconds daily either way out of 86400 is truly a mechanical marvel.

[spacedinvader]

I’ve read a couple of other reports of the 126710 (3285 movement) doing this. Mine too. It was reliably +2 seconds a day for at least a year (assuming consistent overnight resting position) but recently I noticed it is now -3 seconds a day.

I think talking about it being “accurate enough” or COSC etc is missing the point. Such a common(ish) trend of change in time keeping accuracy is indicative of something unusual going on, no? Possible some kind of fault or issue that you wouldn’t expect in a movement.

[Ian Macdermott]

I want to say I really dont use my watch to tell time and its really there as an accessory, but something about knowing it not keeping accurate time still bugs me.

If you don't wear it to tell the time simply set it 30 seconds fast every week.

[PepsiBezel]

Originally Posted by padi56

Look this -2+2 seconds standard all it means in the real world is that the movement was tested in a controlled on a machine many at a time,and time of testing it met this average -2+2 precision test.This dont mean it will be exactly the same every day for life all it means it was tested, just like when they test at the Swiss COSC to get the chronometer certification.And no matter what they regulate too on machine dont always mean it will perform exactly the same on the wrist.As on the wrist there are many many variables to overcome like wearers wearing habits, gravity,mainspring-power reserve,different temperatures,shocks on the wrist,plus many others.So in the real world for any purely mechanical watch to perform to within a few seconds daily either way out of 86400 is truly a mechanical marvel.

Respectfully, and my goal is not to argue with a moderator, but I do not understand this response.

While 86395 seconds out of 86400 is a mechanical marvel, 86398 to 86402 is even more of a mechanical marvel.

If a relatively new Rolex with a 3285 movement is -5 -s/d, that is an issue. Rolex thinks it is an issue, because they make mechanical marvels that they test a lot under a lot of circumstances.

And, in my personal experience, having a 126710 with a 3285 that was running -5 s/d, the local RSC addressed the issue as being outside their expected tolerance, and quickly remedied the issue.

This is a discussion about Rolex and their movements after all — not hype, nicknames, investments, which color is better, etc.

I’ve had multiple Rolex and other mechanical watches since 2005, and don’t expect the same from all of them — but it is reasonable to expect a high standard from a 32XX series movement.

Originally Posted by spacedinvader

I’ve read a couple of other reports of the 126710 (3285 movement) doing this. Mine too. It was reliably +2 seconds a day for at least a year (assuming consistent overnight resting position) but recently I noticed it is now -3 seconds a day.

I think talking about it being “accurate enough” or COSC etc is missing the point. Such a common(ish) trend of change in time keeping accuracy is indicative of something unusual going on, no? Possible some kind of fault or issue that you wouldn’t expect in a movement.

I agree, if you notice significant variance outside Rolex stated norms, it may be useful as a means of something else going on.

If you bought a car that stated its MPG range was 35-40 mpg city/highway, and you were getting 20 mpg, you might wonder if there was some unseen issue...

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by HarryFlashman

If a relatively new Rolex with a 3285 movement is -5 s/d, that is an issue. Rolex thinks it is an issue, because they make mechanical marvels that they test a lot under a lot of circumstances.

And, in my personal experience, having a 126710 with a 3285 that was running -5 s/d, the local RSC addressed the issue as being outside their expected tolerance, and quickly remedied the issue.

Your sentiment is spot on. Fifty years ago, 5 seconds off a day seemed pretty good. But watchmaking is more advanced today and it has become easier to engineer a more accurate watch. Today you can buy a COSC (-4/+6) Christopher Ward watch for a $1000. If I am spending almost 10 grand on a Rolex I expect it to run much more accurately than that.

Rolex's new 2 second standard isn't a lab test that has no applicability to wearing a watch--its a lab test with accuracy that Rolex expects to mimic on a person. Unless you are doing something crazy with how and where you wear the watch, the 2 second standard is pretty attainable. Most watches come out of the box running within that standard. And, if not, Rolex will make it so. In fact, Rolex's willingness to spend their own time and money to get a watch to run within 2 seconds shows that they hold their watches to that standard even when being worn.

[Fred48]

"Today you can buy a COSC (-4/+6) Christopher Ward watch for a $1000. If I am spending almost 10 grand on a Rolex I expect it to run much more accurately than that."

My watch collection ranges from $500 to $7K, and they all consistently run +/- 2 sec/d on wrist. Fortunately, they all have low positional variation due to being well adjusted. If a watch is well adjusted, regulation is pretty straightforward.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Fred48

"Today you can buy a COSC (-4/+6) Christopher Ward watch for a $1000. If I am spending almost 10 grand on a Rolex I expect it to run much more accurately than that."

My watch collection ranges from $500 to $7K, and they all consistently run +/- 2 sec/d on wrist. Fortunately, they all have low positional variation due to being well adjusted. If a watch is well adjusted, regulation is pretty straightforward.

Many years ago bought a Chinese ST19 movement as a replacement movement for a very old Swiss Venus powered chronograph that was water damaged.By research I learned that the Chinese firm Seagull bought the tooling rights of the Swiss Venus movement when many of the Swiss movement manufactures when bust back in the 1970s owning to the introduction of quartz watches.Now Seagull modified the movement from 19800 BPH to 21600 BPH and increased the power-reserve.When movement arrived could not believe how well it was finished,when tested on timograph it was running +7 seconds not bad for a $60 movement.But after careful regulation got it down to a consistent AVERAGE +2 seconds on the wrist and is still running today but must admit have re-regulated it quite a few time but a simple task to do.And the bare uncased Rolex movements are still tested at the Swiss COSC to AVERAGE -4+6 seconds to bare the name chronometer on the dial test is at time of testing.Much like when Rolex retests on a machines with movement in there cases to this -2+2 spec.It's just a test to say at at time of testing, movement met said spec much like the COSC test.This is not a guarantee it will perform exactly the same every day for life.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by No SUBctitute

Your sentiment is spot on. Fifty years ago, 5 seconds off a day seemed pretty good. But watchmaking is more advanced today and it has become easier to engineer a more accurate watch. Today you can buy a COSC (-4/+6) Christopher Ward watch for a $1000. If I am spending almost 10 grand on a Rolex I expect it to run much more accurately than that.

Rolex's new 2 second standard isn't a lab test that has no applicability to wearing a watch--its a lab test with accuracy that Rolex expects to mimic on a person. Unless you are doing something crazy with how and where you wear the watch, the 2 second standard is pretty attainable. Most watches come out of the box running within that standard. And, if not, Rolex will make it so. In fact, Rolex's willingness to spend their own time and money to get a watch to run within 2 seconds shows that they hold their watches to that standard even when being worn.

Precisely
The new "SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER" + or - 2 second per day standard applies to a cased up movement to closer replicate the actual operating environment
Further to this.
Back when the standard was COSC, Rolex would routinely adjust the movements to run well within the standard and could easily achieve near on perfect accuracy.
I can say this because they had done it for me on a number of occassions at my request.

[fskywalker]

COSC is -4 / +6 so if runing at -5 spd is a tad slower than COSC (but as said above 3 seconds slower than the -2 / -+2 spec
from Rolex on newer movements). You could attempt regulation with a watchmaker to see if it improves before considering having it serviced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Fred48]

Originally Posted by fskywalker

COSC is -4 / +6 so if runing at -5 spd is a tad slower than COSC (but as said above 3 seconds slower than the -2 / -+2 spec
from Rolex on newer movements). You could attempt regulation with a watchmaker to see if it improves before considering having it serviced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Maybe mechanical watches should come with a little button on the side to allow regulation by the user; then again, that might be a huge can of worms!

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by SC197

Hi everyone, running into a "minor" issue here...

I got the new GMT II about 5 months ago, and for 3-4 months it was extremely accurate. I was essentially wearing it daily, months would go by and I would be off within a minute to actual.

However, lately I've been noticing that my watch has been losing about 5 seconds daily. I've tried everything (manually winding it more frequent, setting it down in different positions) and nothing seems to work. I personally hate it when my watches are slow (rather it be quick than slow). Just wondering if anyone has had the same experience?

Also, would this be something worth sending it into RSC or should I wait until much later? I want to say I really dont use my watch to tell time and its really there as an accessory, but something about knowing it not keeping accurate time still bugs me.

Please search this forum, there are threads that describe the problems related to the new 32xx caliber families, which tend to suffer from lack of lubrication and start losing time regardless of the owners actions. I'm not saying that it's your case too but I'm sure it's worth reading.

[zion_rasta]

Wind & Wear

[oneover]

Do a search on the new 32XX movements losing time, it's a known issue.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by oneover

Do a search on the new 32XX movements losing time, it's a known issue.

Yes, sadly this is the case

[EEpro]

If it bothers you take it in. If you have an AD with a watchmaker perhaps they can apply lube and get it back in days instead of weeks.

6 digit Rolex are perfectly capable of meeting stated +/- 2 seconds over a period of time. If you're not getting that you can have it adjusted for your wearing habits. My watchmaker take 4 min from hello to handshake to adjust micro stella while I drink a bottle of water.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by EEpro

If it bothers you take it in. If you have an AD with a watchmaker perhaps they can apply lube and get it back in days instead of weeks.

6 digit Rolex are perfectly capable of meeting stated +/- 2 seconds over a period of time. If you're not getting that you can have it adjusted for your wearing habits. My watchmaker take 4 min from hello to handshake to adjust micro stella while I drink a bottle of water.

Just throwing a bit more lube at it, is not the way this fix works.
It is routine for parts to be replaced as part of the repair.
Note I say repair.
That is because abnormal wear on one key part is the result and the slowing of the timekeeping is symptomatic of the deeper issue.

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Just throwing a bit more lube at it, is not the way this fix works.
It is routine for parts to be replaced as part of the repair.
Note I say repair.
That is because abnormal wear on one key part is the result and the slowing of the timekeeping is symptomatic of the deeper issue.

Oh dear. Replace the worn parts and properly lubricate. My intent was not to detail how a watchmaker will perform the 32XX fix. From what I've read lubrication is the issue.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by EEpro

From what I've read lubrication is the issue.

It's a bigger problem than that

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by Dirt

It's a bigger problem than that

That's too bad. Fingers crossed my Pepsi doesn't suck hind teat.

[1William]

It is all about expectations and if a watch does not live up to what was advertised and is expected then take it in for regulation/service. When I experience issue with timing, and when I actually care enough to monitor it, I will give the watch a full wind and set the time and then wear the watch over a multiple day time frame before I check it again. If you are resetting the watch daily you might not be getting to what might not be a timing issue over several days or weeks. All of my watches run better when I wear them. Good luck and keep us posted.

[GoingPlaces]

Not a big deal, but if you're that concerned have them look at it.

[Roddypeepa]

I believe a watch that is pretty stable and then suddenly goes awol despite very similar wearing has an issue. Doesn’t matter if it’s still cosc, something is amiss. My 114060 has gone from less than a second a day to plus 2 or just a bit more a day since the summer. Something is upsetting it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tools]

If you are not happy with the timing, find a Dealer watchmaker that is authorized to do regulations, many are. He should be able to tell if it needs to be sent in for a "fix" or not.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Tools

If you are not happy with the timing, find a Dealer watchmaker that is authorized to do regulations, many are. He should be able to tell if it needs to be sent in for a "fix" or not.

Agreed

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Roddypeepa

I believe a watch that is pretty stable and then suddenly goes awol despite very similar wearing has an issue. Doesn’t matter if it’s still cosc, something is amiss. My 114060 has gone from less than a second a day to plus 2 or just a bit more a day since the summer. Something is upsetting it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Completely within the realms of normality
Relax