OT: Rolex Repair

[budrichard]

[quote=usefeet;759727]Just responding to your response.

"This happened to me, and that was the explanation given from the importer (and authorized service centre) about my watch a year ago."

What can I say, modern mechnical watches with modern lubrication have no problems with sitting. How long did your watch sit?

"Quite seperate from that, I don't believe everything I read (I suppose some people do)."
I don't believe everyting I read also, that's what I'm running one Sub to destruction to find out my own information and it appears that a few others responding to this thread have reached similar conlcusions.

"Also, ..I wouldn't fly an aeroplane that's been in storage for a year! "
Watches are not aeroplanes. Modern aeroplanes would be described as LOW RISK-HIGH CONSEQUENCE pieces of machinery whereas a mechanical watch would be LOW RISK- LOW CONSEQUENCE or maybe ZERO CONSEQUENCE if you ignore the cost of service!
Anyway not even apples and oranges so to speak.-Dick

[DES]

Ok all you Rolex buffs, having sat around and read alot of rubbish, as well as some sound advise I can take it no longer.......

I have been a jeweller now for some 36 years, during this time I have sold most of the high end watches and have been a Rolex Authorised Dealer,

Now I have my own shops and sell many makes but alas not Rolex, I do however sell them second hand, and this market is very strong....yes even now!!

If the watch is performing well...leave it, if it isnt... get it serviced...Simple!!!

There are excellent service people other than Rolex that use only Rolex spare parts etc. but that choice is up to you. There is mileage in keeping all Rolex receipts if ever you sell it.

Rolex used to issue a leaflet with every watch sold (no longer) talking about "Positional Errors"
relating to time keeping........................................... ....

If the watch was left over night on its side with the button (winder) upwards it would loose time.
If it was left on its side with the button downover it would loose even more time.
If it was left on its back facing up... it would gain time.

This way one could "regulate" its time keeping. (If you were a train spotter)

Few watches can beat Rolex in the secondary market, which amazes me because they are not the best watches...But they are the best known.

[Luis D]

Originally Posted by DES

Ok all you Rolex buffs, having sat around and read alot of rubbish, as well as some sound advise I can take it no longer.......

I have been a jeweller now for some 36 years.....
Now I have my own shops .....

If the watch was left over night on its side with the button (winder) upwards it would loose time.
If it was left on its side with the button downover it would loose even more time.
If it was left on its back facing up... it would gain time.

Funny that someone with 36 yrs experience would a)refer to a watch's crown as a "button (winder)", and would also not know that with a few exceptions (those not marked "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified") Rolexes are COSC-certified chronometers, which means they are adjusted to run consistently in 5 positions (crown up, crown down, crown left, crown right, dial up), and a proper overhaul entails adjusting them to the COSC standard once again.

BTW to answer the original poster's question, if there is no Rolex-factory-trained watchmaker with a word-of-mouth reputation (the equivalent of DAG to Leica) in your locality, I can recommend Stoll & Co. (americaswatchmaker.com) which uses by many jewelry shops as subcontractor for repairs. Also a good place to ask for recommendations for local watchmakers is watchuseek.com.

[DES]

Originally Posted by Luis D

Funny that someone with 36 yrs experience would a)refer to a watch's crown as a "button (winder)", and would also not know that with a few exceptions (those not marked "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified") Rolexes are COSC-certified chronometers, which means they are adjusted to run consistently in 5 positions (crown up, crown down, crown left, crown right, dial up), and a proper overhaul entails adjusting them to the COSC standard once again.

BTW to answer the original poster's question, if there is no Rolex-factory-trained watchmaker with a word-of-mouth reputation (the equivalent of DAG to Leica) in your locality, I can recommend Stoll & Co. (americaswatchmaker.com) which uses by many jewelry shops as subcontractor for repairs. Also a good place to ask for recommendations for local watchmakers is watchuseek.com.

Oh here we go again.........There is always one isnt there??
I refered to the your "Crown" as a button simply because "In the Trade" at least in the UK the crown is most often refered to as a "button" also most of the public refer to it as a winder not button and most certainly not crown...So in practice one tends to use the termanology that is most easily recognised.
When one needs a "crown" replacement with its stem, it is called a button and stem replacement...get it??
But I guess if all one does is read Rolex liteature from cover to cover this is easily understood.

Rolex still make models that are not Chronometers, and I listed the "positional errors" as an area of interest to those wanting to tweek the best out of their watches....Also if your "Superlative Officially Certified Chronometer " has not been serviced for a few years and suffering in timekeepingt his positional information may indeed STILL help.

[ho_co]

Originally Posted by Luis D

Rolexes are COSC-certified chronometers, which means they are adjusted to run consistently in 5 positions (crown up, crown down, crown left, crown right, dial up), and a proper overhaul entails adjusting them to the COSC standard once again.

Luis--"Adjusted to run consistently in 5 positions" is accurate but ambiguous as you stated it. It's worth checking the encyclopedia about chronometer certification. It may have changed since I gave the matter some study thirty years ago, but basically:

The manufacturer delivers a box of watches (9 or 12 or 16, some standard and specified number) to the certification agency.

The certification agency chooses a single watch from that batch and puts it through a set of positions--so many minutes on its face, so many on its side etc. If at the end of the test period the watch has not gained or lost any time, then *all* the watches in the box are declared Certified Chronometers.

If on the other hand the watch fails the certification test, then all the remaining watches in the box are individually tested. In this case, those that pass receive certification and those that fail are returned uncertified to the manufacturer to do with as he will. For example, he could simply sell these without the chronometer designation; or he might recalibrate them for resubmission; or he might even salt the failed watches into future batches offered for certification.

Remember, the agency that certifies chronometers is part of and both funded and accredited by the Swiss watch industry. There are, I think, only two brands that make wide use of chronometer certification as a selling point. At one time, Rolex advertising said that more than half of all certified chronometers were Rolexes. At the same time, an Omega brochure claimed that Omegas were such good timekeepers that nearly half of all watches certified as chronometers were Omegas.

Note also that certifying a watch as a chronometer requires putting it into a specified series of positions and afterward verifying timekeeping. Chronometer certification does not make any claims about maintaining time in each position, but rather that the watch gains and loses expected amounts of time in each position so that the overall result is no gain or loss.

This information comes from memory, and I'm sure I'm off in some details (such as how many watches are submitted for certification at a time). But there's a lot to be learned about how the Swiss watch industry works, and it's worth a bit of study. It's really fascinating.

[usefeet]

Originally Posted by DES

If the watch was left over night on its side with the button (winder) upwards it would loose time.
If it was left on its side with the button downover it would loose even more time.
If it was left on its back facing up... it would gain time.

DES, thanks for confirming. I was informed some time ago but the memory is a bit rusty.
I place mine button side down (overnight) and it runs about 1 minute fast every week. I guess I can accept this as good time keeping?

Regards

[usefeet]

[quote=budrichard;759844]

Originally Posted by usefeet

Just responding to your response.
"This happened to me, and that was the explanation given from the importer (and authorized service centre) about my watch a year ago."

What can I say, modern mechnical watches with modern lubrication have no problems with sitting. How long did your watch sit?
Dick

Answer: About 2 and a half years.

The aeroplane bit was only in humour.

[Luis D]

Originally Posted by DES

Oh here we go again.........There is always one isnt there??

Do you mean, someone who claims professional credentials on an internet forum and then trips himself up? And then turns hostile when he's called out? Yes, there is.

I refered to the your "Crown" as a button simply because "In the Trade" at least in the UK the crown is most often refered to as a "button" also most of the public refer to it as a winder not button and most certainly not crown...So in practice one tends to use the termanology that is most easily recognised.
When one needs a "crown" replacement with its stem, it is called a button and stem replacement...get it??
But I guess if all one does is read Rolex liteature from cover to cover this is easily understood.

Perhaps there are some here who base their opinions on having read Leica literature from cover to cover, so I can see where you might be confused OTOH I am a watch afficionado for many decades. Everyone everywhere (speaking English) who is even basically knowledgeable in watches calls it a crown. If you used the ignorant layman's term so to not confuse all of us whom you assume to be ignoramuses, then I apologise for questioning your credentials.

[Luis D]

Originally Posted by ho_co

Luis--"Adjusted to run consistently in 5 positions" is accurate but ambiguous as you stated it. It's worth checking the encyclopedia about chronometer certification.

I was not trying to be ambiguous, merely to be brief, as this is a Leica forum, not a watch forum. I am well aware of the protocols of COSC certification, as well that it refers that particular class of calibre can be adjusted to 5 positions, not that every watch will always do so regardless of its state of repair, or the ineptitude of the watchmaker who last overhauled it. It is very similar to a Leica shutter which can be adjusted to a very small deviation from the engraved speeds (vs perhaps some lesser manufactures) however not every camera repairer can or does so.

[elansprint72]

Originally Posted by Luis D

I was not trying to be ambiguous, .... as this is a Leica forum, not a watch forum.......

Damn right. My 30 yr old NATO-issue Seiko pilot's watch seems to be pretty much spot on, despite having to have two new batteries fitted over the years.
btw my Breitling and Silberstein have both broken down in that time.

What is your considered opinion on this:

Homemade Amaretto Liqueur: Part 1 - Homebrew Underground

Should I go through the lengthy rigmarole, or just stump up for the original?

As an aside; possibly I may have missed your contributions to the photo forum(s). Any chance you could direct me to your work? Apart from you DES .

[Luis D]

Originally Posted by elansprint72

Damn right. My 30 yr old NATO-issue Seiko pilot's watch seems to be pretty much spot on, despite having to have two new batteries fitted over the years.
btw my Breitling and Silberstein have both broken down in that time.

What is your considered opinion on this:

Homemade Amaretto Liqueur: Part 1 - Homebrew Underground

Should I go through the lengthy rigmarole, or just stump up for the original?

As an aside; possibly I may have missed your contributions to the photo forum(s). Any chance you could direct me to your work? Apart from you DES .

I did not start this thread. The one who did, marked it as "O.T." I and everyone else who chose to respond, tried to be helpful, even if we did veer somewhat tangentially into an argument. OTOH your response is O.T. both to the Leica, and to the topic of this thread. Not to mention rude and combative.

[elansprint72]

Originally Posted by Luis D

I did not start this thread. The one who did, marked it as "O.T." I and everyone else who chose to respond, tried to be helpful, even if we did veer somewhat tangentially into an argument. OTOH your response is O.T. both to the Leica, and to the topic of this thread. Not to mention rude and combative.

I think that you should read your own posts again if it is rude and combative you are looking for; to which I would add sneering.

[Luis D]

Originally Posted by elansprint72

I think that you should read your own posts again if it is rude and combative you are looking for; to which I would add sneering.

If DES had an issue with the tone of my post, he either chose to send me a PM, ignore it, or follow forum rules and tattle to the moderators. In all 3 cases, it would have been private, off-line, and in the best interest of the forum, not to mention gentlemanly conduct. What he did not do was retaliate on the forum, or ask for your help in defending him. OTOH you contributed nothing to the discussion on this thread, you simply popped your head in the door attempting to show what you believe to be your cleverness, and trolling for a flame war. If you have more to say on this matter, please take it up with a moderator. I am not here to enable your childishness.

[elansprint72]

Welcome to the forum Luis, it's really great to have folks like you around.
I don't suppose by any chance you are related to Jimmy Pro? The tone of your posts is so similar.

[Luis D]

What part of

Originally Posted by Luis D

If you have more to say on this matter, please take it up with a moderator. I am not here to enable your childishness.

did you not understand?

[lct]

Originally Posted by elansprint72

...I don't suppose by any chance you are related to Jimmy Pro? The tone of your posts is so similar.

Makes me think of Jay, Vinay Patel and Cordell as well. Same family perhaps. I preferred Phil Kneen personally. Any news from him?