Reply With QuoteUnder warranty still?
I noticed on Saturday evening when I looked down at my wrist my BB58 navys second hand was stopped!
It runs for a couple of seconds after moving it around and then stops again.
I undid the crown and wound it but this again only seemed to get it to run for 10 seconds or so. Weirdly later that night I noticed it was running again and did so all day yesterday. Came to it this morning and it's dead again..... Bugger!
I've contacted Beaverbrook who have advised to take it into my local shop and they will send it back to Tudor for evaluation!
I've never done this before so just wondering if anyone else has and what sort of timescale I'd be looking at, a quick search would suggest I'm looking at months, not weeks! :/
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Under warranty still?
My BB58 went back last year because it was running erratically. They quoted 3 months turn around but I got a call to say it was ready in 4 weeks.
A different issue, obviously, but I’m just letting you know that whatever timescale they quote you may not necessarily end up being the case.
Must be, that model has only been out for about 3 years.Originally Posted by gaurav_tzuk
Yes still under warranty purchased in December 2020.
Also thanks for the heads up on the timescale, 4 weeks would be great but I'm braced for it being quite a bit longer!
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
If you’’re able to I’d send/take direct to Rolex, you’’ll cut out the AD dragging the process out. I believe Rolex prioritise warranty work so hopefully the turn around won’t be too long. They were pretty quick sorting my mum’s Daytona under warranty although that was about 5 years ago.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think a movement swap shouldn't take too long.
“ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG
I had this once before with a Rolex. Went in for a warranty service and came back with “Movement Correction” on the paperwork. Worked fine ever since.
Why don’t they ever tell the owner exactly what the fault was and what’s been done? I suppose it’s all part of the mystique!
Yes, it is important to tell people what their fault is.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Take a few photos of your watch at the AD before you hand it over just to be on the safe side etc.
I'll make sure to get plenty of pics, there's a helpful chap on Instagram that recommended the same after his FXD came back with some nasty scratches.
Just thought I'd drop a quick update in here.. After 10days from dropping the watch off I received a call from Beaverbrooks to say the watch had been inspected and that due to a ding on the bezel it was determined it had clearly received a shock and it wasn't covered under warranty.
I did tell them when I dropped it off that I knocked it on a door frame about 12months before it stopped working and that it had been working perfectly in that 12months......I guess there's no way of proving this though and I'm now going to be £485.00 lighter in the wallet...
Genuinely I can't see how it related with such a long time period in betweenbut I suppose any knock could reduce your chances of a warranty claim at any time
But I guess she'll come back all good again, and despite it being an inanimate object I've kind of missed not looking down at it, so hopefully a few weeks and I'll have it back
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Obviously it depends on the 'ding' but I'd tell them that if the watch is incapable of surviving a small shock then it shouldn't be advertised as a robust timepiece, and that I'll be helping my fellow enthusiasts by ensuring they all know how fragile tudor watches and their warranties are!Just thought I'd drop a quick update in here.. After 10days from dropping the watch off I received a call from Beaverbrooks to say the watch had been inspected and that due to a ding on the bezel it was determined it had clearly received a shock and it wasn't covered under warranty.
I did tell them when I dropped it off that I knocked it on a door frame about 12months before it stopped working and that it had been working perfectly in that 12months......I guess there's no way of proving this though and I'm now going to be £485.00 lighter in the wallet...
Genuinely I can't see how it related with such a long time period in betweenbut I suppose any knock could reduce your chances of a warranty claim at any time
But I guess she'll come back all good again, and despite it being an inanimate object I've kind of missed not looking down at it, so hopefully a few weeks and I'll have it back
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S908B using Tapatalk
Did they have any info on what was wrong with the watch and why they think it's related to the knock? Personally I think that sounds like a bit of a farce 12-months on and I'd challenge them on it. If somethings cracked in the movement or something then fair enough they may have a point, but otherwise it seems like a lazy way out of honouring the warranty.Just thought I'd drop a quick update in here.. After 10days from dropping the watch off I received a call from Beaverbrooks to say the watch had been inspected and that due to a ding on the bezel it was determined it had clearly received a shock and it wasn't covered under warranty.
I did tell them when I dropped it off that I knocked it on a door frame about 12months before it stopped working and that it had been working perfectly in that 12months......I guess there's no way of proving this though and I'm now going to be £485.00 lighter in the wallet...
Genuinely I can't see how it related with such a long time period in betweenbut I suppose any knock could reduce your chances of a warranty claim at any time
But I guess she'll come back all good again, and despite it being an inanimate object I've kind of missed not looking down at it, so hopefully a few weeks and I'll have it back
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Is £485 the Tudor service fee? Seems very high and must include some parts. I would want to see the quote to know what’s optional and what’s not.
I would want verification that it went to Tudor and not their own repairer or approved repairer. I have never bought from Beaver Brooks so have no idea re their repair/servicing abilities.
Don't Tudor swap out the movement for an entirely new one at service time?
I doubt it on a mechanical, this happened with quartz watches in the past but I`m surprised if it happens with mechanicals. Possibly the old movement is serviced off-line and re-used, that would make some sense and potentially allow faster turnaround?
As for the OPs situation, it's a poor response. Evidence of a ding on the case or bezel doesn`t infer that the movement has definitely been affected adversely, I see watches that have had a whack but everything is fine, checking on the timegrapher plus visual checks can resolve this and it pays to keep an open mind. Conversely, if a heavy watch is dropped onto a soft floor the movement may be affected yet there's no cosmetic damage.
Dealing with these folks is like playing poker in a crooked game, it isn`t fair but if its the only game in town (and you insist on playing) you've no choice.
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 9th May 2023 at 14:28.
All part of the smoke and mirrors, Wiley. They will never state exactly what's replaced and what isn`t, the policy is to provide a menu price regardless. Many indys do the same, I've never understood the logic and that's probably because there is none. I do things my own way, if I fix a watch I always break the costs down into parts and labour. This works against the owner who's watch is in poor condition and favours those whose watch has been looked after, that's fairer in my view. Charge parts at cost + postage (tooth fairy doesn`t deliver them for free) or replacement cost if NOS etc.
On a watch this age, unless there is damage from impact etc, I wouldn't expect any parts to need replacing! However, there's an argument for always replacing the mainspring/barrel assembly when the watch is apart, it costs the Service Centre peanuts and it's quicker than taking a barrel apart, inspecting it, and replacing the spring.
In modern parlance, it is what it is, in true Swiss fashion they know best and they are reluctant to share info.
My understanding is yes but only if it’s a Kinessi movement.
Not sure what movement is in the BB58 but I was thinking more of crown/bezel/glass/polish as the added cost/s.
I think someone here serviced a BB41 ETA at RSJ not long ago for £250 with an extra £100 or so for a fresh polish.
A lot of talk that Tudor do swap the movement , old one is then refurbished and used in another watch.
Pretty sure all 58s are Kinessi.
Much as I don't like the idea, I can see some logic in a service centre adopting the movement swap approach, a bit like fitting a rebuilt exchange engine to a car. Stripping and rebuilding the movements off-line in a specialised facility where skilled labour is cheaper and more readily available clearly has its attractions.
It seems wrong to swap the guts of the watch and somewhat impairs the bond an owner has with the watch, especially if its an older watch with sentimental value.
If movements don't carry a serial number I guess the owner will be no wiser.
Much as I don't like the idea, I can see some logic in a service centre adopting the movement swap approach, a bit like fitting a rebuilt exchange engine to a car. Stripping and rebuilding the movements off-line in a specialised facility where skilled labour is cheaper and more readily available clearly has its attractions.
It seems wrong to swap the guts of the watch and somewhat impairs the bond an owner has with the watch, especially if its an older watch with sentimental value.
If movements don't carry a serial number I guess the owner will be no wiser.
I’m sure it’s something that goes on a lot - it did also occur to me that if you own one of the first BB58’s there’s a chance you’ll get a newer movement at service time? I’m not someone who gets too attached to inanimate objects, but I know there will be many who object to this kind of practice though. What’s unfair is you must end up paying for a generic ‘movement service’ when your original movement may have needed far less money spent on it than the donor one you receive?!
To answer a couple of questions above when I asked on the phone as to what was wrong with the watch I got what seemed like a generic "oh sorry I'm just reading off a reply we've had back from them" and the £485 quoted was to repair the watch, there was also an optional £125.00 which I assume was to remove any swirls and said ding on the bezel?
Either way the more I think about it the more I do question the hardiness of the watch.... I mean I bloody love it, but the Seiko Turtle currently on my wrist has had more bangs than the Tudor and she's just soaked them up!
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
I think a sample of more than 1 is necessary to judge the durability of a watch. The 58 is pretty popular round these parts and I’ve never read any similar reports. Maybe you’ve just been unlucky or maybe you bashed it harder than you thought. None of us ever like to think we may have caused the problem with our own clumsy nature but it can happen.
Mechanical watches don’t like hard whacks. Regardless of how robust the case me be the movement will always be at risk from severe knocks. Shockproof balance pivot jewels (Incabloc) help prevent broken balance staffs but a movement can still suffer if it gets a hard knock.
I don’t think this says anything about the robustness of the the watch other than mechanical watches sometimes suffer movement issues. Considering the watch ran for 12-months, I suspect the ding is unrelated to the problem…it’s just Tudors method of getting out of a warranty repair and getting £400-odd quid off you.
Exactly this IMO. I'd challenge hard on how they've assessed this isn't a warranty repair. Ask to speak to someone at Tudor, not just the AD.
There have been reports of this before with the movements stopping intermittently
https://youtu.be/yKQGm5bZPNM
Last edited by Middo; 10th May 2023 at 10:32.
Have to smile at the concept of 'hardiness' and how rugged a dive watch is. Ironically, the heavier the case the more likely the movement is to suffer damage when it gets dropped from a height, more energy involved in the collision owing to the extra mass. Very few (if any) watches have any shock absorbing capability between the movement and the case, rubber mountings have been used in the past to improve shock resistance but that fell out of favour, Omega used 4 small oval rubber mounts which looked like lumps of rat-shit on some 70s models but the concept seemed to die a death.
Making the case bigger and heavier just gives the owner a warm feeling, likewise with bracelets. No matter how chunky a bracelet it's only as strong as its weakest link which is the bracelet pins, clasp pins and the springbars. A lot of kidology going on with modern watches, I think they're designed to appeal to folks who like chunky SUV-type vehicles too..........all clever marketing.
I also agree that the OP should have argued more vigorously on this one, I find it disappointing that a big manufacturer can`t be more accommodating and give the owner the benefit of the doubt. I get involved in warranty work sometimes, even when it's almost certain that a watch has been mis-used the owner ends up getting the benefit of the doubt and the watch is fixed free of charge. Unless it's blatant that's how it should be.
On a similar note I find it frustrating when an owner sends me a watch to 'service' and withholds the full story. The more info provided the easier it is to work out what's going on with a watch, sometimes it's like pulling teeth!
This is what I’d be doing. Wouldn’t trust what Beaverbrooks are telling me. Contact Tudor directly IMO.
Who inspected it exactly, is the watch still with Beaverbrooks ? Ask for it back, tell them you’re going to take it up with Tudor. Smells fishy to me ?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by Gomers; 10th May 2023 at 21:17.
What’s fishy about it? Are you seriously suggesting that they haven’t sent it to Tudor?
I had an issue with a watch from them, it was photographed and described, I countersigned the description and off it went to Omega. I got a notification of receipt, progress of the service and notification of the despatch back to the shop. Couldn’t have asked for anything more really.
OP’s beef is with Tudor not the shop.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Can’t say that without proof.
Had this a few years back with a Speedmaster. Took it to the AD who told me it would go to Omega. The price quoted was different than the Omega website and when I dug they’d sent to it their approved third party repairer
Kicked up a fuss and they sent to Omega.
What’s fishy about it is that after 10 days away at “Tudor”, the discovery of a ding on the watch and the knowledge that it’s been assaulted by a doorframe has totally absolved Tudor of any responsibility as to why the movement appears to be technically, knackered.
More detailed info required from whoever carried out the inspection.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
