Reply With QuoteFor a mechanical watch I can’t moan about the accuracy of mine, I noticed it only started deviating when not being worn, once on the wrist it settled back down nicely to 0.0 sec over 2 weeks -
Colleague at work mentioned he has a mate who advised him that Rolex are poor time keepers, to which I replied that accuracy to 2-3s is meant to be a benchmark for Rolex as far as I was aware. I enquired further as to whether his friend was either collecting vintage watches or failing to have then serviced?
Sure enough my colleague advised me later in the week that he had relayed my comments to his mate, who advised that they weren't vintage and in his experience all Rolex watches he had purchased (new,) were poor time keepers??? Apparently my colleague's mate is quite well to do and purchases many different brands of watches. Was tempted to ask if his mate bought fakes...
As an aside, a different watch conversation arose when someone commented that there was no point buying a real Rolex around here because everyone would automatically assume it to be a fake- got to admit my first thought was that Someone could safely wear a Rolex without being mugged.
Last edited by Suds; 2nd March 2019 at 15:02.
For a mechanical watch I can’t moan about the accuracy of mine, I noticed it only started deviating when not being worn, once on the wrist it settled back down nicely to 0.0 sec over 2 weeks -
Last edited by murkeywaters; 2nd March 2019 at 17:33.
My most accurate watch is a 1980 Rolex 1655. It consistently gains 2 secs over a 28 day period.
No complaints from me.
If the person is used to higher end quartz, then I suppose they are pretty poor timekeepers.
I know a guy who has owned a few Rolex watches.
He was oblivious to the fact they could be hand wound. He would dig one out once a month, give it a shake, set the time and wear it out for the evening.
I doubt if any of them had ever reached even half capacity, and I doubt even more whether he had a clue if they kept good time.
Time-keeping is poor compared to my iPhone.
I would've asked the guy to qualify his statement, sounds like he's talking crap to me.
Advice for the OP: ask this guy if he appreciates the difference between precision and accuracy, sounds to me like his expectations are probably unrealistic!
In fact, if the person is used to any sort of quartz, then any sort of mechanical is going to be pretty poor timekeeping wise. It comes down to most (non WIS) people having no idea what's inside the case. They buy a Rolex and assume its hyper accurate (after all, they paid £xxxx for it) but find its not as good as their kid's Casio.Originally Posted by hughtrimble
People who have trash opinions of this watch brand or that one are a dime a dozen, and many of them are misinformed. Why bother even asking?
My watchmaker recently had Submariner or repair. He said, owner has been hand winding his watch every day, because of he did not know that watch had automatic movement.
Anyone born after a certain date and therefore accustomed to quartz would have thought Rolex poor timekeepers.
A strong auto can be 200 seconds out per month; virtually any quartz is sub 15. For 40 plus years most people would think of Rolex as relatively poor. As the most famous auto watches, they are simply representing the whole auto category in such judgements.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk
Gotta wonder whether this is actually what's happening in this case? Perhaps a case of 'all the gear and no idea'.
Last edited by Suds; 2nd March 2019 at 22:34.
Lets face it. +/- a minute a day is good enough for most human activities. Generally the reason for owning different watch brands and models has nothing to do with time keeping (especially owning multiple examples). Probably more to do with, aesthetics, value, quality, showmanship etc.
Maybe you phone is set to auto update, and your service provider syncs a signal - otherwise iPhones can be shockingly bad timekeepers!
It's just a matter of time...
My SD43 has gained 3 seconds in two months.
+/-3sec is exceptional for any mechanical in my book.
Can't think of any reason why it would matter that much if it's just a few seconds. I have quartz and mechanical and must be in the enviable position of not having to worry about timing to the nearest second in everyday life.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
I really prefer my automatics to gain rather than lose time as it is a simple matter to adjust by pulling the crown out to adjust and I’m quite comfortable if my they run up to c. 5 secs/day fast.
Absolutely outstanding!
My Polar Explorer is running less than 2 seconds fast after 3 weeks!
People must be sick to death of your negative posts....henk.
Sent from my SM-A320FL using TZ-UK mobile app
Fixed that for you, based on personal and observed behaviour!
Thank you but the ludicrous thing is that I have been caught up in the "do not polish or tart it up" camp and despite its amazing accuracy, it looks older than me.
When I told a work colleague my Rolex was less than 2 seconds a day fast he thought that was appalling! "It's a Rolex, I would expect it to be accurate" he said.
My worst timekeeper is the digital clock in the car. I presume it’s 2 or 3 start cycles everyday interrupting the power to it.
You sound so much like that other half wit that once frequented this forum, what was his name, oh yes... Captain Howdy.
Sent from my SM-A320FL using TZ-UK mobile app
Posts like “a friend of a friend is an idiot, he said [this], whaddya think” “Yes, we think he’s an idiot” are a dime a dozen.
We all get our jollies and ego-reinforcement by chortling about the idiot FOAF who doesn’t know watches. Haha, hoho, snicker. It’s all very droll, very predictable.
But we DO enjoy them. Not necessarily rubbish if it keeps the smiles up.
Better and better; looks like it's been to hell and back but thinks it's a quartz!
Sent from my SM-A320FL using TZ-UK mobile app
Posting Permissions
