Reply With QuoteI think Rolex said the average time between purchase and service is 10 years. I have a Rolex which will be 5 years in October, no plans to service but more than happy to service it at the 10 year mark even if it's running fine.
I would like to ask the opinion of the many experts here. I have two Rolexes that are now five years old and technically due for their first service. It seems that there is a general opinion here that if the watch is running fine then it is accepetable to leave it until a fault appears. I am quite happy with this. However, if one takes the car analogy, the first service is very important. With a new engine and running train it takes a few miles to run them in to allow the gears and bearings to 'grind' into each other to remove any slight interference (if that is the correct word). The detritus is then removed with the first oil change. Is this also true with mechanical watches. Is most wear going to occur when the watch is new therefor requiring the lubricants to be replaced at an early stage. Your thoughts would be welcome.
I think Rolex said the average time between purchase and service is 10 years. I have a Rolex which will be 5 years in October, no plans to service but more than happy to service it at the 10 year mark even if it's running fine.
I think it is five years and I would have them serviced if they have been worn regularly.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
No expert here I’m afraid, but I’ve always thought that the 5 year service life would be for a watch that is worn constantly for those 5 years, and that one worn in rotation with others will not be subject to the same amount of wear (I’m sure I’ll be proved completely wrong now!)
If you have the cash to burn, then send them for a service.
I have had lots of Rolex over the years and have never had a service unless a fault developed.
What we talking for 2 services? 1200 quid?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Service only when it needs it. If it is running nicely, and roughly within COSC timekeeping, I would not service.
Ok. Thanks guys. Appreciate your thoughts. I'll leave it for now. I bought them in the summer of 2015 and I think things changed around then. Need to dig out the paperwork.
Some of my watches that are getting up towards 10 years old haven't been worn for even 1 years worth of days if you see what I mean.
There will be a point where lubricants will degrade, and a service will be beneficial to the longevity of the movement regardless of how much wear it's getting, but I've no idea when that is, and different experts say different things.
Personally I won't service a watch until there's an issue. But that's part of the reason I try to avoid owning stuff where replacement movements couldn't be easily and cheaply found if need be.
Yes, I take your point. However when one has an expensive watch, one must expect a service to be expensive as well. I am not concerned about the price of the service. It is what it is and I would expect the watch to be like new afterwards. My concern is the importance of a first service. Once all the gears have settled in on a new movement there must surely be some excessive wear in the short term until it settles down. The lubricants would then be contaminated. More than they would be subsequently. Is the accuracy of a brand new watch considered or is it better to test it once it has been worn for a while. To leave the watch until a fault appears would likely cost more in the long run. Perhaps I am looking too deeply into this. Please ignore me. :)Originally Posted by Pagan
The modern Rolex watches are 10 year intervals. For my two, 2006 and 2010 models, my personal choice is service at about 7 years. My 2010 16610 was done at 6.
It’s expensive, but I think it’s a false economy not to, and will cost you more down the line. I think there is more wiggle room if the watch is stored rather than worn, but even then, not longer than 10
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Would it cost more in the long run?
Don't lots of manufacturers charge a flat rate for servicing anyway?
And I've heard rumours plenty of manufacturers replace movements at service as a matter of course, although no suggestion this applies to the specific manufacturer being discussed here.
Think it all depends on the watch, what's important to you, where you intend to take it if/when you do get it serviced.
And opinions differ on whether watches need to "settle" before you get a true idea of their accuracy.
Also don't think you can compare watches to engines. Very different forces involved.
Watches are totally different from cars, the lubricant in a watch has a very easy life and is designed to stay where its applied. Modern synthetic oils don’t deteriorate like the mineral oils used in the past, so provided the watch was oiled properly during assembly it should be fine for several years.
It’s my belief that if a watch isn’t worn often it will need servicing far less frequently, I have a large collection and watches I serviced in 2012 but have worn sparingly are still fine according to the timegrapher data.
If a watch is worn fairly frequently I wouldn’t leave it longer than 7 years, but if it’s running correctly I wouldn’t automatically have it serviced at 5 years.
Ironically, the best way to tell whether a watch is in need of servicing is to strip it down and inspect it carefully whilst dismantling each part, the foolproof way to confirm it needed servicing is by servicing it!
As for ‘first service’ analogies with cars, forget it! The parts in a car engine move very rapidly under great stress at elevated temperature, even with modern engines there’s an element if bedding in. This doesn’t happen with a watch, initial settling of the rate is due to the oil films equilibrating and spreading slightly. The only part of a watch that moves rapidly is the balance, the pivots run in a tiny bath of oil retained by surface attraction in the balance jewels.
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 2nd June 2020 at 23:22.
Thank you Sir. I was hoping you would pitch in. I will leave them for now.
I thought that didn't apply to new cars these days?
Anyway, I think there are two camps. Some like me say get a service when something does wrong and others say get a service regularly. I don't think I've ever seen anyone give the "right" answer supported by evidence.
Posting Permissions