Reply With QuoteNot being a COSC watch I think 8 s/day is ok, even though it could be much better.
I bought a Black Bay 41 and have already sent it back to Tudor for poor timekeeping. It has been returned to me after months with them. I got nothing back except the watch and it still gains around 8 seconds per day. Before I throw it back to them again, I wondered if this was normal or not.
Not being a COSC watch I think 8 s/day is ok, even though it could be much better.
I probably wouldn't have noticed or cared too much about the difference between +6s and +8s. Is it brand new? Sometimes they need time to settle and if you've got a Tudor warranty, one option would be to see how it settles after a month or two and send it back at a later date.
is that the eta 2824 version.
i had the same watch and it was the worse timekeeping 2428 i ever had, most of my watches are cheap and beat it by miles.
even my £28 Vostok out of the box beat it by miles with an old russian slow beat hand winder that probably cost a few quid to make.
most of my 2824 watches are between 1 second and 4 seconds a day with afew that are worse
Originally Posted by markbannister
EDITED
Being the ETA 2824 variant, the Caliber has a quoted average accuracy range of +/- 12 seconds per day.
Last edited by Wazza; 24th August 2021 at 18:54.
Yes it is the 2428 and maybe I should have bought the 58 instead or just keep using my other watches that keep time and don't annoy me.
Aah could be a misunderstanding, I assumed the OP meant https://www.tudorwatch.com/en/watche...41/m79540-0004
According to Tudor's website the Black Bay 41 is COSC so should run within the tolerances of -4/+6 seconds per day.
I think you might have a good case for a refund or replacement watch under the Sale of Goods Act.
Best of luck!
Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk
I was confused too. It appears the OP's watch has the ETA 2824 Caliber so it's running within the average quoted range
Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk
FTFY
FTFY?? Is that 'fixed that for you' or 'fxck this fxck you' ?
It is running exactly as it was when Tudor took it back under warranty to correct it.
+8 is keeping good time for a non chronometer watch. I wouldn’t worry and just enjoy it.
Many thanks for that. I like the watch and was just questioning its timekeeping.
Presumably they tested it and found there was nothing to fix. 8 seconds a day is well within spec for that watch. It's pretty good for a mechanical watch.
AD reply when it went back initially was 'Tudor have given us a notification that work is being carried out under warranty'.
It doesn't help that Tudor do not send any paperwork back.
AD eventually messaged me that 'We have been told it has been regulated and corrected under warranty'.
My guess is the work went no further testing the timekeeping, establishing it was in spec, then returning it.
Interesting, I hadn't heard of a 'settling in period'. I have a brand new 1861 Speedy and it appears to be racing well outside of spec. Am still tracking results as its early days but it looks to be in the region of +17 to +30 per day (spec is -1 to +11). I'm tempted to contact Omega if this continues.
I hope not, as they had it for over 4 months!
I've had two from new and both are/were around 4 seconds a day out if I remember right, I haven't worn it in a while and honestly I just stopped checking and worrying about it. I remember in a previous thread a lot of people were saying their ETA's were +/- 1-2. They do seem to be a bit of a lottery with their time keeping.
I'd probably say 17-30 sec is a bit extreme and wants regulating rather than settling in.
Just called Rolex/Tudor and ask what was done. It's very likely they checked it was within spec and gave it back to you.
I've never sent a Tudor in for a warranty issue but when I have with Rolex I get a £0 invoice back showing what was done. The last one said "movement correction".
If you're wondering why it took 4 months to get it back there were probably loads of people sending their in-spec watches back for warranty checks and Tudor were clogged as a result.
Many thanks to the majority of you for your helpful answers.
That's what I thought. Will keep an eye then get in touch with Omega if timekeeping doesn't improve.
UPDATE: it now appears to be +3 seconds over 24hrs worn on wrist for most of the day and stored crown down over night. The other data I got was for an unworn watch stored crown up for 24hrs so it's obviously racing in that position. Much happier now!
My OCD is going mental looking at this pic of the incorrect watch. Why edit the post but not delete the image? Torture...
That was bad of me, all fixed for you nowMy OCD is going mental looking at this pic of the incorrect watch. Why edit the post but not delete the image? Torture...
Sent from my SM-G998B using TZ-UK mobile app
Owe you one.
Wind it twice/day, morning and evening. Store it dial up. Check what the rate is 'on the wrist' after ca 16hrs wear. Also check the rate dial up overnight. That'll give you a better picture of how it's performing.
Be sure you're checking against something reliable.
I`ve serviced and regulated these watches to run within a few secs/day, certainly between zero and +6!
Thanks Paul. I will do as you suggest next week ( I have a run of gigs so will not be wearing the watch until after the weekend). Do you know if there is a resting position where the 1861 loses most time? So far it seems to lose more time crown down than crown up. On all my other watches, dial up usually results in gaining time. Is this also the case for the 1861?
It is likely that a watch will run slightly fast in the flat positions. Its not possible to predict the relationship between crown up vs crown down.
That seems good.
I've got the Black Bay 58 with in house chronometer movement that consistently runs at around +6 seconds per day under the same conditions.
Mine's a bit of lemon though and were it not for the crown down position overnight, where it is between 0 and +1 seconds, it'd be noticeably outside specifcation when worn day to day; for instance dial up on mine is +8.
I've mentioned it before and some regulars get a kick out of citing user error without knowing the circumstances, but my ETA-based Longines Big Eye annihilates my 'in house' BB58 for accuracy and positional errors with whatever test one sees fit, be it 'real world' observation, different positions on the timegrapher and from full wind to comparison 12 hours later as it runs down.
Sent from my JSN-L21 using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
