Reply With QuotePersonally, unless it wasnt running well or needs a refurb I would service it until there was a change in time keeping. The service price last year was £475 if nothing else was needed - but a new crown etc. would push up the price a little.
Last year I bought my first Rolex from a buddy of a mine. A Rolex Deepsea from 2009. He took very good care of it and timing is spot on?..Considering it is from 2009, should I have it serviced by Rolex or not? How much would a service cost me?
Thanks upfront for any input.
Guillermo
Personally, unless it wasnt running well or needs a refurb I would service it until there was a change in time keeping. The service price last year was £475 if nothing else was needed - but a new crown etc. would push up the price a little.
It's just a matter of time...
No-if it's been well looked after and the timing is fine leave well alone.
I’m afraid I’m not in this camp.
I always service my watches every five years regardless. It may be a bit more expensive but my youngest auto is fifteen years old and none of them have ever let me down or given me cause for concern.
Personally I’d get it serviced - at the 10 year mark it is definitely due, even if it’s running well now the lubricants will have dried causing accelerated wear to the movement.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Well... Rolex suggest every 10 years for newer movements, so I think every 5 is complete overkill and potentially v expensive.Originally Posted by JeremyO
I've seen no proof that modern oils dry up so quickly with occasional use.
Unless substantial movement (or other) parts need replacing, having a service at 5 years, 10 years, or 15 years old would be exactly the same price
It's just a matter of time...
I agree with Scott in that I wouldn't service unless it started to show signs of needing attention (e.g. timekeeping off). I think the basic SD service cost is now £550 though (through Rolex).
Same here.
I`m not familiar with the Rolex 3135, but I`m sure there's a post on the mainplate that can wear if the lubrication isn`t maintained. That's the sort of problem that will cost money to fix in future years.
Regardless of what the sages may say, I`m convinced that service requirement is related to the amount of wear the watch gets. A watch that's worn in rotation with a few others may be OK for many years, but one that's worn every day will need attention earlier.
Another factor is the degree of activity from the wearer. If the wearer's very active the auto-winding parts will be under more stress whereas the more sedate wearer's watch will be fine. I`ve just serviced an Omega 1120 (ETA 2892) and that defied logic, I know it hasn`t been serviced for years and the amplitude was crap (215°), it had significant wear to two of the auto-winding parts, yet the mainspring barrel (which I`d expect to be in poor condition) was near-perfect! Possibly the watch hasn't been auto-winding efficiently for years and the mainspring hasn`t been slipping inside the barrel in the fully-wound state....that's the only explanation I can give.
Neglecting a watch long-term will create problems but they'll usually manifest themselves when the watch becomes older, anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves. It's the parts that don`t affect the timekeeping that can wear, the owner doesn`t realise this because the watch still seems to be running well and that's what lends weight to the (flawed) 'if it ain't broke' philosophy.
I`ll engage in this debate to a limited extent, I don`t have the experience of the true watch-repairing professionals but I`ve seen enough to back up what I`m saying and that makes these 'debates' a frustrating exercise for me.
In some respects a watch is like a pet dog, it can`t tell you when it's starting to hurt and it'll still appear to run OK.
Who waits until their car runs rough or breaks down before having it serviced ?
How do you define 'well looked after'? A watch can be in good cosmetic condition because the owner's been careful with it, but he may have worn it extensively for several years and the movement's crying out for some TLC.
I`ve no wish to be patronising, but I`ve yet to find anyone in the 'if it ain't bust don`t fix it' camp who has hands-on experience of fixing watches!
It might sound harsh, but most people who subscribe to this philosophy do so because they baulk at paying the relatively high prices charged by the big brands. It's a convenient stance to adopt and provided enough people agree it starts to feel even more comfortable. Yet these same people will pay £200 for a watchstrap that's got the maker's brand stamped on it!
If folks want to run their watches till they stop, like a horse collapsing in the shackles, that's fine, but trying to justify it on any other grounds than perceived cost-saving is flawed. To claim that a watch should be run till it gives serious problems is insulting the folks who know otherwise based of their hands-on experience, I know it's 2019 and we're supposed to let everyone think they're right thesedays, but sometimes the people who are in a position to know better have to state this and tell folks they are 100% wrong......this is one of those times.
Most people.
When it fails, it can put your and many other people's lives in danger.
The other is a watch.
Ok, I’m convinced.
Thank you.
My Omega Seamaster was purchased in 2001 and my Rolex Submariner was purchased in 2004. At that time, iirc, both manufacturers recommended servicing at c.five year intervals.
I am aware that more modern movements can have longer service intervals and, if I had one of these I would stick with manufacturers recommendation for these.
It may be overkill, as you say, but I can live with that.
Get someone local to put it on a timegrapher. If it's accuracy is out or it has poor amplitude, I'd bite the bullet and get it serviced.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk
That’ll highlight problems with how it’s running, but it won’t tell you that the auto-winding parts and keyless work are as dry as a witches fanny. Given the age and value of the watch I’d treat it to a service then rest easy for 10 years.
Aside from the potentially expensive wear on a rolex mvt what about the water resistance?
Having worked in the motor trade a lot of my life... nearly every customer!
Unless the car is nearly new and servicing is free or required for warranty purposes most people seem to just drive them until something goes wrong and then moan when it does. Or you’ll get the people that use the “My car needs a service” line when something has gone wrong and they expect an oil change to fix the knocking suspension or engine management light.
“Hello, your car needs a new shock (ideally pair) front brake pads and ARB bushes”
customer
“Oh my god, I’ve only had it 3 months! (15 year old car they bought with 150k on) I’ll leave it as just going to get rid of it if it’s going to start costing me loads of money”
I went out to a lady once who’d “broken down” and suspected (from what she said) she’d drained the battery. When I looked under the bonnet I had a quick poke around as it looked pretty neglected, no coolant showing in header tank, oil cap with thick build up, etc. All the time she’s over my shoulder moaning how it’s “let her down” & she’s going to “get rid of it before it starts costing her loads of money” I asked when she’d last had it serviced and she just looked taken a back & said “well I’ve never serviced it since I’ve had it as it hasn’t needed it”. Of coarse my next question was how long have you owned it, only 6 years! I had to tell her it’s actually been anything but a let down considering how she’d looked after it! Turned out she’d just left the interior light on too!
Had a guy tell me servicing was a scam when I went out to his broken down car! He’d bought it ex demo and never had it serviced (12 years old) hadn’t done a huge mileage but was over 40k and the spark plugs were worn so large it couldn’t fire properly.
My mate also runs a garage & has a wall of shame of neglected parts.
That's all well and good Paul, but how much extra is the bill for some replacement parts occasionally?. Especially when we are now talking £550+ per service.
I haven't seen completely crazy prices for normal servicing with Rolex except in very exceptional Circumstances like rust etc.
It's just a matter of time...
The problems arise when things like the mainplate or barrel bridge need replacing. I don’ know what Rolex charge for these parts, but when a movement becomes obsolete the stocks of these major parts is limited and will eventually run out. All the manufacturers restrict supply of parts thesedays, they will control supply of limited stocks and you can be sure they’ll charge a lot if a movement needs such extensive restoration.
Think of it like a car or bike engine that’s so badly worn it can’t be rebored or re- engineered, you’re then looking at a replacement block......watches are machines and the need lubrication to avoid wearing themselves out.
i think there’s an argument for having interim services for watches, on some designs the auto- winding parts would benefit from being cleaned and re- lubricated more frequently than the rest of the watch, but Swiss-Think dictates otherwise.........and they always know best! This definitely applies to vintage Omegas that are worn frequently, if the auto-winding parts are lubricated properly they’ll out-last the owners.
Maybe Swatch Group don’t really want all these old watches to continue being worn?......food for thought!
Pretty sure iwc have an interim service on the 7 day.
For less than the price of a service you could probably buy a new main plate and balance bridge. You can currently buy them new from a few resellers at premium prices too though.
It's not the same thing as your analogy though. The movement is always stripped to component parts in a service, whereas a car or bike and its engine most certainly isn't - so it's much easier to swap worn parts (If you have them, and Rolex do have them and hold stock for quite extensive time periods. As Rolex quotes that it will service their watches up to 50 years old in some countries) when the watch is dismantled for servicing.
I have a lot of watches, and I'm not paying for 10-15 of them to be serviced every year, just because of some arbitrary servicing schedules that were put out years ago.
It's just a matter of time...
If the watches aren’t being worn they won’t need attention on anything like the same timeframe as daily wearers, that’s my opinion.
My 2004 Omega Speedy reduced is a good example, I’ve owned it from new and it’s had very limited use, it runs well and shows no signs of needing attention. However, if I was to start wearing it as a daily wearer it would make sense to service it.
There isn’t a ‘one size fits all’ answer, I don’t rush to service watches that get very little use provided they’re running OK, but a daily wearer deserves a bit more attention.
Lots of different viewpoints here, but likewise I tend to agree with the above statement.
Preventative maintenance is preferable, so I’d personally get it serviced.
My take is that the price of regular servicing is the price you pay for owning the watch.
That’s why I only have two automatic watches.
No......
If timekeeping is good, timegrapher shows good amplitude and rotor axle is not worn, I'd restrain from service.
Yes service. If you wait too long the bill could be massive because when they dry out parts wear very quickly and you really don't want to know how much Rolex movement parts cost, its ludicrous
Quick Q Paul,
If a watch is rarely worn, then is the drying of the oils not an equal issue to a watch that has been worn regularly or do they dry less if static?
I have a 10y/o no date sub which has never been opened. I bought it stickers so know its history and I rarely wear it.
I had no intention of servicing as its seen maybe 4 months wear in a decade. In this instance is oil drying an issue or no?
If the movement doesn't see enough wear, the other issue can be that oils migrate and aren't in their place anymore.
On top of that: I would never ever have a diving watch without change of seals for 10 years. Check them every year, replacement every 3 just to be sure. I don't want to be down 20+ meters and see my SMP / Halios / TAG S/EL fill up with water!
All modern watches from the last decade will have been oiled with synthetic oils that are very resistant to oxidation, so they shouldn't thicken and degrade for a very long time. Most of the oiled surfaces in a watch move very slowly, they're oiled with the thicker oils which don`t evaporate or spread easily. Even when the watch is in use most of the oil on slow-moving parts is only getting agitated or sheared very slowly, they tend to stay where they should and in my experience last well.
The faster moving parts, such as balance pivots and escape wheel pivots are oiled with much thinner oil which is also subjected to more shear, it leads a harder life and the migration/evaporation/degradation is proportional to the use the watch has had.
The special lubricant on the escape wheel teeth also migrates/breaks down eventually, again that's proportional to wear. All things been equal, these are the parts that govern how well the watch will run, so it's no surprise when a watch that's had little use continues to run OK. Likewise, the automatic winding parts won't be worn if the watch has had little use, same applies to the keyless work.
That's my take on it, others may have a better informed view. If I had a 10 yr old watch that's had around 4 months wear I wouldn't be in a rush to service it. However, if you decide to wear it very regularly it may be worth having it serviced to safeguard against wear and tear. In this case, I`d be happy if the watch gave good results on the timegrapher.
Hope that helps, I`ve tried to explain my reasoning hence the lengthy reply.....no chance of a quick answer I`m afraid.
Tried to get my head around this and I can`t see it (unless I`ve misunderstood?). Any migration of oil is more likely to be encouraged by movement and micro-agitation of the oil in the jewels. If a watch is over-oiled the oil can spread out of the jewel cups if the watch gets a hard knock (so I`m told) but sufficient will stay where it's intended to be.
I find the subject quite intriguing, I`m sure the wise people in the Swiss industry know more about these issues but finding any research articles isn't easy. Oils and greases get updated/replaced/modified by 'new improved' versions and we have to assume the boffins at Moebius, Swatch and Rolex know something we don't. I guess there are two reasons for change, one is longevity and the other's efficiency, if the new versions do a better job and last longer that's all to the good.
It's interesting to read service data sheets for movements and see how the lubricant recommendations have changed over the years. Logic says that the latest should always be followed, even if that means spending significant amounts on new lubricants. Last week I bit the bullet and spent £75 on Kluber P125, a braking grease recommended by Omega (and others) in recent years. I received a tiny pot with 5g in it, OK, it'll last ages but it's bloody expensive. However, having tried it on a mainspring and barrel that previously gave problems very impressed, I`ll use it on everything in future.
The biggest change (IMO) has been the move to synthetic oils and greases, makes a whole lot of sense to me.
Leave it for now.
That’s definitely wasting money.
A Rolex service covers a full overhaul. Even non brand new ones should easily go closer to 10 years before needing service. If it’s running well, leave it alone.
Just my opinion.
I hate the car analogy.
The cost to service my 40 year old 6694 that had never been serviced was the same; the parts they had to replace were the same as the parts they replace anyway.
If the watch is keeping good time, whether oils are drying or not the cost will be exactly the same, so wait until it affects function.
I tend to adhere to manufacturers recommendation and am happy to have my watches serviced accordingly.
It may be more expensive than strictly necessary but, as said, I can live with that.
Totally flawed logic based on one experience.
No two old watches are ever the same......but what do I know, I’ve only worked on a 300+ watches over the past 8 years, I’ll bow to the experience of one watch owner.
Paul, you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.
Ok, use the dentist one then. It's called preventative maintenance.
That's not a good analogy either though. Unless it's a full set of dentures, that you decide to have looked at every year at check up, which in this analogy would cost the same as a new replacement set if/when they were needed ;)
It's just a matter of time...
I think you are missing his point Paul. He simply states that he paid the same service price for a watch to go to Rolex once it "needed" it. The comment didn't deserve your response imo.
It's just a matter of time...
It comes up because there are differing opinions. Even between watchmakers. You will note Paul's contributions above, which sensibly take into account usage etc.
Simply ask Rolex? Why bother, read it's website.
It's just a matter of time...
One of the problems with this analogy - and fwiw I myself am in the preventative-maintenance camp - is that car manufacturers are very much more prescriptive than most watch manufacturers when it comes to service schedules. So it's easier to know where you stand. As you say, car manufacturers have precise mileage/time spec/s. Most watch manufacturers say, oh, x-y years, depending also on nature of use. That vagueness creates the space in which these frequent discussions gestate.
I think I would be more concerned about the seals from a waterproof perspective. If it has been used in the sea for example or any other swimming the seals may well be due for a change. Water ingress would cause a lot
More damage, so I say get it done.
If a non maintained car should fail someone could be killed or injured. If a non maintained watch fails someone might be late for a train.
Best to maintain that car, just in case.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Talking about servicing here mind , I’ve never heard of a car killing someone because the oil and filter needs changing .
Ridiculous analogy.
Funny enough when my car is serviced the brakes are checked, as are the tyres, suspension and drivetrain. But of course I am being ridiculous.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
You’re 100% correct, having a car serviced includes checks and maintenance of brakes, steering and suspension which are all safety- related, I thought everyone knew that.
Most of the ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ brigade have a fixed mindset and aren’t going to be persuaded otherwise.
When I buy a pre owned Rolex, I get it in for a service to Rolex or an accredited agent within a couple of days of buying it. I don't want my watch to suffer because the previous owner was too tight fisted and stretched out the servicing purely to save spending some money. Tightwads rule supreme in this hobby.
If you can't afford to service a watch, don't buy it.
Everyone has differing opinions , my Sub non date went over 17 years unserviced , ran perfectly, nothing internally wrong to report regarding wear and tear when it was serviced by Rolex .
It’s nothing to do with being a “ tightwad “ as you put it , how would you know about mine and other watch enthusiasts on here , financial position ?
I’ll treat your last comment with the contempt it deserves.
Posting Permissions