An Argument For Routine Maintenance...

[Tools]

A lot of confusion surrounds when to get a mechanical watch cleaned and oiled....and folks typically say, I used to have one and it ran for decades without maintenance..

This could be true..watches did used to last, seemingly, forever. But there is a scientific/technical reason for this..

Early watches were slow beat movements. They beat at 18,000 BPH or 5 ticks per second. This means that the hairspring swung one complete arc, unlocking the pallet fork in one direction, and then back again, unlocking the fork in the other direction, causing the watch to tick, or move properly..

This is all caused by a mainspring that pulls on the gear-train constantly...the pallet jewels hold the escapement wheel in place and then locks and unlocks that wheel on each half swing of the hairspring, unwinding the mainspring.

Pretty simple...

But, as the quest for more stable and precise movements came about, along with better lubricants, it was found that faster beat movements were more stable, drifted less, and were easier to regulate. As these beats increased, the faster swing of almost twice as much in a 28,800 beat movement causes the oils to be slung off parts, and drain the mainspring power faster. The obvious result was a need for stronger, and longer mainsprings that exert more of a pull on the drive train to ensure a ~42-48 hr power reserve. In the case of super high beat movements such as the Zenith 36,000BPH 10 BPS movement, the mainspring is huge and the need for a more solid (less fluid) method of lubrication is paramount or it would beat itself to death in little time. It's just this need for different oils and larger mainsprings that Rolex reduced the speed on their Zenith modified movements so they could use their standard oils and parts in their watches..

So, in a nut shell: Today we have movements that move considerably faster, essentially throwing the lubricating oils around like never before, and we have stronger mainsprings pulling harder on the entire drive-train causing more need to ensure proper lubrication to avoid metal-to-metal disintegration of parts..

I think that it is more important than ever that we ensure that our mechanical, high-beat, watches get cleaned and oiled on a more regular basis than ever before.

[cameron]

Very informative. My initial thoughts on the matter was that modern oils would be able to last longer but I can see now that I was very much mistaken. On purchasing my last watch (GMT 2 - c) the booklet recommended a service after five years which I have been planning to go along with.

[mretzloff]

Good article :thumbsup:

Is this what the five-year service is for? Does Rolex just lubricate your watch's gears?

[meloncap78]

Thanks Larry!! Excellent observation, perfect delivery. This definitely sheds some light on why it is important to keep your timepiece maintained. :cheers:

[astcell]

But in the 1970s we had cars that lasted for 100k miles an that is all. Today they will get 3x the mileage and run 3x as long.

Have watches not improved too?

[Tools]

Good article :thumbsup:

Is this what the five-year service is for? Does Rolex just lubricate your watch's gears?

Thanks...:thumbsup:

Actually, Rolex takes the watch completely apart, checks for wear on any parts, then oils the watch at all the key parts..

The major oiling points are the pivot jewels that all the axles rotate in...and the pallet slide needs grease, and the mainspring barrel needs oil, as well as the ends of the pallet jewels that do the holding, unlocking operation.. and dozens of other points.

What you might find at your local watch repair technician is a sonic cleaning and then just oiling of the pivot points..

So, sometimes you do get what you pay for...

[RossInIllinois]

What is the cost of just a regular service VS the cost of service with replacing a gear or two that would wear from lack of service? What I'm saying is if Rolex is going to charge me $500 for an oiling and $700 for an oiling and a failure whats the point? Might as well take your chances No? You could have an oiling service then 2 years later have a gear or spring break and be in for still another $500+ service bill. If an oiling and cleaning was like $150.00 I could see doing it. Even my Dr. doesn't get $500 for an hour of his services and I'm sure as hell not going to give that to Rolex.

[Tools]

But in the 1970s we had cars that lasted for 100k miles an that is all. Today they will get 3x the mileage and run 3x as long.

Have watches not improved too?

Early car engines wore out because the use of cast iron rings, combustion by products, and loose tolerances caused them to have a relatively known life.

Today, moly rings, computer designed tolerances, metallurgy, and modern lubricants; as well as different fuel formulas to reduce combustion by products have all resulted in increased life in modern power plants.

Watches are still pretty much the same as two centuries ago, but with better tolerances, materials and oils that allow the before mentioned capability to increase the speed, and therefore accuracy and precision in the new 28,800 beat movements..

But like the car analogy, routine oil changes and maintenance is critical to achieve these higher life-cycles.

[Tools]

What is the cost of just a regular service VS the cost of service with replacing a gear or two that would wear from lack of service? What I'm saying is if Rolex is going to charge me $500 for an oiling and $700 for an oiling and a failure whats the point? Might as well take your chances No? You could have an oiling service then 2 years later have a gear or spring break and be in for still another $500+ service bill. If an oiling and cleaning was like $150.00 I could see doing it. Even my Dr. doesn't get $500 for an hour of his services and I'm sure as hell not going to give that to Rolex.

Interesting, and valid perspective..

I suppose it's like never going to the Dentist for a cleaning and check-up; waiting until a tooth has a big enough hole in it to warrant the cost of a trip. You could save the cost of those cleanings, and perhaps the cost of a crown or filling every couple of years could balance out...

[RossInIllinois]

Interesting, and valid perspective..

I suppose it's like never going to the Dentist for a cleaning anc check-up; waiting until a tooth has a big enough hole in it to warrant the cost of a trip. You could save the cost of those cleanings, and perhaps the cost of a crown or filling every couple of years could balance out...

Indeed and lets not forget what a Rolex really is. It's just a watch.

[mretzloff]

Thanks...:thumbsup:

Actually, Rolex takes the watch completely apart, checks for wear on any parts, then oils the watch at all the key parts..

The major oiling points are the pivot jewels that all the axles rotate in...and the pallet slide needs grease, and the mainspring barrel needs oil, as well as the ends of the pallet jewels that do the holding, unlocking operation.. and dozens of other points.

What you might find at your local watch repair technician is a sonic cleaning and then just oiling of the pivot points..

So, sometimes you do get what you pay for...

But don't you think $500-ish is a lot for an oiling? I have no problem with that (or else I wouldn't have bought my Rolex), but I just don't see where the money is going.

Would it cost more to have it tuned up every 5 years or only when something breaks?

Maybe I need to stop sounding so gosh darn cheap :chuckle::dummy:

[Tools]

But don't you think $500-ish is a lot for an oiling? I have no problem with that (or else I wouldn't have bought my Rolex), but I just don't see where the money is going.

Would it cost more to have it tuned up every 5 years or only when something breaks?

Maybe I need to stop sounding so gosh darn cheap :chuckle::dummy:

Well...being cheap, and being frugal are not the same things..

I am not advocating a 500 dollar service every 5 years. There are plenty of old watchmakers, Rolex trained, who will do the job for much less. Typically though, the cost is double what they might charge for a "regular" watch..

I have several watches I rotate through so I am comfortable with 10 year service intervals... I would probably go ~7 if I wore it every day.

What I am saying is that the old days when a 50's or 60's Rolex is still ticking after no service at all, with little wear on the parts is gone..

What I am further saying is that Modern watches are operating at higher speeds and under more physical pressure (torque) than ever before.. Older watches had very little actual friction so could operate even without oils for quite a while.. The pull of modern mainsprings is considerably higher.. As an example.

The Omega co-axial 2500, which has had to be slowed down to 25,200 to operate, is still running so fast that the disintegration of the gear teeth is a well known phenomenon. (the original design of the co-axial was to operate at 18,000 BPH) Omega seems to have backed off their claim of 10 years without a service.

[Alcan]

Although $500 for an overhaul might sound expensive, here's what they're working with, and the lubricants required. And remember, the watch is completely disassembled to facilitate cleaning, inspection, and lubrication.

[Tools]

Al...

Post our Rolex Lubrication Chart over on the Reference Library board..

...............:cheers:

[YuppieKid]

Although $500 for an overhaul might sound expensive, here's what they're working with, and the lubricants required. And remember, the watch is completely disassembled to facilitate cleaning, inspection, and lubrication.

Bridge Jewlers took the whole movement apart (as far as I know), re-oiled, timed, etc. No sonic b.s. Now it's working like new. New gaskets and a pressure test, and a polish of the case and bracelet. Also included, were three follow-up visits by me for regulating, adjusting of the clasp's safety and demagnetizing the watch. All of this backed by a 2 year warranty on the service. Worth every penny.

[RsqVet]

I see a few things here:

1. Tools is 100% correct, the modern watch is more "technical" than an old pocket watch, as we make any system more critical the upkeep becomes even more important. That being said I would never neglect an old watch either....

2. I have zero question in my mind that rolex has priced their service not based upon cost but based upon what their studies show we will pay. Welcome to the joy of marketing; because of this others in the market price lower than Rolex but perhaps higher than they would otherwise. My guess is that a service should be 250-300 for an automatic watch, the rest is just "extra" mark up

3. When it comes to service I'm more likely going to be loyal to rolex.... in other words I have no real issue with GM dealers and if you are not dumb it's hard to get screwed in the GM, you pay a price and get something that is relitivly easy to verify the value of. With service, I can not accurately access an orginization or the job they do servicing the watch. So unless I am in a pretty big market where there are independent shops that are well know, (i.e. NYC), more than likely I will turn to rolex.

[marshallr47]

Good read Larry. Thanks.

[RossInIllinois]

What happens to the chronometer certificate once they pull it all apart like that? Wouldn't it have to undergo the whole testing process to once again be "officially certified"? Do They?

[ashu2289]

Very informative!!!!Great post:cheers::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[ashu2289]

What happens to the chronometer certificate once they pull it all apart like that? Wouldn't it have to undergo the whole testing process to once again be "officially certified"? Do They?

excellent question

[Tools]

What happens to the chronometer certificate once they pull it all apart like that? Wouldn't it have to undergo the whole testing process to once again be "officially certified"? Do They?

The chronometer certificate is meaningless...... well, not really, but almost.

Movements are submitted to COSC for a test of their capability... in mass.

In other words, there are racks and racks of watch movements, they are all rotated, heated, and cooled, and the results are either pass-fail. failed are regulated and sent back... They must pass for Rolex to be able to paint chronometer on the dial by Swiss law........nothing more.

The passed movements are fitted with dials, hands, self-wind modules, and installed in the watch case they are destined for....then they are re-regulated by Rolex, case-backs fitted, and shipped out...

COSC certification is a representation of it's capability; not an indication of it's accuracy...........once tested, they are never tested again..

[JJ Irani]

The chronometer certificate is meaningless...... well, not really, but almost.

Movements are submitted to COSC for a test of their capability... in mass.

In other words, there are racks and racks of watch movements, they are all rotated, heated, and cooled, and the results are either pass-fail. failed are regulated and sent back... They must pass for Rolex to be able to paint chronometer on the dial by Swiss law........nothing more.

The passed movements are fitted with dials, hands, self-wind modules, and installed in the watch case they are destined for....then they are re-regulated by Rolex, case-backs fitted, and shipped out...

COSC certification is a representation of it's capability; not an indication of it's accuracy...........once tested, they are never tested again..

Well said, Larry. :thumbsup: After the service, it's the watchmaker's job to get the watch running up to COSC specs again.

JJ

[cwru32]

may be some watchmaker can tell me why they need to disassemble the watch before putting it back together n lubricating it?!?! why they dont wash it enbloc?






A lot of confusion surrounds when to get a mechanical watch cleaned and oiled....and folks typically say, I used to have one and it ran for decades without maintenance..

This could be true..watches did used to last, seemingly, forever. But there is a scientific/technical reason for this..

Early watches were slow beat movements. They beat at 18,000 BPH or 5 ticks per second. This means that the hairspring swung one complete arc, unlocking the pallet fork in one direction, and then back again, unlocking the fork in the other direction, causing the watch to tick, or move properly..

This is all caused by a mainspring that pulls on the gear-train constantly...the pallet jewels hold the escapement wheel in place and then locks and unlocks that wheel on each half swing of the hairspring, unwinding the mainspring.

Pretty simple...

But, as the quest for more stable and precise movements came about, along with better lubricants, it was found that faster beat movements were more stable, drifted less, and were easier to regulate. As these beats increased, the faster swing of almost twice as much in a 28,800 beat movement causes the oils to be slung off parts, and drain the mainspring power faster. The obvious result was a need for stronger, and longer mainsprings that exert more of a pull on the drive train to ensure a ~42-48 hr power reserve. In the case of super high beat movements such as the Zenith 36,000BPH 10 BPS movement, the mainspring is huge and the need for a more solid (less fluid) method of lubrication is paramount or it would beat itself to death in little time. It's just this need for different oils and larger mainsprings that Rolex reduced the speed on their Zenith modified movements so they could use their standard oils and parts in their watches..

So, in a nut shell: Today we have movements that move considerably faster, essentially throwing the lubricating oils around like never before, and we have stronger mainsprings pulling harder on the entire drive-train causing more need to ensure proper lubrication to avoid metal-to-metal disintegration of parts..

I think that it is more important than ever that we ensure that our mechanical, high-beat, watches get cleaned and oiled on a more regular basis than ever before.

[karmatp]

Another great read Larry, thanks for the information. :thumbsup:

[trek]

Reading your artical has put my thoughts into a totally different view. Thanks for the info.

[watchnut]

So, in a nut shell: Today we have movements that move considerably faster, essentially throwing the lubricating oils around like never before, and we have stronger mainsprings pulling harder on the entire drive-train causing more need to ensure proper lubrication to avoid metal-to-metal disintegration of parts..

I think that it is more important than ever that we ensure that our mechanical, high-beat, watches get cleaned and oiled on a more regular basis than ever before.
That's exactly why the last time mine was torn down I had baffles installed in the pan! Cuts down on the foaming problem too.

[BigHat]

Vanessa's threads and posts on the subject were enough to convince me. The damage she has witnessed from watches run well past the suggested service interval was all I need to read.

[Dan Pierce]

Good food for thought, Larry.:read: Thanks for sharing.:cheers:
dP

[chicagowatchman]

Great information thanks!:clap::clap::clap:

[Erix]

nice post..thanks for sharing.

[cody p]

reg maintenance makes sense. end of story. although, it does fascinate me how long some of them keep running without any intervention.

[Tools]

reg maintenance makes sense. end of story. although, it does fascinate me how long some of them keep running without any intervention.

Some do run longer than others...but how do you know if you have one of the longer runners..:thinking:

Or put another way... If you were going to buy a used watch, what would you put more value on.... an old warranty cert being marketed as "original paper", or a watch with a recent, or within the past couple of years old service paper.

[B. Doggy]

This is certainly one of the more informative threads!!

[GradyPhilpott]

My AD suggested service after the first seven years and every five years thereafter.

To have the watch serviced is going to cost money no matter what. I'd rather Rolex service it, just for the peace of mind.

This reminds me of the old Fram commercial: "Pay me now or pay me later."

It's a Rolex. It deserves proper preventive maintenance.

[ttannert]

I have a dumb question about this. Most of my watches I wear often and plan on servicing them at the 5 year interval. However, I just bought my GV and I plan on not wearing it and keeping it in the safe. If the watch is not warn and just kept in the box how long would you push back the service??? :thinking:

[Z-Sub]

may be some watchmaker can tell me why they need to disassemble the watch before putting it back together n lubricating it?!?! why they dont wash it enbloc?

Well, since parts are small, I don't think it's possible to have "fittings" for grease like there are many in most cars.
It's like rebuilding engine, entire engine is disassembled, cleaned, worn or torn parts replaced and repacked.
:cheers:

[Z-Sub]

I have a dumb question about this. Most of my watches I wear often and plan on servicing them at the 5 year interval. However, I just bought my GV and I plan on not wearing it and keeping it in the safe. If the watch is not warn and just kept in the box how long would you push back the service??? :thinking:


I thought about the same question and would suggest that you let the watch run from time to time and change the position it's sitting in the safe.
Secondly, I would also get it serviced 5-7 years after you start wearing it. Many watches sit in AD for 1-2 or longer before it's sold and it's like having it sit in your safe for that same period of time.
:cheers:

[ttannert]

I thought about the same question and would suggest that you let the watch run from time to time and change the position it's sitting in the safe.
Secondly, I would also get it serviced 5-7 years after you start wearing it. Many watches sit in AD for 1-2 or longer before it's sold and it's like having it sit in your safe for that same period of time.
:cheers:

That is what I was thinking as well. Does everyone else agree?

[Tools]

That is what I was thinking as well. Does everyone else agree?

I've been saying that for years..........:thumbsup:

[Alcan]

Al...

Post our Rolex Lubrication Chart over on the Reference Library board..

...............:cheers:


Hi Larry, I can't post there. Maybe only accessible to the Mod Squad?

[nko51]

Yes! I will have mine serviced every 5 full years, I bought mine staggered so I will always have another one to wear while one is getting serviced.

[Jimbits76]

Every five years I'm just gonna prise the back off mine with a chef's knife and spray the insude with WD-40 followed by some MTB chainset wetlube.

Jobsagoodun!!!!!!

J

[Quicksilver]

I thought once every 3 years for a watch that was being worn regularly - but I see now that might be a little excessive and the consensus is 5 years. Suits me :thumbsup:

[2th DR]

A few observations based on what has been said already,

1) seems like an awful lot of work to take the watch completely apart, clean, lubricate, and put back together, along with testing, and refinishing the watch, so I think it would take a lot longer than an hour to do this, ie Rolex is not getting $500/hour for this service, in reference to Ross's post.

2) I recently checked with Omega to see how much it would cost to service my Omega De Ville, and it was $480.00, so Rolex is not much different than Omega in that regard.

3) As a dentist, I would not recommend forgoing routine dental check-ups and waiting until something is wrong. Yes you may save a lot by not paying for preventive maintenance, but in the end, if something does happen, it may be too late to repair, at any cost. I would think it would be similar with a fine automatic watch. :2:

[Wooddog44]

I see a few things here:

1. Tools is 100% correct, the modern watch is more "technical" than an old pocket watch, as we make any system more critical the upkeep becomes even more important. That being said I would never neglect an old watch either....

2. I have zero question in my mind that rolex has priced their service not based upon cost but based upon what their studies show we will pay. Welcome to the joy of marketing; because of this others in the market price lower than Rolex but perhaps higher than they would otherwise. My guess is that a service should be 250-300 for an automatic watch, the rest is just "extra" mark up

3. When it comes to service I'm more likely going to be loyal to rolex.... in other words I have no real issue with GM dealers and if you are not dumb it's hard to get screwed in the GM, you pay a price and get something that is relitivly easy to verify the value of. With service, I can not accurately access an orginization or the job they do servicing the watch. So unless I am in a pretty big market where there are independent shops that are well know, (i.e. NYC), more than likely I will turn to rolex.

There is one factor to consider here, IMO, that no one has yet mentioned - The use of certified (or non) Rolex parts during the service and Rolex standing behind the work.

From a dollars and cents perspective 500 bucks over 7 years is just under 6 bucks a month so that is what it is. For me, as with getting my cars worked on at the dealer, it's not so much about whether they may charge a bit more - they almost certainly do – for the same work as a local mechanic/watchmaker. However in the event there is a problem after the warranty period is up showing that you had all the work done by the dealer and no one else touched the car/watch can and has resulted in them correcting a problem despite being outside the warranty period.

Letting any machine run until it breaks down and then fixing it is one way to go but if that happens you will certainly be on the hook for whatever it takes to get that watch going again. On the other hand if the watch had been seen and serviced on something of a regular basis, by Rolex with Rolex parts, an argument can be made that they should assume some/all of that financial responsibility in the event of mechanical failure. You might not win but at least would have an argument.

[jasper]

When I bought my 16750 last year it has a chipped crystal, it knocked a bit when I "shook" it, and it wouldn't wind manually. I sent it in for service and all of it was fixed for $500. I chose to not have the case polished, but that would have been covered by the $500 service cost as well.

Excellent value in my opinion. A bargain almost.

[Rolexsd4000]

Hi all, but what about the old saying "If it ain't broke don't mess with it!

If My Rollie is losing time by all means have it serviced depending how old it is.Both my Sub-Date "z" and Sea-dweller a "P" series are right on + or - 3sec.s amonth..

[Tools]

Hi all, but what about the old saying "If it ain't broke don't mess with it!

If My Rollie is losing time by all means have it serviced depending how old it is.Both my Sub-Date "z" and Sea-dweller a "P" series are right on + or - 3sec.s amonth..

It is an old saying........just not a very good one..........

After the oils are moved out of position by continuous movement, then you start metal-to-metal wear...

At that point, you have a ticking time bomb.............the metal will continue to wear out (erode) at the contact points until eventually the tolerances are so loose, or the parts are so thin, they will easily break with the slightest jar, or they will simply grind themselves to dust...

At that point, you can slap in a new movement, or replace all those worn out parts at a fairly high cost, and be good to go until it too wears out.............

.....But, with routine maintenance, the watch and it's moving parts will last for more than a lifetime......

[Lion]

Tools and everyone else this thread has been very informative and explains why preventative maintenance is critical to the proper performance of Rolex watches!!!
THANX!!!

[Rolexsd4000]

Larry

I agree with you on that part. This is my James bond collection sorry for the firearm .I know some people get alittle peeved about them , but that is a 1959 sub my dear departed grandfather gave me. It was redone in 2003 because me the idiot dropped it on the bathroom floor tile. It ran great till I dropped it. New plastic crystal , cleaned , lubed , rotor shaft , seals pressure proofed. told not to swim with it . I wouldn't. Its a keeper . I only wear it on special occasions only.

Mike

[Rolexsd4000]

Sorry wrong picture ..here it is..

[Imtiaz]

My wife's Tudor was purchased in 1978. The first service was done in 2008, exaclty 29 years and 10 months from purchase.

Never gave any trouble, just ticked away. Summer of 2008 it started to lose minutes per day. The service guy found nothing worn or broken. Just a clean and oil and back on her wrist.

Totally amazing.

My Datejust went for 20 years without a service. My feeling is only service when the watch starts to show signs of abnormality.

Cheers Imtiaz

[Boopie]

I got my YM serviced at BH RSC after 6 1/2+ years of daily wear, including swimming in the ocean and swimming pool. It had been running perfectly. The RSC didn't tell me the condition of the movement, and the only component replacement part I was separately billed for was the crown.

Last year my father in law gave my husband a BNIB 1998-vintage Sub. Because it was unworn for 10 years (my father in law had received it as a gift himself), we brought it to the BH RSC to check out before wearing it. They told my husband just to wear it. They didn't want to service it first.

[bobernet]

All this talk of "metal on metal" wear makes me think of the 31 jewels in a Rolex 3135 that exist solely to act as a barrier between metal to metal contact. The fast oscillating parts are not metal to metal, but shaft inside a jewel bearing.

Also, the technology and metallurgical improvements allowing faster movements and stronger springs, also allow for higher grade metal components that are stronger and more resistant to wear.

I've seen lots of pictures of movement parts worn down after 15 or 20 or 25 years of use, but all the cases I remember, these parts were < $100.

$500 * 20/5 = $2000 in preventive maintenance. I wonder what it would cost to simply replace the worn parts in a 3135 after 20 years?

I wonder how many folks would be paying $50 for recommended rotate & balance service on their wheels/tires if the tire manufacturers recommended it every 2000 miles versus just replacing the tires for $800 after they wore out in 40,000 miles?

[abigsecret]

All this talk of "metal on metal" wear makes me think of the 31 jewels in a Rolex 3135 that exist solely to act as a barrier between metal to metal contact. The fast oscillating parts are not metal to metal, but shaft inside a jewel bearing.

The wheels touch each other metal to metal, we're not just talking about the pivots. The metal dust created by the metal-to-metal pressure and wear, will sit in the oil reservoirs of the jewels, and become like sandpaper, which then will cause the pivots to wear.

[Nods]

That is what I was thinking as well. Does everyone else agree?

No movement no wear, simple. So as long as it is airtight it could sit for 50 years no problem. However, if you sit it down for 7 or more years get it serviced before you wear it again as the lubes and oils would now be stuffed. (Tec term for no longer working as required) Also pray that that no air gets in as sitting metal tends to oxidize. (IE rust)

[snow_rocks]

What I am saying is that the old days when a 50's or 60's Rolex is still ticking after no service at all, with little wear on the parts is gone..

What I am further saying is that Modern watches are operating at higher speeds and under more physical pressure (torque) than ever before.. Older watches had very little actual friction so could operate even without oils for quite a while.. The pull of modern mainsprings is considerably higher..


Larry, buying a '60s, '70s watch might be the ticket!

Have the watch reconditioned and then go for a decade or two without service!

I know, I know ... where do you get parts if needed?!!!:banghead:

[pyxis]

Anybody knows how much Rolex would charge to replace the whole movement? The costs of servicing does seems to be getting abit out of hand.

Two days ago I sent my old Series 2000 Tag automatic that uses a common ETA for quote at the local (Malaysia) LMVH service centre and was quoted RM960 (USD1 = RM3.45) to service it! I'm sure thats a lot more than the price of a new movement! And to replace the dial would be RM610, and a set of hands RM510! The total is as much as a new watch!

As an aside, in one of the post on another thread discussing the cost to make a "good" fake vs what it cost Rolex, there was an estimate that it cost Rolex about USD500 to make a sub.

[Safetrends]

Indeed and lets not forget what a Rolex really is. It's just a watch.

:wow:
If a Rolex is just a watch then a Lincoln is just a car.
I do not think so.

[Skullring]

Great thread Larry.

[Tim Wells]

"Originally Posted by cwru32
may be some watchmaker can tell me why they need to disassemble the watch before putting it back together n lubricating it?!?! why they dont wash it enbloc?"

The reason for this is that a movement cannot be properly cleaned or inspected without taking it apart totally. In higher grade watches the hole jewels will have cap jewels also, especially in the escapement which is a perfect place to trap dried oil that an ultrasonic won't always remove.

Old oil, especially if it is dried up or something that has sat for 20 years and had not been overhauled since 10-20 years before it was placed in that dusty old box you just pulled it out of, you will find gummy or hard varnish that used to be oil. Older oils that we used had animal fats in them and they were particularly bad about gumming up and it didn't take no twenty years either, plus that stuff stinks.

Today we use synthetic oils and lubricants that hold up better, longer, lubricate better, have a better capillary attraction action and don't dry up like the old oils did. I learned to "peg" my jewels and I still do this even though I have various ultrasonic cleaning machines. You take a piece of orangewood or osage orange and sharpen it to a point like a pencil and stick it into the pivot holes and twirl it just like cleaning your ears with a Q-tip.

To mechanically, physically remove any ubstruction in the hole jewel and any caked up grease or what have you, I am certain that there will be no issue later on; the ultrasonic will do the rest.

I specialize in old aircraft 8 day clocks and in the case of a Hamilton 37500 that has several hundred parts in it; when you're done with it and it goes out the door, you don't want it back because of negligence or laziness on your part. Do it right,... once.

Someone mentioned something about frequency of servicing referring to old slow movements vs newer faster ones. My thinking on that is that old movements such as old gents watches and pocket watches whether they are 17+ jewel movements or low grade 7 or less jewel movements with brass train bushings; required more frequent servicing than movements of today rather than the other way around.

My reasoning for this is that the oils broke down faster then, didn't lube as well, and the tolerances were not quite as tight as now, particularly in the lower grade movements. Now compare that with a modern movement.

Hardened pivots; all of them, sapphire or ruby jewels which are both right under a diamond in hardness on a Mohs scale and they're all slicker than a bell pepper; no brass bushing can be that smooth.

The jewel holes providing they're not cracked don't wear, the pivots do if dirty or not oiled properly. Modern synthetic lubricants are far superior to anything made in the past when every town had a few watchmakers to go around and didn't have to sell jewelry to stay busy. The life of oils are much better now and consequently do their job longer and to me the required maintenance schedule on any modern high grade movement is less frequent than in days of old for all those reasons.

My diesel truck with dinosoar oil will require changing 2-3 times more often than when I use fully synthetic oil. This is because it wears a lot better and doesn't break down and this isn't from some sales hype, I actually have my oil tested to see what the facts are. I don't use anything but synthetic for a reason and that's a fact. Same goes for watches, we have better stuff nowdays and things work better, last longer and require less upkeep because of it.

Sorry for the novel length post.

[Dr. DiveWatch]

Great thread! How about this question....

What does everyone think about "Rolex certified" watchmakers at various upscale jewelery stores/Rolex dealers doing the service vs. sending it in to RSC for the maintenance?? Is there really such a thing? I would think it would be cheaper than sending to RSC (and perhaps quicker). I can't imagine parts being worn down & needing replaced on an every 5 year maintenance schedule. Perhaps sending to RSC for complete overhaul every 10-15 years, but have local certified watchmaker service it every 5 until then??

Anyone ever done that and been happy/satisfied knowing all Rolex parts and Rolex trained watchmaker. (I read the one post about the GMT2 maintenance at Ben Bridge and wondered).

[walds11]

I haven't done it yet, but plan on doing it with my SS Sub Date Y series. There is a well-known local guy downtown that does it. I can drop the watch off and pick it up. I wouldn't mind saving a few hundred bucks on a routine service.

Great thread! How about this question....

What does everyone think about "Rolex certified" watchmakers at various upscale jewelery stores/Rolex dealers doing the service vs. sending it in to RSC for the maintenance?? Is there really such a thing? I would think it would be cheaper than sending to RSC (and perhaps quicker). I can't imagine parts being worn down & needing replaced on an every 5 year maintenance schedule. Perhaps sending to RSC for complete overhaul every 10-15 years, but have local certified watchmaker service it every 5 until then??

Anyone ever done that and been happy/satisfied knowing all Rolex parts and Rolex trained watchmaker. (I read the one post about the GMT2 maintenance at Ben Bridge and wondered).

[Tools]

I have had a couple done at my local AD Watchmaker. He is Rolex trained and contracted.. The results were as good as I have had from an RSC.. The only issue is that he doesn't give it back in a Rolex service box, and you don't get the little pouch. However, since the price is a basic flat-rate, it is the same as an RSC cost. So, you can see the work being done and it doesn't take as long...but you do miss some of the RSC experience..:cheers:

Great thread! How about this question....

What does everyone think about "Rolex certified" watchmakers at various upscale jewelery stores/Rolex dealers doing the service vs. sending it in to RSC for the maintenance?? Is there really such a thing? I would think it would be cheaper than sending to RSC (and perhaps quicker). I can't imagine parts being worn down & needing replaced on an every 5 year maintenance schedule. Perhaps sending to RSC for complete overhaul every 10-15 years, but have local certified watchmaker service it every 5 until then??

Anyone ever done that and been happy/satisfied knowing all Rolex parts and Rolex trained watchmaker. (I read the one post about the GMT2 maintenance at Ben Bridge and wondered).

[cody p]

just re-read this thread... great original post. i'm thinking somewhere between 7/8 years and off to the rsc in toronto, ontario, canada she'll go.

[Rikki]

Other things to consider also is the diameter of the pivots on the newer gears is smaller meaning less surface area so faster wearing pivots. I rarely have to change gears on a 1530 but a 3135 or 3035 I have changed hundreds. Now add to the fact that everything is going faster and you can see where I'm going with this. Another example is and old seth thomas kitchen clock time and strike the pivots were a millimeter in diameter lots of surface area the newer Hermle modern westminster clocks the pivots half the size or smaller wear faster and cut right through the plates and burn out in 20 to 25 years the older kitchen clock that is 80 years old still going strong. Construction has as much to do with servicing as does technology. Why does it cost 8000 dollars a year to maintain a Ferrari and only 500 a year for a chevy. High performance costs money pure and simple. Rikki

[larrysb]

may be some watchmaker can tell me why they need to disassemble the watch before putting it back together n lubricating it?!?! why they dont wash it enbloc?

Can't get it truly clean if it isn't disassembled, and you can't put the oil where it is supposed to go.

I'm not a watchmaker, but for fun, I took a discarded Wakmann aircraft clock apart to see if I could get it running again. The Wakmann clocks are 8-day windup, 4-jewel swiss made movements. The design is just like a watch, but on a somewhat larger scale, (fits in a 2" panel cutout hole), so it is somewhat easier to work on for a beginner. The one I took apart was made in 1975 and spent some 30 years in a light, unpressurized turbocharged twin engine airplane. So it saw all kinds of heat and cold, dry and humidity, and altitude. It stopped running.

The dirt comes from two things, the environment to some extent, and the wear products of the parts grinding against each other. Also the lubricants dry up, turn into a sticky hard goo.

Some techs clean these things assembled. Just dunk 'em in the ultrasonic cleaner, squirt some oil here and there and call it good.

But that leaves dirt where it doesn't belong and oil can't go where it does belong.

Believe me, inspite of being sealed, that poor old Wakmann was dirty inside. I first tried to sponge it off with solvent and lint-free swabs. I got some of it. Then I dunked it in the sonic cleaner. Got even more. But looking really close, there was still goo in the bushings and the jewel bearings. I could see it with a microscope. So, without a manual to go by, I took it completely apart. Sure enough, there was still dirt and goo hiding in important places. Carefully cleaned each individual part. This time, no doubt and looking at it under a microscope revealed it was sparkling clean.

Lubing it is the other side of the coin. The jewels and lubrication points take miniscule amounts of lubricants. There's no way to get the tiny amounts of oil into the cups with the gear pinions still in there. Doing so externally would certainly mean overlubing, or smearing it into places where it doesn't belong.

I didn't have the exact right lubricants on hand, but I did have some intended for instruments, which are similar. Carefully applied in the right places, no excess, no drips.

Proud to say, that Wakmann is still on the shelf on my hangar, in the cold and heat and it still keeps pretty good time, in spite of being a bit worn out.

So when it comes time, the Rolex will go to the service center, to keep it working.

[RolexPete]

True story:

My father received a Rolex 16030 DJ in 1987 from a very close friend (wealthy). He wore it almost regularly until 2002 when I gave him a 14060 for his 60th birthday. He put it away atthat point, wearing it only occasionally. (He was retired at that point and had no need to know what the date was, so the 14060 suited him fine). He NEVER serviced the DJ in 22 years.

Jump forward to December, 2009. I remarked to him that he didn't really wear his DJ all that often, so it ended up in my hands. I sent it to a watchmaker that I had recently discovered in PA for service and to swap for a dial that I had bought.

The watchmaker did not need to replace ANY parts except for the mainspring (which he does as part of his routine servicing). $150 plus I had him replace the acrylic crystal ($30).

So, lack of servicing does not always equate to additional cost. My father wore his watch and never really abused it, so YMMV.

[redmoon]

I have a Date Just (Steel and Gold) and wear it everyday. Its normal use and never really abuse it. Although winters are really cold here in MA. Whats the recommended interval for having my watch serviced? I couldn't find anything specific on this on the rolex website.

Thanks.

[RolexPete]

I have a Date Just (Steel and Gold) and wear it everyday. Its normal use and never really abuse it. Although winters are really cold here in MA. Whats the recommended interval for having my watch serviced? I couldn't find anything specific on this on the rolex website.

Thanks.

Every 5 years.

[Tools]

I have a Date Just (Steel and Gold) and wear it everyday. Its normal use and never really abuse it. Although winters are really cold here in MA. Whats the recommended interval for having my watch serviced? I couldn't find anything specific on this on the rolex website.

Thanks.


Here is what Rolex has to say about servicing...

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa67/LD_album/Shop/RolexService.jpg

[redmoon]

Thanks Larry :)

[Horologier]

Great stuff here keep up the conversation!!!!:thumbsup::lol:

[RolexPete]

I love how Rolex says "depending on their wearing habits, about every five years". So, I guess the answer is, it depends?

[Kapture1]

I posted under another thread with no response... Would any of you trust your AD if they had the capability to perform the service themselves rather than sending your Rolex to the company?

The PROS would be only a week without my Rolex... and the cost is considerably less.

The CONS would be...


Im basically asking if you would trust your AD or just pay more, suffer a longer period of time without your Rolex and just send it to Rolex for the service directly?

[RolexPete]

I see no cons in using a local AD or a local competent watchmaker. I advise it. I have used Rolex NY 3 times and will never again.

[Vanessa]

I posted under another thread with no response... Would any of you trust your AD if they had the capability to perform the service themselves rather than sending your Rolex to the company?

The PROS would be only a week without my Rolex... and the cost is considerably less.

The CONS would be...


Im basically asking if you would trust your AD or just pay more, suffer a longer period of time without your Rolex and just send it to Rolex for the service directly?

Hi Matt, I guess that would really depend on the watchmaker's reputation, and if he or she is actually trained by Rolex and has a parts account with them.
The one week turn-a-round should be a concern IMO, since it takes a week to just time out the watch after service....
And if the watch repair lives up to the standard of Rolex, there shouldn't be a reason why the price would be considerably less than that of a RSC.:read: