Quote:
Originally Posted by keepitsimple
Agree absolutely. If you're going to pay the costs required to service watches, then getting yout own Timegrapher for a fraction of that price to provide some check on the result is money very well spent. They may not be professional calibrated devices with aged crystals etc. but they aren't going to be orders of magnitude out - yours demonstrates that.
Out of interest, I've checked mine in the past by doing the full - 2 days at a time COSC timing checks (as close as I can and excluding the temperature one) and comparing against the machine's readings. Given that a 2 minute per position on a timing machine is only ever a "moment in time" check at a particular state of wind, and the fact that I have to eyeball the 2 day results (against time.com) they are still pretty darn close.
You have to wonder what proportion of watches go back to customers with unacceptable results that are never known about. In the case of yours, anyone unable to check it out would probably see the "on the wrist" performance and conclude a proper job had been done. The poor amplitude would be hidden.
I don't know whether Rolex service standards include issuing the timing results. I'm fairly sure that Omega standards do, but my limited experience of using their approved service agents is that they don't all do so. My non-authorised repairer of choice always does.
|
Rolex did not include a timing result with my service. I'm going to ask them for one once I get the 14060 back.
And you're absolutely right, w/o a timegrapher, people who get a service will never know if the watch was serviced correctly and I bet there's quite a few RSC sub-par jobs out there.
I also have a feeling that my watch was actually serviced at their Lititz, PA location which if I remember correctly, is where their school is. I'm wondering if they let a student service the watch instead of a certified CW21.