Question about service intervals

[VicLeChic]

Hi guys, wondering if someone would be able to shed some light on a little question that's been bugging me since Rolex officially announced the extension of warranty to 5 years, and now recommend 10 years service intervals. I proudly bought my first Rolex last month, and only wear it at weekends. It doesn't rest in a winder, so it's pretty much stopped 5 days in a week.

My question is the following. Does it mean that I probably won't need to service it in a very long time, or do I still need to stick to the 10 years recommendation. In other words, does the lubricant wear off even if I hardly wear the piece?

Greetings from sunny Spain.

[trackntrail]

When not wearing a watch, the oils can coagulate over time although this takes quite a long time to happen. Stick to the Rolex service intervals and you should be ok.

[Jamesha]

Yes lubricant will eventually dry out over time no matter how much you wear it, I personally would give it a full wind (40 full turns) once every few days to keep it running when not on your wrist and then get it serviced at the recommended 10 year interval but that's just my opinion. Many will say don't service until something goes wrong or it starts running outside COSC spec (-4/+6)

[watchwatcher]

Odds are, your watch will be fine for a long time.

The fact that you are winding it up every few days, though, makes me think the days "off" are going to be fairly negligible in calculating total wear/tear.

[tkerrmd]

if you only need service once every ten years would be a good plan

remember when people got their car oil changed every 3 thousand miles, now with better oil technology it is every 10thousand

[travisb]

Id still stick to the 10 year recommendation.

[sgt10p]

The professional watchmakers say 5-7 years for a mechanical watch - I'm still going to stick to that advice - I think it's a big investment to make and I want it to run sweet and not cost a fortune to repair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sirduncs]

Originally Posted by sgt10p

The professional watchmakers say 5-7 years for a mechanical watch - I'm still going to stick to that advice - I think it's a big investment to make and I want it to run sweet and not cost a fortune to repair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi Pete I notice you are in the northwest and have a similarly excellent taste in watches! Where did you get your LV from?

[sgt10p]

Rebecca's in Southport - it was second hand as the waiting list was 10 months at the time :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Annan]

Originally Posted by sgt10p

The professional watchmakers say 5-7 years for a mechanical watch - I'm still going to stick to that advice - I think it's a big investment to make and I want it to run sweet and not cost a fortune to repair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

X2 Maybe I'm just mired in the past but I plan to stick with a 5-year service interval.

[sirduncs]

Originally Posted by sgt10p

Rebecca's in Southport - it was second hand as the waiting list was 10 months at the time :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahh I got mine from Milton's in Chester. Not serviced yet but running fine. Great first Rolex!

[sgt10p]

I've had one service after 5 years - came back as new - perfect time keeping - 4 yrs later + 2 sec So it will be going on holiday next year as I'm keeping it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[T. Ferguson]

If you read the other thread on the Rolex letter, there is a discussion as to whether Rolex is actually changing the recommended service interval or just stating that seems to be the current average time people wait to have their watches serviced. The actual wording of the letter is a little odd to say the least. But it is an internal letter to dealers rather than some document for the public so who knows?

I'd like to see the recommended service interval stated somewhere else in the papers accompanying one of the post 7/1 pieces to clear this up.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

If you read the other thread on the Rolex letter, there is a discussion as to whether Rolex is actually changing the recommended service interval or just stating that seems to be the current average time people wait to have their watches serviced. The actual wording of the letter is a little odd to say the least. But it is an internal letter to dealers rather than some document for the public so who knows?

I'd like to see the recommended service interval stated somewhere else in the papers accompanying one of the post 7/1 pieces to clear this up.

Exactly

[sgt10p]

Did they state a service time prior to 1st July - I thought all the debate was on what various people suggested and thought not what Rolex prescribed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tom-P]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

If you read the other thread on the Rolex letter, there is a discussion as to whether Rolex is actually changing the recommended service interval or just stating that seems to be the current average time people wait to have their watches serviced. The actual wording of the letter is a little odd to say the least. But it is an internal letter to dealers rather than some document for the public so who knows?

I'd like to see the recommended service interval stated somewhere else in the papers accompanying one of the post 7/1 pieces to clear this up.

Exactly so. As I said in the other thread but which seems relevant here (forgive the repetition), the line in the letter is: 'the typical time frame between service intervals has grown to approximately ten years'. This could be taken to mean:

1] dear dealer: please tell our faithful clients that we now recommend a service interval of approximately ten years, or

2] dear dealer: we observe that people are typically having their watches serviced approximately every ten years, and that's too long, please encourage them to do it sooner according to our existing recommendations...

I definitely think we need clarification before we can assume that Rolex have done something as dramatic as [1].

[red.earth]

Originally Posted by Tom-P

Exactly so. As I said in the other thread but which seems relevant here (forgive the repetition), the line in the letter is: 'the typical time frame between service intervals has grown to approximately ten years'. This could be taken to mean:

1] dear dealer: please tell our faithful clients that we now recommend a service interval of approximately ten years, or

2] dear dealer: we observe that people are typically having their watches serviced approximately every ten years, and that's too long, please encourage them to do it sooner according to our existing recommendations...

I definitely think we need clarification before we can assume that Rolex have done something as dramatic as [1].

If it's not option 2, I'll be astonished.

To my mind, the English is sufficiently clear that it is not suggesting service intervals of 10 years - rather, it is saying that 10 years seems to be the customer norm. If Ariel Adams is basing his latest missive on just that Rolex letter alone, I predict some hasty corrections coming soon. Or perhaps he knows something we don't...

Sent from my phone

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by VicLeChic

Hi guys, wondering if someone would be able to shed some light on a little question that's been bugging me since Rolex officially announced the extension of warranty to 5 years, and now recommend 10 years service intervals. I proudly bought my first Rolex last month, and only wear it at weekends. It doesn't rest in a winder, so it's pretty much stopped 5 days in a week.

My question is the following. Does it mean that I probably won't need to service it in a very long time, or do I still need to stick to the 10 years recommendation. In other words, does the lubricant wear off even if I hardly wear the piece?

Greetings from sunny Spain.

If you read that letter announcing the new warranty period, I believe you will find that Rolex says that the typical service interval is ten years.

Rolex did not recommend a service interval, therefore it is prudent to assume that the original service intervals still apply--give or take.

[VicLeChic]

Alright, 5 years it is then, thanks everyone

[Tools]

Actually, this is what Rolex has said (regarding development of the new movements) which likely directly relates to their increased service recommendation.

"The efficiency of the gear-train has been optimized. Rolex has also developed and synthesizes in-house exclusive high-performance lubricants with a considerably longer useful life and greater stability over time. Rolex is the only independent manufacturer that has developed and synthesized its own lubricants."

[whysleep]

How did the recommended interval change from 3-5 years to 10 years for the same or current models???

[Jefferyasher]

When did they implement the "in-house exclusive high-performance lubricants" into their line? Is this something that has always been in the "modern" watches? Is this something that is a recent transition thus the change in service intervals? Larry, where did your information come from?

[Tools]

Originally Posted by whysleep

How did the recommended interval change from 3-5 years to 10 years for the same or current models???

Rolex has not had a "3-5 year" recommendation for decades. Their warranty booklet has stated "...about 5 years, depending on use", which would indicate to me that a lightly used watch can easily go longer.

Originally Posted by Jefferyasher

When did they implement the "in-house exclusive high-performance lubricants" into their line? Is this something that has always been in the "modern" watches? Is this something that is a recent transition thus the change in service intervals? Larry, where did your information come from?

I don't make this stuff up.. It's in Rolex literature and web site about the gear-train and movement advances.

[Perrinyanna]

I plan to go "10 years or when it bogs down, whichever comes first" in my watches..Rolex and with the other brands..My explorer bogged down on its 8th year while an lady oyster hit 10 years a few months ago and is still running fine..

[PJ S]

Spoke with Rolex UK for clarification on the statement sent to the ADs.

The 10 year observation remark was just that, but it could still be construed as a veiled hint for the ADs to remind customers the service interval recommendation is every 5 years.

Along with the new 5 year warranty for watches sold from July 1st, is an extended initial service recommendation of 10 years.
I think this is where some of the confusion may also stem from.

So, it is slightly messy, if you consider that the same watch on display on the 29th, had its tag switched over to the new green one, and new warranty card, is now due its first service in 2025, but if it'd been sold on the 30th, it would've been due in 2020.

Of course, one is free to choose to ignore recommendations and just decide for themselves when it's time to be done.
Obviously, it goes without saying that pressure testing to check seal integrity should be still done regularly.

[zjd168]

I am not an English expert. But I think the common sense is Rolex does not need to mention the 10 year interval if it is not what they intend to suggest.

Originally Posted by Tom-P

Exactly so. As I said in the other thread but which seems relevant here (forgive the repetition), the line in the letter is: 'the typical time frame between service intervals has grown to approximately ten years'. This could be taken to mean:

1] dear dealer: please tell our faithful clients that we now recommend a service interval of approximately ten years, or

2] dear dealer: we observe that people are typically having their watches serviced approximately every ten years, and that's too long, please encourage them to do it sooner according to our existing recommendations...

I definitely think we need clarification before we can assume that Rolex have done something as dramatic as [1].

[Tom-P]

Originally Posted by zjd168

I am not an English expert. But I think the common sense is Rolex does not need to mention the 10 year interval if it is not what they intend to suggest.

Not sure what you mean - see the previous post to yours, from PJ S - which says that he's spoken to Rolex and they confirm they did mean to suggest this, ie a new initial service recommendation of 10 years (around double the previous advice).