Poor Regulation After RSC (London) Service

[Jazz]

Hello all!

I had my 116610LN serviced by RSC (London), a little while ago.

Since then, it has had to be sent back 4 times, due to poor regulation. I've attached a screenshot, showing the latest figures.

Ultimately, I am sending it back, yet again, and RSC will regulate it appropriately 5 seconds slower, in order to hit the - 2/+2 regulation.

Has anybody else had issues similar to mine? Is it that difficult to get the regulation correct?

[Seanken]

All i can say is that I would do as you have done. Keep sending it back until you get the touted accuracy. I check mine once a week or so for accuracy and I couldn't stand more than three seconds plus minus. I think that's reasonable. I'm giving them an additional 50% room for error in both directions, quite generous I think. So far with my subc and new model Explorer I, I am right on their claims/guarantee.

[uansari1]

I don't understand why this is such an issue for some shops...especially the RSC.

My watchmaker (Rolex and Swatch Group certified of course), regulates my watches within 20 minutes.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Jazz

Hello all!

I had my 116610LN serviced by RSC (London), a little while ago.

Since then, it has had to be sent back 4 times, due to poor regulation. I've attached a screenshot, showing the latest figures.

Ultimately, I am sending it back, yet again, and RSC will regulate it appropriately 5 seconds slower, in order to hit the - 2/+2 regulation.

Has anybody else had issues similar to mine? Is it that difficult to get the regulation correct?

Originally Posted by Seanken

All i can say is that I would do as you have done. Keep sending it back until you get the touted accuracy. I check mine once a week or so for accuracy and I couldn't stand more than three seconds plus minus. I think that's reasonable. I'm giving them an additional 50% room for error in both directions, quite generous I think. So far with my subc and new model Explorer I, I am right on their claims/guarantee.

The bare uncased movements are still tested at the COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds to get the chronometer certification.When movements are shipped back to Rolex passed or failed,then stored till matched to its case.Rolex then regulates on a machine which they must do many at a time by automation or have hundreds of regulators with the amount of watches Rolex sells each year.Yes they are tested to a precision after caseing to this new spec -2+2, but they do not state it a guarantee it will perform every day the same for life on the wrist. On the wrist there are just too many variables to 100% guarantee any movement will perform to -2+2 every single day for life, but expect it was tested to this precision on the machine.On the wrist things like the movement is constantly affected by the earth's gravity, metal expansion and contraction,mainspring-power reserve, temperature variations, subtle changes in lubrication and friction,daily shocks on the wrist,plus the owners wearing habits and so on.And while all these phone applications are not as accurate as electronic quartz timing machines, they do provide a general idea whether a watch or clock is running fast or slow. But not 100% accurate as they are only as good as what the microphone produces on the phone.

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by uansari1

I don't understand why this is such an issue for some shops...especially the RSC.

My watchmaker (Rolex and Swatch Group certified of course), regulates my watches within 20 minutes.

Even I can do that.

[seanw]

Rolex RSC took three tries to regulate my new Explorer to within its stated specification, but it got there in the end.

The +2/-2 sec/day precision is a de facto guarantee on a watch within warranty, otherwise Rolex wouldn't bother to regulate to this criterion. Rolex states a range, not a single figure, as that's what it's confident it can achieve.

[CaveDweller]

16030 – 3035 - +2 seconds a day from new , though four services over 30 years – still there @ +2 seconds a day (regular as clockwork)

Now, I’m not being funny, but yours looks all over the place – if anything, I’d expect the results to be reversed as it settled in (and they do “settle in” during the first week)

I got mine back from an independent service recently and it ran for the first two days for 48 hours on my wrist – it’s been going for three weeks now, no winding, on the wrist @ +2 seconds a day – “settled in”

If I were in your shoes, I’d send it back, explaining the issue (again) – and ask them to hold on to it until they can confirm it’s not going to “slip” …..

[The Libertine]

Originally Posted by CaveDweller

Now, I’m not being funny, but yours looks all over the place – if anything, I’d expect the results to be reversed as it settled in (and they do “settle in” during the first week)..

My observation as well. Consistency is as important as accuracy.

[offrdmania]

Missing some information OP. Your scope reading only shows +/- seconds per day, what about the amplitude and beat error? If the amplitude and beat error are within the proper parameter then it may just be that your watch is magnetized. When I see minutes off by a large margin, I immediately think magnetized.

[MJK737]

My local AD also regulated my 14060M in about 20min. It's been running about minus .5sec a day no matter what I do. Pretty amazing when you think about it.

[PJ S]

Originally Posted by offrdmania

Missing some information OP. Your scope reading only shows +/- minutes per day, what about the amplitude and beat error? If the amplitude and beat error are within the proper parameter then it may just be that your watch is magnetized. When I see minutes off by a large margin, I immediately think magnetized.

It’s not minutes, it’s seconds.
Just needs properly regulated and all will be good again.
Concerns about amplitude and beat rate error would be fair if discussing whether to service the movement or not, but since it’s not long back from being serviced, then these are not what ails this particular movement.

[offrdmania]

Originally Posted by PJ S

It’s not minutes, it’s seconds.

Just needs properly regulated and all will be good again.

Concerns about amplitude and beat rate error would be fair if discussing whether to service the movement or not, but since it’s not long back from being serviced, then these are not what ails this particular movement.

Fixed, honest mistake

[PJ S]

^
Okay, but then magnetisation wouldn’t even be a consideration at a fairly consistent +6 s/d (average).

[Jazz]

Thank you all ever so much for your input and replies.

I'll be agreeing with RSC in regulating my wristwatch approximately 5-6 seconds per day, slower. They will then monitor it for a week or so and go from there!