ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
22 January 2018, 03:15 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 1,057
|
What timekeeping would be acceptable to you ?
On a 38 year old watch ?
Mine is running a regular 15 secs fast per day. While it doesn't bother me . . I actually enjoy the process of re-setting it every 3 or 4 days. Almost like the experience you get with a manual. However, is this generally acceptable for 1980 Sub 1680 ? Should I only be concerned if it changes suddenly and then look at a service ? Think the last RSC service was 2013. Not a long time if we were talking about a modern piece. I'm asking because I'm relatively new to vintage and I would not want to think I was causing damage to a watch that I wear everyday and my favourite piece. Thanks |
22 January 2018, 05:54 AM | #2 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 1,826
|
I have a -78 1680, a -78 1675 and a -72 1625. I have had them all regulated to less than 30s fast per month. The 1575 movement is capable of that. This is something that only slowly changes throughout the years and if they are running to slow/fast for my liking I have them regulated again. It is usually years between the regulations.
Maybe you just need to have it regulated? |
22 January 2018, 07:09 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Easton PA
Posts: 581
|
Not officially vintage, but I have a 28 year old Datejust that ran about +14 spd when I got it, but after full service has been running + 2 spd or less. Is there a time that the watch can’t be serviced and brought up to COSC or close thereto? I see a lot of fine watches in particular a Rootbeer GMT that I have my eyes on but I’d like to know what to expect accuracy wise if I’m willing to pay for full service.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
22 January 2018, 07:54 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 191
|
You'll be so much happier when you have it regulated. It should be something they can do while you wait...though it might be worth making an appointment. And it would be worth make a log of time checks. Do it over a one week period, being constant on the time of day you check the watch, and how long the watch is off your wrist at night. The position you rest the watch in can also impact on the overall gain or loss per day. Resting on its side (on the nine) or on the crown (the three) or on its back (dial up) or face down (the case back up). But for that I would do a second week of time checks. Then present the information to the watch maker when you have the watch regulated. My 1018 was just recently serviced and runs +/- 2 sec per day and I rest it on its back, face up. My 1013 is losing about 15 sec per day but has no recent service history. I've been compiling a gain/loss log I'm taking it in for an inspection and regulation this coming week.
|
23 January 2018, 03:45 AM | #5 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NL
Watch: Yachtmaster
Posts: 14,352
|
It would not bother me, 15s per day is accurate enough
__________________
Day Date 18238, Yachtmaster 16622, Deepsea 116660, Submariner 116619, SkyD 326935, DJ 178271, DJ 69158, Yachtmaster 169622, GMT 116713LN, GMT 126711. |
23 January 2018, 03:55 AM | #6 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,268
|
To be honest I don't care much about time keeping on my vintage watches. As long as it runs I am happy. I rarely wear the same watch for more than a day or two consecutively though and I enjoy winding and setting my watches.
|
23 January 2018, 05:11 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 1,057
|
Thanks guys for your input .
|
23 January 2018, 03:17 PM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,973
|
Most 15xx series balances have been slowed and sped a few times. Hypothetically if one screw or the other is not exactly tweaked the same...even off 1/2 of a notch over 16 regulations it could be pretty far out of poise. It's a little tricky to get them back. Some are inherently better than others and always were. I just got a 1675 from a friend that was losing a lot of time. It was pretty far out of poise. He's at + 4 a day resting dial up now. He's much happier. He watches pretty close and he's pretty detail conscious. He is a very prominent and well known electric guitarist. He says it seems to lose 1 second during the day and gain 5 back dial up at night. That's well within spec for that watch. Individual wearing habits could make more variance than that. It was as close as I felt I could make it given the parameters I started with. Some of the positions are a little wide but still in spec at full wind. It's 40+ years old. it's been worked on a few times. I didn't service the movement as it had been done recently by someone else.
|
18 August 2018, 01:47 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Real Name: Chris B
Location: Yorkshire U.K.
Watch: 1016 Explorer I
Posts: 25
|
*** Duplicating my entry in another "accuracy thread" here ***
I have been advised by my dealer, who contacted RSC in UK on my behalf, that Rolex targets -4/+10 s per day for older watches (not the COSC standard of -4/+6). My 1972 1016 is currently running at -7 for the last 3 months after 4 months close to perfect so if it stays like that I will get it regulated under warranty (out of service last October); on the other hand it may be related t the heatwave we have had in UK so I'll now see if the watch settles back to more accurate timekeeping |
19 August 2018, 08:50 AM | #10 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2017
Real Name: Dave
Location: Knoxville, TN
Watch: Air King 5500
Posts: 56
|
Quote:
Weird that my watch loses more seconds with the stem down vs the stem up as is per normal convention. I guess that's why the time logs are valuable. |
|
19 August 2018, 11:05 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: US
Posts: 2,237
|
My daily wear 1968 1603 has gained a minute since the first. It is a 1570 of course and was 'serviced' in 2015. I have no idea what was done, it came from the seller that way. I've had more accurate ones over the years but this isn't irritating enough to worry about.
|
19 August 2018, 12:26 PM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Salem, OR
Posts: 5,198
|
My 1680, 1675, 5513, and 1601 were all dead accurate.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.