How accurate is Rolex vs. ETA?

[ron17402]

We talk a lot about the accuracy of our Rolexes. BTW; my GMTIIC is +1.5 seconds/day.

This is my first automatic watch and was wondering what your experiences have been with other brands of automatic watches, especially relative to accuracy.

One of things that I like about Rolex is that they actually make the entire watch. But is the Rolex movement actually better than an ETA or other automatic movement; as far as accuracy, robustness, long-term durability, etc.?

Thanks.

[frostie]

Swatch watches are more accurate than rolex watches. I had many of them and they were losing ten seconds a year

[roadcarver]

Both are capable of achieving chronometre specs.

ETA is also used by Tudor and other fine swiss watches, which tells you something of their durability and accuracy.

[Nick Hacko]

Originally Posted by ron17402

We talk a lot about the accuracy of our Rolexes. BTW; my GMTIIC is +1.5 seconds/day.

But is the Rolex movement actually better than an ETA or other automatic movement; as far as accuracy, robustness, long-term durability, etc.?

No, it is not.

Rolex movements are not technically advanced
or robust. And they are not very accurate at all.
The strength of Rolex is in it's brand name, water resistant case and good resale value (70% for steel models to 50% for gold).
The only exception to above is new Daytona, fitted with reasonable good movement.
However the watch itself is terribly overpriced compared to similar models by other makers.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

I have owned an IWC "Doppelchronograph" with a modified Eta 7750 mvt., and that one did not really impress me precision-wise, but otherwise ETA mvts. are said to be able to be regulated to COSC specs, but then again most automatic mvts. are. Rolex used ETA mvts. in its chronographs up until 1988 when the Zenith modified Cal. 4030 took over, being in the Daytona until 2000 when the in-house Cal. 4130 took over.

The easiness of service of the Rolex cal. 3135, however, is unbeatable, and it is also one of the most sturdy mvts. out there.

[Nick Hacko]

Originally Posted by Spacedweller

The easiness of service of the Rolex cal. 3135, however, is unbeatable, and it is also one of the most sturdy mvts. out there.

No it is not. The 3135 is not an 'easy' movement to service at all. Seiko cal. 71xx is by far the "sturdiest" mechanical movement ever manufactured. And it only costs $10.

[Jocke]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

No it is not. The 3135 is not an 'easy' movement to service at all. Seiko cal. 71xx is by far the "sturdiest" mechanical movement ever manufactured. And it only costs $10.

I will say Rolex movement are very robust and durable.
Then there is not many high end watches you can get
serviced around $300 and get them back in a few weeks.

That is what I call a good movement. Then a Seiko movement
for $10 is not bad either, but that one will you never service.
But those movement don´t sit in a $3000+ watch.

Jocke

[mikey]

Its kinda hard to say whether an eta or Rolex movement are accurate. They are both mechanical and swiss made. Since they are mechanical proper regulation will affect both movements. I am sure there are no 2 peoples Rolex movements are running exactly the same or eta powered high end watches for that matter. IMHO neither is more accurate than the other.

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

No it is not. The 3135 is not an 'easy' movement to service at all. Seiko cal. 71xx is by far the "sturdiest" mechanical movement ever manufactured. And it only costs $10.

I see you're back, Nick!

[mike]

Well....I'm not a watch maker so they're all hard for me to work on. I can only give you my thoughts based on my experience.

Rolex movements are capable of great accuracy, but on occasion need to be regulated to get the best out of them. In my experience Rolex movements are some of the most consistent movements I've used. A movement that gains or loses X number of seconds in various positions is accurate if not regulated. I've used them for 40 years in all kinds of conditions and never had one fail. I've also been guilty of not servicing the watch when called for--some times for years and not had one fail. Indeed the older 15xx movements are said by those I respect to have been over engineered monsters. I can't really say I've seen anything involving the 3xxx movements that would make me feel otherwise either.
I've had watches with eta movements, and have one now. Very accurate! But, I notice a lot more positional variation with them.
I have Omegas with 861 and 1861 movements. Built like a tank and accuracy to match.

All of them are more than capable of COSC standards, indeed a LOT better.

Just my 2 cents.

[KJacques]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

No, it is not.

Rolex movements are not technically advanced
or robust. And they are not very accurate at all.

Sorry, couldn't disagree with you more. Every Rolex I've owned has been robust to the extreme and accurate within COSC specs. One sub has proven itself with over 34 years of zero trouble performance through extreme usage conditions. And after a negligent 10 year lapse in servicing, it was returned to like new condition and is currently accurate within -.5 sec per day. I doubt I'm the only one with that kind of luck.

[Nick Hacko]

Originally Posted by KJacques

Every Rolex I've owned has been robust to the extreme and accurate within COSC specs.

Millions of Seiko 5 ( $50 watch) owners worldwide would have the same experience. And for billions on this planet, Seiko 5 is the biggest 'status symbol' watch they could ever afford. The truth that your Rolex is not really all that much better / accurate / reliable or robust than Seiko may hurt but c'est la Vie.

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

Millions of Seiko 5 ( $50 watch) owners worldwide would have the same experience. And for billions on this planet, Seiko 5 is the biggest 'status symbol' watch they could ever afford. The truth that your Rolex is not really all that much better / accurate / reliable or robust than Seiko may hurt but c'est la Vie.

Nick.

I guess that you haven't bothered with the birthday present I sent you.

[haakon59]

There are several manufacturers who make the entire watch or nearly all of it, like Citizen for example. And there are likewise a number of manufacturers who make excellent movements which power watches that are accurate. Not even the price of a watch is much of an indication of how accurately it will perform. Your Seiko may outperform your Patek Philippe, for example.

Given that manufacturers are in the "keeping accurate time" business, most have worked pretty hard to obtain a pretty decent consistency in this regard. Obviously, a manufacturer whose watches didn't keep good time would be put out of business pretty fast because that is a reputation which would spread like wildfire.

ETA and other manufacturers make robust, reliable movements. So this is not usually a quality which distinguishes them. Also, you must realize that most movements work approximately the same way with the same technology, just designs which are different enough so they can get a patent. One exception to this is the co-axial escapement designed by George Daniels and now used exclusively by Omega. Audemars Piguet also is working on a new escapement mechanism, although I don't think it has been released yet. But basically, mechanical movements are essentially unchanged in principle from what Mr. Breguet used 200 some years ago.

Rolex makes a fine watch, but so do others. Accuracy is not exclusive to any particular manufacturer, but I do think that the record for total number of wins in accuracy contests (which were popular at one time) actually belongs to Zenith, and they make their own movements.

[Nick Hacko]

Originally Posted by haakon59

There are several manufacturers who make the entire watch or nearly all of it, like Citizen for example. And there are likewise a number of manufacturers who make excellent movements which power watches that are accurate. Not even the price of a watch is much of an indication of how accurately it will perform. Your Seiko may outperform your Patek Philippe, for example.

Given that manufacturers are in the "keeping accurate time" business, most have worked pretty hard to obtain a pretty decent consistency in this regard. Obviously, a manufacturer whose watches didn't keep good time would be put out of business pretty fast because that is a reputation which would spread like wildfire.

ETA and other manufacturers make robust, reliable movements. So this is not usually a quality which distinguishes them. Also, you must realize that most movements work approximately the same way with the same technology, just designs which are different enough so they can get a patent. One exception to this is the co-axial escapement designed by George Daniels and now used exclusively by Omega. Audemars Piguet also is working on a new escapement mechanism, although I don't think it has been released yet. But basically, mechanical movements are essentially unchanged in principle from what Mr. Breguet used 200 some years ago.

Rolex makes a fine watch, but so do others. Accuracy is not exclusive to any particular manufacturer, but I do think that the record for total number of wins in accuracy contests (which were popular at one time) actually belongs to Zenith, and they make their own movements.

Moderators: PLEASE make this one sticky. Or even better:
make the acceptance of above statement compulsory for joining
the Rolex forum.

Well said, haakon and thank you for your courage to say it publicly.
Bravo !

[ron17402]

Here's an interesting article about COSC from timezone.com. I found it quite informative about accuracy and COSC in general.

http://www.timezone.com/library/wbor...33384647656250

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Nice one! Thanks for sharing, Ron!

[Green Arrow]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

No, it is not.

Rolex movements are not technically advanced
or robust. And they are not very accurate at all.
The strength of Rolex is in it's brand name, water resistant case and good resale value (70% for steel models to 50% for gold).
The only exception to above is new Daytona, fitted with reasonable good movement.
However the watch itself is terribly overpriced compared to similar models by other makers.

How about the new 3186 movement?
What are the most robust movements in your opinions, irrespective of manufacturer?

[Incurable]

The most robust and reliable timepiece ever produced...

[Letsgodiving]

Originally Posted by Incurable

The most robust and reliable timepiece ever produced...

I'll give you robust but reliable?

[Incurable]

Sure, it's reliable... Now as for the availability of the sun, that's another story. Kinda hard to read underwater too.

[ldmarcht]

So, if i buy an eta equipped watch i dont to worry about my inheritance? Sorry, i couldnt resist

[bayhillrolex]

Originally Posted by ldmarcht

So, if i buy an eta equipped watch i dont to worry about my inheritance? Sorry, i couldnt resist

[ldmarcht]

...just a bit of levity...

[Destroy]

my green arrow is still at +0 secs a day

[knightspringer]

Nick Hacko's following comments are interesting:

"Rolex movements are not technically advanced
or robust. And they are not very accurate at all.
The strength of Rolex is in it's brand name, water resistant case and good resale value (70% for steel models to 50% for gold).
The only exception to above is new Daytona, fitted with reasonable good movement."

Can you please elaborate on this? Why are Rolex movements not considered technically advanced, robust and accurate vis a vis an ETA movement? Examples of an ETA movement using a more advanced construction design over a Rolex movement?

In which areas have the Daytona movement improved over say, the 3135 or 3186?

Thanks, and hope to have your comments.

[roadcarver]

Partly quoting Nick on this...

Its priced accordingly due to demand as long as customers deem that they can still afford it.

Is gasoline over priced?

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

However the watch itself is terribly overpriced compared to similar models by other makers.

[abigsecret]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

And they are not very accurate at all.

Maybe once your trained by Rolex Nick, you might understand better the way they are regulated, and made accurate...

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Nick Hacko

No, it is not.

Rolex movements are not technically advanced
or robust. And they are not very accurate at all.
The strength of Rolex is in it's brand name, water resistant case and good resale value (70% for steel models to 50% for gold).
The only exception to above is new Daytona, fitted with reasonable good movement.
However the watch itself is terribly overpriced compared to similar models by other makers.

Sorry, Nick, while I do agree that Rolex do not make the most "pretty" looking movements in the world, I beg to differ and completely disagree on the accuracy bit.

Rolex movements are pretty damn spot-on! I've had the distinct pleasure of owning 20 Rollies over 27 years and I've found each and every one of them to be well within COSC specs.

As a matter of fact, my current two - Blue Sub and Exp-II - are superbly and mind-blowingly accurate. I would stake my life on the accuracy of both these timepieces of mine.

Over priced? What luxury commodity out there isn't? You want something flashy, you pay the bloody price - it's as simple as that!!

Cheers - JJ

[leopardprey]

I would have to say that many ETA movements are equal with Rolex (or maybe even better?), especially ETA movements that have been modified or fine tuned by the watch company (such as you see with Panerai and Ulysse Nardin0. I do agree, with Nick somewhat, that in regards to Rolex, you are paying for the name ROLEX than for a superior movement. Rolex movements are good, but there are some out there just as good if not better. Many watchmakers have told me that actually JLC makes some of the best mechanical movements. And that as for Chronographs, the Omega Speedmaster has the best movement. One thing that I like on many modifed ETA movements, better than Rolex, is the use of ball bearing mounted rotar instead of the pivot rotar Rolex uses.

Now the 3135 movement, 3185, and the 3130 movements are pretty darn good. And the newer 3186 movement so far has proven superb. But I would nto say they are really any better than OMegas ETA movement with the Co-Axial, or UN's/Panerais modified movement. Just different in my opinion.

One thing nice about ETA movements (along with most basic Rolex and JLC movements) is that most any competent watchmaker can service. And the big advantage of ETA movements, is there will be plenty of spare parts around to last for several lifetimes of servicing/repair.