ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Bowlerhat · 29 January 2015, 01:21 PM

I am a newbie Rolex owner and have just bought a GMT 2. I set it on Christmas day and it lost 2 seconds over the first 3 weeks. Delighted. I do a lot of exercise and always wear the watch. However, when I went jogging, after 3 weeks of ownership, it gained 35 seconds over a 30 minute run. It then returned to its near perfect accuracy, but around this new datum. I have ran with it twice since and it gained around 10 seconds on both occasions. I checked the threads and found some discussions based around the way repetitive rhythmic motion generates centripetal force and through it an acceleration of the the "tick" and deceleration of the "rock" on the escapement and therefore a gain in time. Although the time gain seemed excessive for such an expensive watch, the principle made sense so I relaxed a bit. However, yesterday I did my usual jogging route with my venerable Oris diver on my wrist and it was +/- 0 over 30 minutes. I am about to put the Rolex in its box and take it back to the dealer, but before I do am I missing something? The only doubt I have is that if the watch was 'broken' its steady state accuracy would not be so good (or it simply wouldn't work at all). Thanks team.

997.2 · 29 January 2015, 06:11 PM

Could be magnetized. First take it in to be demagnetized (I think most AD's can do this?), go on a run and check it out, and then go from there. Sorry to ask but why would you want to run with a GMT master? It should be built to handle it if you insist on running with it.

Andad · 29 January 2015, 06:28 PM

Rapid shaking/vibration/jarring can cause a watch to run fast for short time while the escapement returns to normal.

Not uncommon.

Some owners use rapid shaking to speed up watch that is running slow - not recommended.

If a watch becomes 'magnetised' you would normally see a much bigger rate increase, most likely in minutes/day.

Brushpup · 29 January 2015, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 997.2

Could be magnetized. First take it in to be demagnetized (I think most AD's can do this?), go on a run and check it out, and then go from there. Sorry to ask but why would you want to run with a GMT master? It should be built to handle it if you insist on running with it.

Highly unlikely, especially with modern watches. If it were, it would never go back to running with accuracy, and would stay off/erratic all the time.

AK797 · 29 January 2015, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directioneng

Rapid shaking/vibration/jarring can cause a watch to run fast for short time while the escapement returns to normal.

Not uncommon.

Some owners use rapid shaking to speed up watch that is running slow - not recommended.

If a watch becomes 'magnetised' you would normally see a much bigger rate increase, most likely in minutes/day.

mike · 29 January 2015, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directioneng

Rapid shaking/vibration/jarring can cause a watch to run fast for short time while the escapement returns to normal.

Not uncommon.

Some owners use rapid shaking to speed up watch that is running slow - not recommended.

If a watch becomes 'magnetised' you would normally see a much bigger rate increase, most likely in minutes/day.

Spot on.

To the OP, I've noticed the same thing with certain Rolex references as opposed to other watches with other movements. I've wondered if it's something with the 3xxx movements, but I don't know.

Rags · 29 January 2015, 11:21 PM

I know a lot of people jog with their watch on but I would just buy a G-Shock for exercising.

GTC · 29 January 2015, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rags

I know a lot of people jog with their watch on but I would just buy a G-Shock for exercising.

If I have to change watches based on normal activity such as a three mile run, I've got the wrong sports watch in the first place.

HERITAGE82 · 30 January 2015, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTC

If I have to change watches based on normal activity such as a three mile run, I've got the wrong sports watch in the first place.

I agree with this statement! Rolex watches are sports watches and therefore should be able to take some exercising.

Jari from Finland · 30 January 2015, 02:26 AM

I think that it is worth of taking for being checked. When I myself go jogging I use Polar sportwatch, while having a workout at the gym or when swimming I usually leave the watch at home because there are watches on the walls to check the time.

watchwatcher · 30 January 2015, 02:32 AM

It's definitely going to gain time, but luckily there's an easy fix...don't wear it while running.

HogwldFLTR · 30 January 2015, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTC

If I have to change watches based on normal activity such as a three mile run, I've got the wrong sports watch in the first place.

I change watches every time I swim because the Rolex is lousy at tracking distance in comparison to my Garmin Swim. If I were running I'd likely wear a specialized watch to help me improve and keep track. There are some things Rolexes don't do.

GTC · 30 January 2015, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

I change watches every time I swim because the Rolex is lousy at tracking distance in comparison to my Garmin Swim. If I were running I'd likely wear a specialized watch to help me improve and keep track. There are some things Rolexes don't do.

Accepted and respected. For me, I want a Swiss knife to the extent possible. I wear an Exp II 98% of my life because I don't want watches laying around ready to jump on my wrist depending on what I'm doing.

If I'm swimming I can count laps and the watch can stay on (don't swim as much anymore), and if I'm running I don't need a Daytona to keep the time around a fixed distance, if I'm training at the criminal justice training center, the Exp II can take the sustained recoil on the range, if I'm just returning from Istanbul (which I did Tues), I knew what time it was at home too; and, the Exp II was fine in business clothes in the NGO board meeting I attended there.

Just a different approach.

rmfnla · 30 January 2015, 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

It's definitely going to gain time, but luckily there's an easy fix...don't wear it while running.

No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTC

If I have to change watches based on normal activity such as a three mile run, I've got the wrong sports watch in the first place.

Yes...

Bowlerhat · 30 January 2015, 04:55 AM

Thanks guys. However, I'm still none the wiser. Some say the gain is normal, others not. I am absolutelty convinced that a £6500 sports watch should be able to stand up to a 30 minute jog - c'mon! However, given the inter-woven complexity of a mechanical movement, if the bit that keeps time during "shock" is broken, the watch is unlikely to maintain its accuracy when it's not under "shock" (e.g. the 30 minute jog). Therefore my rather unsophisticated conclusion is that the Rolex movement is pretty poor at timekeeping beyond benign conditions. Is this really the case?

watchwatcher · 30 January 2015, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmfnla

No.

Actually yes...I run 3 or 4 times a week and wearing a watch doesn't work for me. I simply prefer not having one on. The horror, I know, of not having one's watch on for an hour or so.

And the great thing about this forum is we can all have different opinions without being labeled right or wrong...or yes or no.

breitlings · 30 January 2015, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTC

If I have to change watches based on normal activity such as a three mile run, I've got the wrong sports watch in the first place.

do you wear your rolex lifting weights?

CoachRolexRyan · 30 January 2015, 08:43 AM

If its gaining time only when you're jogging,...maybe it's because you're running faster than you used to??

FTX I · 30 January 2015, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

Actually yes...I run 3 or 4 times a week and wearing a watch doesn't work for me. I simply prefer not having one on. The horror, I know, of not having one's watch on for an hour or so.

And the great thing about this forum is we can all have different opinions without being labeled right or wrong...or yes or no.

I agree with you 100%. Of course I could run with a heavy Sub, and if my wrist gets huge with the effort or heat I could just stop running and use the glidelock clasp to make it comfortable again, but the question is why would I want to do that..

ps. OP, your watch is fine.

RollieVerde · 30 January 2015, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTC

Accepted and respected. For me, I want a Swiss knife to the extent possible. I wear an Exp II 98% of my life because I don't want watches laying around ready to jump on my wrist depending on what I'm doing.

If I'm swimming I can count laps and the watch can stay on (don't swim as much anymore), and if I'm running I don't need a Daytona to keep the time around a fixed distance, if I'm training at the criminal justice training center, the Exp II can take the sustained recoil on the range, if I'm just returning from Istanbul (which I did Tues), I knew what time it was at home too; and, the Exp II was fine in business clothes in the NGO board meeting I attended there.

Just a different approach.

This versatility is what attracted me to Rolex/Tudor in the first place. I really think this is what the Oyster range is all about.

HogwldFLTR · 30 January 2015, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTC

Accepted and respected. For me, I want a Swiss knife to the extent possible. I wear an Exp II 98% of my life because I don't want watches laying around ready to jump on my wrist depending on what I'm doing.

If I'm swimming I can count laps and the watch can stay on (don't swim as much anymore), ...

Just a different approach.

I used to wear my Rolex swimming. Then I started hour long swims with 100ish laps. Then I started swimming multiple miles with 140 or more laps. I can't keep track by counting because I lose track and get into debates with myself as to wear in the routine I am; thus a need for a watch that does it automatically. It is so much less stressful. If I were running, swimming, and biking then I'd likely go with a Garmin 910 or 920XT. If I didn't need the higher tech approach I would use my Rolexes as I used to. My sanity has value however.

ceo012384 · 31 January 2015, 02:22 AM

If you eclipsed the speed of light on your run, then time may have been reversed... that explains it.

MTROIS · 31 January 2015, 02:29 AM

I have no problem with mine due to jogs or physical activity.
You may want to have it checked.
Also, what reference do you use to compare times?

chong2k · 31 January 2015, 02:48 AM

Can you damage your Rolex movement through jogging?

Usually I don't use my watch while running but when on vacation I'd feel better with the watch on my wrist while jogging, instead of staying in the hotel room/safe.

If the only downside would be a temporary speed increase - no problem. If I could damage the watch by, say, 10-15x running a year while wearing it - problem...

Bowlerhat · 31 January 2015, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTROIS

I have no problem with mine due to jogs or physical activity.
You may want to have it checked.
Also, what reference do you use to compare times?

I check the watch against my iPad clock before I run and then again on return. I know an iPad clock can jump a little as it changes satellites (I think), but the 'gain while jogging' has happened on four separate occasions now, so it's not a flook. I would never wear the Rolex for a contact sport, or say squash, but for a jog in the park it should IMHO be spot on - especially as far cheaper watches are.

997.2 · 1 February 2015, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brushpup

Highly unlikely, especially with modern watches. If it were, it would never go back to running with accuracy, and would stay off/erratic all the time.

My dad has a pretty new Zenith Defy which I would consider modern. It was magnetized and was gaining time like crazy. We demagnetized it and it was all good to go.

rmfnla · 2 February 2015, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

Actually yes...I run 3 or 4 times a week and wearing a watch doesn't work for me. I simply prefer not having one on. The horror, I know, of not having one's watch on for an hour or so.

And the great thing about this forum is we can all have different opinions without being labeled right or wrong...or yes or no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FTX I

I agree with you 100%. Of course I could run with a heavy Sub, and if my wrist gets huge with the effort or heat I could just stop running and use the glidelock clasp to make it comfortable again, but the question is why would I want to do that..

ps. OP, your watch is fine.

Both your preference; GTC's preference is to wear his while jogging.

My point is he should be able to do that if he wants, not be told his only choice is to not or to wear another watch...

FTX I · 2 February 2015, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmfnla

Both your preference; GTC's preference is to wear his while jogging.

My point is he should be able to do that if he wants, not be told his only choice is to not or to wear another watch...

Ok

rmfnla · 2 February 2015, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FTX I

Ok

Flintstone · 2 February 2015, 11:31 AM

Run backwards

29 January 2015, 01:21 PM	#1
Bowlerhat "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Plymouth, UK Posts: 3	Gaining time while jogging I am a newbie Rolex owner and have just bought a GMT 2. I set it on Christmas day and it lost 2 seconds over the first 3 weeks. Delighted. I do a lot of exercise and always wear the watch. However, when I went jogging, after 3 weeks of ownership, it gained 35 seconds over a 30 minute run. It then returned to its near perfect accuracy, but around this new datum. I have ran with it twice since and it gained around 10 seconds on both occasions. I checked the threads and found some discussions based around the way repetitive rhythmic motion generates centripetal force and through it an acceleration of the the "tick" and deceleration of the "rock" on the escapement and therefore a gain in time. Although the time gain seemed excessive for such an expensive watch, the principle made sense so I relaxed a bit. However, yesterday I did my usual jogging route with my venerable Oris diver on my wrist and it was +/- 0 over 30 minutes. I am about to put the Rolex in its box and take it back to the dealer, but before I do am I missing something? The only doubt I have is that if the watch was 'broken' its steady state accuracy would not be so good (or it simply wouldn't work at all). Thanks team.

29 January 2015, 06:28 PM	#3
Andad 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Eddie Location: Australia Watch: A few. Posts: 36,807	Rapid shaking/vibration/jarring can cause a watch to run fast for short time while the escapement returns to normal. Not uncommon. Some owners use rapid shaking to speed up watch that is running slow - not recommended. If a watch becomes 'magnetised' you would normally see a much bigger rate increase, most likely in minutes/day. __________________ E

29 January 2015, 11:21 PM	#7
Rags 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Chuck Location: SW Florida Watch: 16233,16610,214270 Posts: 11,183	I know a lot of people jog with their watch on but I would just buy a G-Shock for exercising. __________________ 16233 Y Serial Datejust 16610 Z Serial Submariner 214270 Explorer *114300 Oyster Perpetual* *76200 Tudor Date+Day*

30 January 2015, 02:26 AM	#10
Jari from Finland "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Finland Posts: 377	I think that it is worth of taking for being checked. When I myself go jogging I use Polar sportwatch, while having a workout at the gym or when swimming I usually leave the watch at home because there are watches on the walls to check the time. __________________ "I am interested in watches, that's why I like them."

30 January 2015, 08:43 AM	#18
CoachRolexRyan "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: Coach Location: Boston Watch: Rolex Deep Sea Posts: 1,297	If its gaining time only when you're jogging,...maybe it's because you're running faster than you used to?? __________________ DSSD, PAM 320, PAM 170, BR03-92

29 January 2015, 06:11 PM	#2
997.2 Banned Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Chaz Location: Cherry Hill, NJ Posts: 2,721	Could be magnetized. First take it in to be demagnetized (I think most AD's can do this?), go on a run and check it out, and then go from there. Sorry to ask but why would you want to run with a GMT master? It should be built to handle it if you insist on running with it.

30 January 2015, 02:32 AM	#11
watchwatcher "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Larry Location: Kentucky Watch: Yes Posts: 34,479	It's definitely going to gain time, but luckily there's an easy fix...don't wear it while running.

30 January 2015, 04:55 AM	#15
Bowlerhat "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Plymouth, UK Posts: 3	Thanks guys. However, I'm still none the wiser. Some say the gain is normal, others not. I am absolutelty convinced that a £6500 sports watch should be able to stand up to a 30 minute jog - c'mon! However, given the inter-woven complexity of a mechanical movement, if the bit that keeps time during "shock" is broken, the watch is unlikely to maintain its accuracy when it's not under "shock" (e.g. the 30 minute jog). Therefore my rather unsophisticated conclusion is that the Rolex movement is pretty poor at timekeeping beyond benign conditions. Is this really the case?

31 January 2015, 02:22 AM	#22
ceo012384 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Boston Posts: 69	If you eclipsed the speed of light on your run, then time may have been reversed... that explains it.

31 January 2015, 02:29 AM	#23
MTROIS Banned Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: USA Posts: 479	I have no problem with mine due to jogs or physical activity. You may want to have it checked. Also, what reference do you use to compare times?

31 January 2015, 02:48 AM	#24
chong2k "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Munich Watch: Deepsea Posts: 104	Can you damage your Rolex movement through jogging? Usually I don't use my watch while running but when on vacation I'd feel better with the watch on my wrist while jogging, instead of staying in the hotel room/safe. If the only downside would be a temporary speed increase - no problem. If I could damage the watch by, say, 10-15x running a year while wearing it - problem...

2 February 2015, 11:31 AM	#30
Flintstone "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: New York Posts: 623	Run backwards

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)