The question in the title is one I see on watch forums often. The responses will be quite varied, but inevitably there will be someone from the “If it isn’t broken, then don’t fix it” camp chiming in. Now here at Omega Forums, this attitude is far less common than on a site like WUS, but I consider most posters here to be quite a bit more knowledgeable about watches in general than the WUS crowd is. But still I have seen the “it runs well so it must be okay” sort of statements posted here occasionally.

Now I’ll be up front here that if that is what you believe, and you want to continue that way of dealing with service on your watches for whatever reason, I am not trying to convince you to change anything you currently do. The purpose of this post is to dispel the myth that if the watch is keeping good time, then everything inside must be fine.

So I recently received this Speedmaster in. I’ll be up front in saying that I purchased this watch, and had no idea of service history or even how well it ran to be honest. Sorry for the blurry photo:



Since I had no idea what condition this was in, I decided to fully wind it and put it on the timing machine for checks in 6 positions, and here is the result:



Now keep in mind if you don’t have a timing machine and just simply wore this watch, all you would know is that it keeps damned good time. The average rate is +3.7 seconds per day, and the positional variation (Delta at the red arrow) is extremely good for this movement at just 5.4 seconds difference between all 6 positions. Note that for the Cal. 861 in this watch Omega allows the average daily rate to be from -1 to +11 seconds, and they allow up to 25 seconds of Delta measured over just 3 positions at full wind, so this is excellent.

Now what I see as a watchmaker is a beat error that is a bit larger then I would expect, and the balance amplitudes are not quite as high as I would like to see, but they are far from horrible. So to be honest although I was hoping it had been serviced fairly recently, that was certainly questionable at this point.

So the next step was to remove the case back, and it was on tight. One reason why is evident below – the case back gasket has started to turn to black goop as these often do after many years:



The movement overall looks to be in good condition though, so I place it under the microscope, and took photos of some specific areas. Now because this is a chronograph, it has a lot of parts mounted on top of the base movement, so it’s not easy to see all the jewels, but I can see a few. Here is one, and as you can see the well of the jewel around the pivot is completely dry...and I mean 100% bone dry:



On this one some of the old oil residue can be seen, but again completely dry:



And lastly, here is the balance jewel, and again it is 100% dry:



Now because balance jewels can be tricky to know what exactly you are looking at due to various features on the hole jewel that might look like rings of oil to the untrained eye, some time ago I took these photos of a jewel (also in a Cal. 861) before and after service to show what a properly oiled jewel looks like:



You can clearly see the ring of fresh oil between the hole and cap jewel.

So this watch has certainly not been serviced recently, and after looking at it more, I’m pretty convinced it’s never been serviced actually. No service marks inside the case back, and all the heads of the screws are nearly perfect. And slots that do show deformation from a screwdriver being in them are only deformed in the direction of tightening the screws, not loosening them.

Once again, I’m not trying to tell anyone to do anything differently then they are doing now. I just want to illustrate pretty well I think that timekeeping is actually a pretty poor indicator of the need for service.

I know this will not deter some true believers out there into repeating the false idea that if it runs okay it's fine inside, but for those who might be on the fence I hope this gives you some clarity.

Hope this helps.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks Al , i also had the belief that if it runs nicely there is no need to service it.
You surely know the wording, never touch a running system
But the way you illustrated a nicely running watch might make me think different thou.
Looks really like your has never been touched except for the inscribtion on the upper right lug.

 

Thank you so much for the education here, Archer!

This post should be a permanent 'stickie'!

I have a Timegrapher, and I love using it, but you just gave me a whole lot more depth as to the use of its information, not to mention the greater knowledge of what a service can really do for a fine timepiece... very cool

 

Great information and pictures are always nice 2 c.

 

Thank you very much for this very interesting topic (as usual if I may say)

 

Great information. Thanks for the post!

 

I saw the thread on Watchuseek about the this topic.. The OP's run the watch till it stops running attitude blew me away.. I run into the same attitude as a technician for Toyota all the time… People think maintenance is just money thrown away because warranty will cover any neglect.. I'm with you on this one Al, thank you for the pics and taking the time to educate the less informed..

 

Unfortunately, some watchmakers do nothing to dispel this myth. Most of the watchmakers I have gone to in New York have even tried to talk me out of getting an overhaul if the watch is running "fine", despite being informed that it has been 6+ years since its last cleaning and oiling. Is this a matter of improper training? I don't want to name anyone specific (PM me if curious), but these guys are being used by the big auction houses in Manhattan. Then there are of course places like Central Watch in Grand Central that recommend an overhaul if there is a scratch on a lug (I don't mind naming them, having experienced first-hand and heard too many horror stories)

 

Great info, Al. Thanks!

 

Thanks Al for this enlightening article
I have a few follow up questions:
When should a manual wind watch be serviced after purchase and without knowledge of service history?
Also, should manual wind watches stored in a box or safe and not regularly worn be wound and allowed to run
at a certain time interval, for example, monthly?
I have mostly vintage manual wind military watches-pre 1960
I usually wind each one on a monthly basis-should I continue that practice?
Thanks for your expertise and I appreciate you taking the time to answer

 

Woo hoo! What an excellent thread. I've had a watchmaker tell me: "if it's keeping good time then do not mess with it." Even as clueless as I am about watches, that would seem to be the same as saying because my car still accelerates well under full-throttle I shouldn't need to change the oil.

 

Not sure why people would be saying what they are. They may not want your business, or simply don't care. Remember that anyone can "hang out a shingle" and call themselves a watchmaker.

Cheers, Al

 

I numbered your questions to make responding easier...

1 - The short answer is, as soon as possible. The more complete answer is that just like I have done in the example above, the watch should be looked at for balance amplitudes, and then visually inspected to determine if it requires a service. This goes for all kinds of watches, not just manual winding watches of a specific era.

2 - Not needed. When you are not wearing them they can just sit.

3 - You can continue this if you want, but it's not needed. If it makes you feel better that they are being used a bit then go for it, but there is no real technical reason to do it.

Cheers, Al

 

IMO, like any mechanical instrument that is in continuous operation, a watch needs to be periodically serviced. While a watch might be running o.k. at a given point in time, but the lack of service will likely impact the performance and tolerances in the long run.

This reminds of a story of family friend who had the engine seize on her 2-year old car after 30,000 miles. Turns out she never had the oil changed since she believed oil changes were a myth propagated by the auto industry to get people to spend money and the car was "running great" up until it stopped

 

It's called breakdown maintenance, when it breaks down I'll maintain it.
A modern and popular form of servicing.

 

Great post! I look forward to the after pictures

 

I do my own work on the 120+ watches in my collection. My "daily drivers" number less than 5, and these are all modern watches. (Well, my newest daily driver is 25 years old!) Those I try to go through every 5 years or so. As for everything else? When I add a vintage or antique, I make it a point to go through it immediately. If it joins the ranks of those that seldom run for more than a week or two during a year, it may not get a going through for long time. If, during a 20 year period, the majority of these watches may only run for a month or two in total. Some of them, I don't remember the last time I wore them. I see no advantage to a regular recurring maintenance schedule for these.

An important aspect of maintaining a watch is prevention, not necessarily repair. That is, very frequently a watch comes my way was in over all good condition up until the day the deteriorated crown allowed the watch to leak. Not a major factor on a garden variety $100.00 watch. But if the watch happens to be an expensive exotic, a leaking crown can be a world of hurt! If that watch was being examined regularly, and the deteriorating crown had been discovered in time, chances are conditioning, crown and gasket may be all that would have been required. But if the crown fails owing to neglect? Imagine the possible expense! The old adage "a stitch in time saves nine" seems to apply. A principle few seem to adhere to.

So maintenance should not be viewed as repairing a damaged watch that has been neglected, but maintaining it so the damage doesn't happen. An attitude of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" may result in a trip to the shop for a repair that might just be a whole lot more expensive than a trip to the shop for maintenance! Maintenance prevents repairs!
Repairs happen because of lack of maintenance!

 

We've seen some of Al's "gallery of horrors" in the past and I'm sure he's seen some results of work by "watchmakers".

I came across this from checking out an earlier post here today.

http://www.abellwatchmakers.com/Cheapwatchrepairs.htm

 

Great post Al! Information like this shows why this is the best watch forum on the net!!

 

I tend 2 agree