One thing I've wondered for a while is why watches from high-end brands like Patek tend to have shorter (3-5 year) service intervals while, for example, Rolex is 5-7, Omega's non-co-axials are 4-5, and co-axials are even longer? Perhaps Al or another watchmaker could enlighten me?

I suspect it may have to do with the fact that replacement parts are so much more expensive, and a conservative interval reduces the risk of any parts suffering enough wear to warrant replacement.

I'm keep resisting entering the high-end world with such short service intervals and such long repair times (6-12 months or even more, I've heard, even for simple movements).

 

Based on nothing more than my gut feeling, and feel free to call me a cynic...

... The money throwing smiley isn't there!

But if it were, that's why.

 

I'm wondering if it has more to do with the 'wash, rinse, REPEAT' marketing strategy that increased shampoo sales.

 

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I'd be much more inclined to make sure the service was kept up on a Ferrari than on a Toyota. Call it insurance, call it preventative maintenance, whatever you like - I call it common sense.

Like they say about all of our big boy toys, if you can afford the _________ (fill in the name of the trinket), you'd better be able to afford the upkeep too.

 

Where does Rolex indicate a 5-7 year service interval? I was unable to find this on their web site with a quick look, so please let me know the source of this information. I have never seen any official Rolex communication say a watch can go 7 years before regular service, so not sure where these quoted service intervals come from, and I'm not sure they are what the factories really say.

With the 7 year Rolex thing being very dubious in my mind if it's a real recommended interval from the company, and not just something picked up on a forum, then there's not really a lot of difference between the 3 companies you cite. I honestly think this question is really a non-issue. Per the quoted numbers, the top end of PP is 5 years, as is the top end of Omega, and the lower end of Rolex.

PP does say this on their web site:

"Regular service is recommended at intervals of between three and five years, depending on the type of watch and its general wear and tear."

So the 3-5 year time frame is well qualified - what I mean by that is the situation is different for different watches. Keep in mind PP makes all different sorts of watches, some water resistant, some not. Some with snap together cases, and even pocket watches. Rolex and Omega...not so much.

How often you need to service a well sealed dive watch, and how often you need to service a non-sealed pocket watch are 2 completely different things. Also, PP is far more into maintaining their legacy, so they will be servicing more vintage watches (as a percentage of overall service jobs) I suspect than either Omega or Rolex would be. We all know Rolex simply refuses watches over a certain age, where PP will repair anything they ever made, even something that is not water resistant, or even dust resistant.

I don't think there is any significant difference in what these companies recommend to be honest, and I don't think it has to do with a money grab or the fact that the company is "high end" or not. I think you are reading far too much into some dubious recommended service interval numbers...

Hey, you asked!

Cheers, Al

 

Another factoid I just learned. Do they have a blanket rule to refuse watches over certain age? Just curious here, but any idea to what this is? or do they assess the watch before declining service?

 

Believe its 30 years from date of original sale

 

Hi Al, I did indeed ask! The 5-7 for Rolex was from a forum post, yes, but the poster had just returned from RSC in NYC and said they had explicitly told him that. I wouldn't suspect the poster would flat out lie about that, but stranger things have happened. Omega Boutique staff are explicitly saying 6-8 years on co-axials now (even though Omega's website still only has 4-5 in print, and I suspect that's the official line).

Sorry if my question seemed silly to an experienced watchmaker such as yourself, but the ownership experience does differ wildly between having a watch in the shop for 6+ months every 3 years versus 6 weeks every 7. A conservative interpretation of (admittedly "reading too much into") the numbers would indicate that PP service costs at least twice as much, is required up to twice as often, and takes at least 4 times longer, and I just wondered if there was a technical reason for that on comparable calibers, though it sounds like even approaching the question using these intervals might be the wrong way to think about it.

 

I guess it depends on how much legitimacy you put into a comment made on a forum with the Rolex example. Is this is really something the company states as their official policy as a standard service interval, or is this the result of a casual conversation with a Rolex tech at the counter? Those are 2 very different things in my view.

The 7 years could easily be a conversation about a watch worn in rotation with others, where the owner is not particularly hard on the watch, so the tech says "Yeah, you could probably go 7 years before your next service." This gets repeated on a forum, and now this is what everyone says is the Rolex standard service interval. This is not a strange thing - it happens every day on watch forums. I fight/correct this sort of misinformation all the time on forums, so I would take these numbers with a big grain of salt.

For the Omega example, again what someone says to you verbally in a boutique is suspect IMO in terms of being the official company line. If this is the new "standard" which I very much doubt, then they would be updating it on the web site. Remember Omega have backed off the service interval claims on co-axials that they once made, because they found they were really no going to last as long as they thought they would. I think they would be pretty gun shy about bumping them back up given the problems they have had with various movements.

The bottom line is that there is no difference in service intervals for a watch movement, technically speaking. I tried to explain this above, but not sure it came across well with you...the case construction is very important in how often a watch needs to be serviced. A PP pocket watch, that has zero water resistance, and very little dust resistance even, would require service far more often than if the exact same movement in that pocket watch was in a highly, or even moderately, water resistant case.

Omega and Rolex really don't have any watches that fall into this same sort of category of "not even dustproof" so they don't have to have a low end of 3 years for recommended service intervals.

So PP says the interval could be as short as 3 years, not for anything related to the movement, but because the movement is not well protected in it's case. So unless you are planning on buying a PP pocket watch that has no water resistance and lets dust in, you are fine, and again making this into something it really isn't.

Cheers, Al

 

Al, thanks for all the clarifications, I appreciate it. I did understand your reply about the technical concerns, it came across just fine -- I was just trying to clarify that my OP was primarily about technical concerns (as you addressed) and not the idea that it's a money grab as proposed by others (service costs and profitability would need a whole thread themselves!). Thank you for explaining the concerns regarding case construction, intended use, etc. and how they potentially affect service intervals.

As for the Omega Boutiques saying 6-8 years, that wasn't just hearsay from a single salesperson talking -- the sales staff are systematically using the 6-8 year service interval on 8500/9300 series movements as a way of differentiating themselves from other brands when explaining co-axial watches to customers. Whether this is stretching the truth or not, and whether it's just sales and marketing tactics that don't have much basis in reality, is different story. I would absolutely trust your opinion (and doubts) over even a sanctioned sales strategy though!

 

Just a curosity, during recent visit in Milan to the opening Omega boutique Gene Cernan says the his speedmaster is a great watch and he NEVER serviced in 45 years...

 

With coaxial 4 years warranty, it would be easy for Omega sales to back up their "story". Rolex only offer 2 years warranty.

 

I agree - whatever the recommended service intervals are, the warranty is where the "rubber meets the road" IMO.

Cheers, Al

 

I call shenanigans on that one. 45 years is a long time, and unless it was not being used for the majority of those 45 years, I suspect it has been serviced if it's still running.

I think one of our other forum members is due to meet with him soon, so I'll see if he would be willing to ask about this specifically.

Cheers, Al

 

I was in a boutique and the woman advised not to service until it stops and that it could be 20 years. I can tell you after 6 its showing no signs of needing service. That is the Planet Ocean 8500, 4200, the one with the matte ceramic bezel

 

42mm not 4200 sorry

 

Do you remember that old joke that goes, more or less:
-Would you sleep with me for one million?
-Humm...
-Oh, well, would you sleep with me for one buck?
-Certainly not! What kind of woman do you think I am!?
-Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.

Luxury companies already stablished the kind of customer you were when you paid their watch's obnoxious price. Maintenance intervals just try to see how much more they can squeeze out of their gullible customers.

 

Maintenance is done to reduce the risk of needing to repair the watch. When a repair is required, usually it is because the watch, or a component has failed. Maintenance is generally done to prevent the watch or a component from failing. Maintenance is usually done on a watch that is functioning well……for the moment. Repairs are done to watches which are not functioning well. Simple!

 

I just had my fathers 1969 Omega Geneve serviced...for the first time ever....he passed it down to me...and he had never serviced it - before the service i have just had done it kept time very well, and since the service the only difference besides aesthetic ones such as new crystal & strap and a refinish on the gold case....the winding is more crisper but the time keeping still the same - a testament to the quality of the workmanship of Omega and their movements.

 

OK, I hope you are sitting down, because this sure gave me a shock:
https://www.rolex.com/watch-care-and-service/faq.html