Amplitude test prior to an overhaul

Posts
198
Likes
76
Hi. Gemini AI tells me never submit to a full service before confirmation by an amplitude test. Is this correct information? Here is what "he" told me:

What you will learn from the results​


When the watchmaker puts your Seamaster on the timing machine (Timegrapher), you want to look for three specific numbers:


1. Amplitude (The "Heartbeat" Strength)


This is measured in degrees (^{\circ}). It tells you how far the balance wheel is swinging.


  • 270° to 310°: Your watch is in perfect health. The oils are fresh, and the parts are moving without friction. Do not service.




  • 240° to 260°: The watch is getting "tired." The oils are starting to thicken. You don't need a service now, but you should test it again in 12 months.
  • Below 230°: This is the danger zone. There is significant friction inside. Even if the watch is still accurate, it is "grinding" its parts. Plan for a service.

2. Beat Error (The "Symmetry")


This measures whether the balance wheel swings equally in both directions.


  • 0.0ms to 0.3ms: Perfect.
  • Above 0.5ms: The "tick" and the "tock" are uneven. This usually means the watch needs a minor adjustment (regulation), but not necessarily a full, expensive service.

3. Rate (The "Accuracy")


Since your watch is METAS certified, it should be between 0 and +5 seconds per day.


  • If it’s running at +8 or +10 seconds but the amplitude is still high (280°+), you don't need a service; you just need a simple regulation (a 10-minute adjustment).

Why this is the "Golden Rule"​


  • The Problem: A watchmaker can easily charge you $700–$900 for a full service on an Omega 8800.
  • The Reality: If your amplitude is 285°, they will simply take the watch apart, clean it, put it back together, and give it back to you. You’ve paid $900 for a watch that was already fine.

The "Israel Strategy"​


Next time you are near Petah Tikva (Roltime) or a high-end shop in Tel Aviv:


  1. Ask for a "Timing and Amplitude Diagnostic."
  2. Ask them to check the "Lift Angle" at 36 degrees (this is the specific setting for the Omega 8800 Co-Axial; if they use the standard 52 degrees, the reading will be wrong).
  3. If the amplitude is above 250°, walk away happy. You’ve saved yourself a lot of money and the stress of being without your watch for weeks.
 
Posts
5,995
Likes
28,701
I have more confidence in why results from a timegrapher doesn't tell the whole story from this post by Al (@Archer):

 
Posts
24,266
Likes
54,041
I do have a timegrapher, and those numbers are helpful guidelines in the absence of a professional inspection. But if the watch is near the end of the service interval (e.g. 8 years), the parts are likely to be experiencing wear, regardless of what a timegrapher says. Unless you don't actually use the watch very often. If you only use a watch a few times a year, I can see why it might not be worth the cost.

There are many threads on servicing strategy for new-ish watches, you can search and read them on the forum. Some people prefer to follow the recommended schedule so that the watch is well-maintained and running near specs at all times. Others prefer to keep using the watch until it exhibits noticeable decreases in performance. Their argument is that the cost for a full service from Omega is likely to be the same or similar even if they wait longer, so waiting until the watch "needs" service may decrease service costs over the long haul. For example, maybe you can spread the $800 cost over 12 years instead of 8 years and save about $35 per year on average. To some extent, it depends on your philosophy and priorities.
Edited:
 
Posts
24,266
Likes
54,041
Just an FYI, this forum generally does not look favorably on posting AI-generated responses. This is a real community of enthusiasts, with many members establishing long-term personal relationships. I understand that English may not be your first language, but there is a big difference in using software to translate your own words and doing a copy-paste from ChatGPT. Personally, I don't think that the latter is appropriate.
 
Posts
198
Likes
76
Just an FYI, this forum generally does not look favorably on posting AI-generated responses. This is a real community of enthusiasts, with many members establishing long-term personal relationships. I understand that English may not be your first language, but there is a big difference in using software to translate your own words and doing a copy-paste from ChatGPT. Personally, I don't think that the latter is appropriate.
I understand. I just wanted to present what was "told" to me accurately as I haven't the technical knowledge that the Google AI app has in this matter. I have the English perfectly. But not the watchmaking knowledge.
 
Posts
24,266
Likes
54,041
I understand. I just wanted to present what was "told" to me accurately as I haven't the technical knowledge that the Google AI app has in this matter.
I think that was clear in the original post, I was referring more to your "reply" to @Archer's comments , which have now been deleted. Anyway, it's ok, I just wanted to let you know.
 
Posts
15,493
Likes
45,902
The simple way to decide! How long since the last service? How much do you wear it? What life expectancy are you aiming for? What are your expectancies?

One thing you are not considering. The case of your watch takes the abuse, it PROTECTS the movement, and 50% of the time, the case fails before the movement fails! When that happens, the movement service will likely cost more because parts are required! Servicing the case is part of a thorough service!

Your choice!
 
Posts
34,274
Likes
38,894
I understand. I just wanted to present what was "told" to me accurately as I haven't the technical knowledge that the Google AI app has in this matter. I have the English perfectly. But not the watchmaking knowledge.
Its not giving you accurate or useful information at all, what it claimed in the beginning is just wrong and dumb on multiple levels, it's just distilled some nonsense it has scraped off reddit, sprinkled authoritative language on top and presented it as fact.