Not impressed with my PO 8500

Archer

Your watch is not borderline. It is running very well, and meets/exceeds Omegas specs in every aspect. If you consider that the Delta here is just 2.2 seconds over 5 positions, that is an excellent result. Omega allows this to be as much as 12 seconds.

In one post you mentioned that adjusting the rate could affect the watch in other ways - he is referring to the Delta number. I don't know if this is a boutique technician or boutique watchmaker, but since this watch has a free sprung balance it's not just a matter of moving a lever. Two screws on the balance wheel would have to be turned to slow this watch down, and if they are not turned exactly the same amount a poise error can be introduced that will negatively affect the Delta.

The slowest position appears to be dial up, provided they are using the order of measurements that Omega specifies in work instruction 28...

Cheers, Al

Archer

I have no idea what he mans by "roll in" as I've never heard that term before...sounds made up to me personally.

I know again on that other site you have said that the watch is "borderline meeting COSC specs in certain angles" but before making that claim you should really take the time to understand what COSC specs really are. To most people "COSC specs" simply means that the watch keeps time between -4 and +6 seconds each day. Please note that this is the average daily rate - emphasis on the word average is intentional.

COSC/Omega do not require that each and every position tested should fall within -4 and +6 as you appear to be implying is the case, and why you are saying that in some positions the watch is borderline...5.4 seconds in one position is not at all borderline. You don't apply the tolerances for average rate to each position as you are doing. To keep this simple let's talk just about Omega tolerances, as they are tighter than COSC. Omega tolerances allow positional deviation to be as much as 12 seconds as I've already stated. This means that no 2 positions can be more than 12 seconds different, so for example your watch could have one position running -6 seconds at the slowest, and another running +6 at the fastest, and as long as the average of all 5 positions falls in the -1 to +6 range that Omega calls for, it's within tolerances. Again you do not apply the tolerance for the average of all positions to each position as you are doing...

Again, there is nothing borderline about the performance of your watch...

Cheers, Al

Archer

The Cal. 8500 is "meant" to have the average daily rate between -1 and +6 seconds per day. The target rate that Omega uses (how fast they set the watch to run) is +3 seconds, so they do adjust them to intentionally run fast.

There is nothing wrong with your watch...

M Moswissa

Thanks for your response. Like I said, I am very new to the world of mechanical watches and Omega. I spend a lot of time reading forums which can be misleading as I rarely see people claim their PO runs +4 seconds fast per day. This is what bothered me initially. I feel much better now after consulting with both forums and the omega boutique.

The Tech I met yesterday didnt use the word "Break in", matter of fact when I mentioned it he shook his head and said "I wouldnt call it a break in, its more like a roll in". He also said my delta was excellent as you mentioned. He also didnt recommended that I have the watch regulated close to zero or even +2. He said its not worth opening it up just to be 2 seconds slower. The gentleman was very nice, he called himself a technician not a watchmaker. I gave him a good review on the omega survey website. He said to come back and have it diagnosed again after I wear it out. So we shall see

yinzerniner

First things first, congrats on the gorgeous new piece, and glad the OP will be keeping it.

So, I've been watching the thread here and the one the OP posted on WuS with great interest, as it's a perfectly condensed encapsulation of early luxury mechanical timepiece ownership.

-The whole "I read everywhere that the 8500 movement is +1s/day accurate" based off of forum posts may have fed your confirmation bias. People like to brag and those brags are the ones that are posted online. Online posts are NOT the best method for gaining knowledge on something as specialized and complicated as a watch movement - best is to take in information from well-known expert sources, such as @Archer (who is an invaluable FREE resource for everyone.)
-That said, very few things in this world are as disappointing as your internal expectations not being met on a luxury purchase. Simply psychology at play.
-Since you're a self-admitted newbie to mechanical watches it was probably a bad idea to have your "dream" watch this early - so many lofty expectations, many avenues for letdowns.
-As your PO is running within specs, and consistently at that, don't get it regulated - unless there's a very valid reason in opening up the caseback it's best left closed for as long as possible. Think of it like surgery - do it only when necessary.

With all that said, glad your initial disappointment grew into understanding and ultimately a happy resolution. Wear it in good health, and don't be afraid to ask for assistance in the future.

larryganz

Thanks, I learned something today about Omega using +3 sec/day as their average target rate. Interestingly, my Ti PO 8500 LM and my Grey Side of the Moon have both been consistently running about +3 sec/day when on my wrist 24/7 for a few days, and I'm quite happy with that.

On the other hand, my black Rolex Explorer II 16570 runs anywhere from -4 to +3 in any of 6 positions, but over an 8 day period it averaged out to about +0.5 sec/day fast. It mostly loses time with the watch in crown left position (like when I'm driving my car or sleeping), and then gains it back when I'm doing other activities during the day, to average out close to zero gain or loss over a more lengthy period of time.

To the OP, would one really call the Rolex more accurate? I sometimes wonder - would I rather have a watch that gains consistently in a variety of positions, or have one that might run too fast or too slow if I lay it down in the wrong position while averaging dead on over the long run. Still haven't decided...

Syed117

Hey OP,

I think you might have brought some preconceived notions into the world of mechanical watches.

Your watch is running fine. 4 or 5 seconds off a day might be around the edge of cosc certification but it's perfectly acceptable. You can always get it regulated, but you should really stop and think about what it means for a purely mechanical device to beat that consistently every single day, it's incredible.

Don't be drawn into what you read on the Internet. Some people may very well be getting +/-1 second per day with absolutely no deviation, but most don't. If that were the case, cosc qualifications wouldn't be what they are.

A lot of people just want everyone else to think that the particular watch they have is somehow better than the exact same watch that other people have.

I used to obsess over accuracy, but I've found over time that the nicer the watch, the less I care about how accurate it is.

Here's my newest Omega. About six months old at this point. Has stayed around +3 to +4 and I couldn't care less.

U ulackfocus

Oh, that's low. Funny and true, but low. 😁

We do have 2 World Series Championships since then though!

Archer

In all my years of owning and repairing watches, I have yet to witness this "break in over the first few months" that is often repeated on forums.

al128

make sure you stay away from high end hifi fora, where even DAC and HDMI cables sound so much better after they break in 😒

dsio

The "burn-in" discussion on not only cables but optical TOSLINK cables on audio forums is genuinely scary, you try to counter that by explaining digital cables have only two modes of operation, working and not working and they consider you unenlightened or an idiot.

Nobel Prize

Not that I have a technical explanation but that is the same I was told by the tech at the Omega Boutique in NYC. Basically he said a brand new watch may run faster and with use it finds it's spot. After that it stays pretty steady until it may start loosing time when it needs service.

I never asked for a more technical explanation as it made some sort of mechanical sense to me at the time, but what do I know really.

Anyway, that's my experience.

jcmartinez98

Curious as to what "mechanical sense" it makes to you because I've never understood this and no aspect of it ever made sense to me

When one buys a watch, it may very well have been sitting in the store for two or three years, so what would be different about the first few months that one individual owns it?