Community Stories

Omega 8800 caliber Accuracy

N
Posts
5
Likes
1
Good morning,

i own an AT with a 8800 caliber for 3 years now. It was running slow from the start around -1-2sec which didn’t bother me much. But since 2 months it looses around 4.5 sec per day (-3-6sec). I still wear it like I always do during the day and I take it off at night. I tried resting it in different positions without real improvement.
I was at the Omega store already and they said it would only run 1.6sec slow.

Do you guys think it’s time to send it in for a service ?

i would be really curious to hear if any of you had a similar problem and especially if it was resolved.

Looking forward to your feedback here, thanks !
 
padders
Posts
10,438
Likes
16,317
Was it new 3 years ago or second hand? Is the manufacturer warranty still in place?
 
N
Posts
5
Likes
1
I bought it brand new, so warranty is still in place. ✌
 
padders
Posts
10,438
Likes
16,317
If it is Master Chronometer or Metas rated, it shouldn't lose any time at all, I think the spec starts at +0 so it might be eligible for a warranty service or at least regulation. I'd approach the Omega service facility directly, they will probably do it even if it isn't massively out as a good will thing. My recent Omegas all are in the low + region, the worst is at +3s which I can live with no problem. Negative change is more annoying as you can't periodically sort it by hacking.
 
Annapolis
Posts
1,852
Likes
2,811
Not sure how familiar you are with the Omega/Swatch servicing process, but in case you’re not aware: this won’t be a quick drop-off/pick-up deal. If the watch is going in for service, it will likely be off your wrist for around 2 months. (A lot variables, but according to a recent thread on service turnaround times, that seems like the current average.)

This all comes down to weighing pros and cons: does the slight accuracy issue bother you more than the idea of being without your watch for months? One option could be to keep enjoying the watch for now and then send it off later during the warranty period. There’s no hurry, I don’t think, unless the timing really annoys you.
 
Annapolis
Posts
1,852
Likes
2,811
In perspective, your watch is off by less than two-thousandths of one percent—that’s pretty phenomenal. But -1.6spd is indeed out of the METAS spec this caliber is rated for. It wouldn’t bother me at all, but each of us has a threshold, and you’re certainly entitled to demand the performance you were guaranteed and that you paid for. I bet Omega will take care of it for you under warranty. But I don’t know that they’ll just regulate it and sent it back—I suspect they’ll want to run a full diagnosis, disassemble, clean, lubricate, etc. So, again, a lot of to-do and time away from the watch for something that amounts to less than a minute per month. I can see both sides of the coin here.
 
S
Posts
121
Likes
25
Annapolis Annapolis
So, again, a lot of to-do and time away from the watch for something that amounts to less than a minute per month. I can see both sides of the coin here.

minus 2 minutes and almost 20 seconds per month.
It was specified at the beginning.
 
Annapolis
Posts
1,852
Likes
2,811
S Speedy13
minus 2 minutes and almost 20 seconds per month.
It was specified at the beginning.

He said the Omega store measured 1.6spd—I trust their timegrapher since that’s what Swatch would go by. Anecdotal experience matters but it’s less objective.
 
N
Posts
5
Likes
1
S Speedy13
minus 2 minutes and almost 20 seconds per month.
It was specified at the beginning.
Exactly. I checked every morning against an atomic watch and noted down the time difference. The 4.5 sec is the average over 30 days . So it’s indeed over 2 minutes per month. It would bother me less if it was a few seconds fast
 
N
Posts
5
Likes
1
padders padders
If it is Master Chronometer or Metas rated, it shouldn't lose any time at all, I think the spec starts at +0 so it might be eligible for a warranty service or at least regulation. I'd approach the Omega service facility directly, they will probably do it even if it isn't massively out as a good will thing. My recent Omegas all are in the low + region, the worst is at +3s which I can live with no problem. Negative change is more annoying as you can't periodically sort it by hacking.
Yes it’s a master chronometer, hence spec is 0 to +5 sec
 
Annapolis
Posts
1,852
Likes
2,811
N Nik11
Exactly. I checked every morning against an atomic watch and noted down the time difference. The 4.5 sec is the average over 30 days . So it’s indeed over 2 minutes per month. It would bother me less if it was a few seconds fast

weird that their timegrapher would have such a different result, but positional differences can be significant. Understand, though, as has been noted by our resident watchmaker gurus here often, the certified timekeeping will always be an average across positions, so it’s rarely going to be the dead-on spec you’re quoted in actual experience.

sounds like it’s worth it to you to send it in! Keep us posted, as there are probably other forum-goers who could benefit from hearing about what happens when you do.
 
josiahg52
Posts
1,477
Likes
2,994
I see this 0 to 5 sec/day spoken of frequently.

I was looking at my Seamaster Pro test results online:

DEVIATION OF DAILY CHRONOMETRIC PRECISION AFTER EXPOSURE TO 15,000 GAUSS
In this test, the watch is subjected to a magnetic field of 15,000 gauss and its chronometric precision is calculated after 24 hours. The next day, the watch is demagnetised and the chronometric precision is calculated after another 24 hours. We show the minimal deviation between the two days.
Test Limit: 0 - 5 sec/day
My Result: 1.3 sec/day

AVERAGE DAILY CHRONOMETRIC PRECISION OF THE WATCH
This test is carried out over four days. During these days, the watch is placed in six different positions and two alternating temperature zones. It is also exposed to a magnetic field of 15,000 gauss. Chronometric precision is recorded each day. At the end of the four days, the results are used to calculate a daily average.
Test Limit: 0 - 6 sec/day
My Result: 3.4 sec/day

DEVIATION OF CHRONOMETRIC PRECISION IN SIX POSITIONS
In this test, the watch is placed in six different positions and its chronometric precision is recorded in each one. Out of these six results, we show the deviation between the two most extreme results known as the Delta.
Test Limit: 0 - 14 sec/day
My Result: 6.0 sec/day

Emphasis added by me.

I picked out these because they were interesting to me and although are expressed in the same sec/day unit, are telling you very different things. These aren't all averages or the best in the specified conditions or positions. One is an average, one is the best, and the other is a Delta.

They're also tested in specific conditions, temperatures, positions, state of mainspring, magnetic fields, etc. I believe that the tests and test limits are such that METAS movements that lose time in the real world are minimized, but to think or say that in some position(s), at some temperature, around a magnetic field, at some point as the mainspring winds down or is wound and in the most unscientific conditions, there might be one that does, is wrong.

Or I could be misinterpreting the test limits and results.

My actual average observed accuracy (an average of all my observational periods) is pretty much dead on a 3.0 sec/day average. There are some days where it's +4, 6, 7, even over 10 sec/day during an observational period. Sometimes it even loses time but it always comes out between 2 and 4.x sec/day average per period if I observe it long enough.
Edited:
 
Archer
Posts
29,662
Likes
76,812
Annapolis Annapolis
weird that their timegrapher would have such a different result

Not weird at all. When a watchmaker is using a timing machine, and taking readings over several positions, the resulting average is equally weighted. So if you actually wore the watch in only those 6 positions an equal amount of time throughout the day, the result on your wrist will likely be very close to the average the watchmaker gives you.

But no one wears watches this way - they are in all 6 positions measured (plus many more that aren't measured) for different amounts of time throughout the day, so it's not surprising at all that the results you get do not 100% match the carefully controlled tests that are done by Omega or a watchmaker.

If your watch runs slowest say crown down, and you happen to wear the watch on your left wrist, and stand a lot during the day with your left arm down at your side, it will skew your results to the slower side of the average.

This is why the specs given for the average rates are not "guarantees" as so many people believe. If you think about it, if the average rate can be zero, then there are going to be positions that run less than zero, and again if that happens to be the position your watch spends the most time in, it won't run within that 0-5 range, but will still be perfectly within specs.

The Delta on most of these watches is allowed to be 12 seconds. So let's look at an extreme example - here are the 6 readings:

+6
+6
+6
-6
-6
-6

Average rate = 0
Delta = 12

This meets the specs 100%

But if you wear the watch in a way that favours the fast positions, it will possibly run faster than the 0-5 average rate spec. If you happen to wear the watch in a way that favours the slower positions, you may have a rate that is below the 0-5 range.

Again these are not guaranteed, hard specs...
 
Annapolis
Posts
1,852
Likes
2,811
Interesting. I guess I was (erroneously) assuming that typical wear would average out in some way, akin to a timegrapher test. But what you say makes a lot of sense.
 
josiahg52
Posts
1,477
Likes
2,994
Considering my results further, I must represent an "average" fairly decently.

My observed accuracy - I use an app called WatchCheck which relys on your eyes, reaction time, and your cellular or GPS time - to get a general sense of accuracy. I figure the inaccuracies of this method probably average out or are minimized the longer I observe my watch.

In the second test - AVERAGE DAILY CHRONOMETRIC PRECISION OF THE WATCH - my watch displayed a result of +3.4 sec/day which is nearly what I observe as an average: +2.988 sec/day. Pretty cool. So this test appears to me represent most normal wear scenarios for an average person. It doesn't mean that's what you'll see because you're not a temperature controlled test rig, but it might be close. This test result and limit matters more to me than the 0 to +5 sec/day spec that is often mentioned for the METAS movements.

The DEVIATION OF CHRONOMETRIC PRECISION IN SIX POSITIONS is a good one to me also. My watch performed well with a Delta of +6.0 sec/day against a test limit of 0 - 14 sec/day. All of my observed results fall within the test limit: -0.6 - 10.6 sec/day.
 
Modernism
Posts
336
Likes
164
I think you've got to be really lucky with accuracy after servicing. It depends who does it. It shouldn't be like that, but it is in my experience. My 2500 has had two services at Omega, the first one was excellent and maintained great accuracy over that period, but the last one was poor. Several things were not right when it came back, but getting back to accuracy, it was dead on for 10 years in between the services, and last time round it runs much faster, and positionally makes far too much difference than I believe it should. The positions prior to this service may have influenced a couple of seconds, not more than 1 or 2, but now.... it's far more. So from what you're saying, I don't believe this is that bad, unless of course it really bothers you. Interestingly, this is the first time it's run faster, as opposed to losing a couple of seconds, like every Omega I've had has
 
N
Posts
5
Likes
1
Modernism Modernism
I think you've got to be really lucky with accuracy after servicing. It depends who does it. It shouldn't be like that, but it is in my experience. My 2500 has had two services at Omega, the first one was excellent and maintained great accuracy over that period, but the last one was poor. Several things were not right when it came back, but getting back to accuracy, it was dead on for 10 years in between the services, and last time round it runs much faster, and positionally makes far too much difference than I believe it should. The positions prior to this service may have influenced a couple of seconds, not more than 1 or 2, but now.... it's far more. So from what you're saying, I don't believe this is that bad, unless of course it really bothers you. Interestingly, this is the first time it's run faster, as opposed to losing a couple of seconds, like every Omega I've had has
I would have hoped that if it is send to „Omega“ you get the same quality of work no matter what. But that’s exactly my worry that it might run then even worse in the daily routine, considering they only measured a difference of 1.6 sec at the Omega store. So I’m really torn what to do. But since it bothers me more that the watch goes slow than it would going fast I might send it in after all.
 
Modernism
Posts
336
Likes
164
N Nik11
I would have hoped that if it is send to „Omega“ you get the same quality of work no matter what. But that’s exactly my worry that it might run then even worse in the daily routine, considering they only measured a difference of 1.6 sec at the Omega store. So I’m really torn what to do. But since it bothers me more that the watch goes slow than it would going fast I might send it in after all.

Yes, I'm not saying you're wrong, because I get it, we've ALL been there, but just pointing out there is a slim possibility it may come back worse. Not saying it will, but be prepared, because what is in spec to them, can be worse than what you have. I couldn't be bothered to send mine back and will wait for next service, because it was away 5 months last year. They may say it's within tolerance, but if it's going to niggle you then send it in. My 8500 has always been - 2 per day, but it's never changed since 2016 so wondering why yours would. But all these specs are only guides. No two watches or wearers are indentical
 
jb.44
Posts
80
Likes
112
N Nik11
Good morning,

i own an AT with a 8800 caliber for 3 years now. It was running slow from the start around -1-2sec which didn’t bother me much. But since 2 months it looses around 4.5 sec per day (-3-6sec). I still wear it like I always do during the day and I take it off at night. I tried resting it in different positions without real improvement.
I was at the Omega store already and they said it would only run 1.6sec slow.

Do you guys think it’s time to send it in for a service ?

i would be really curious to hear if any of you had a similar problem and especially if it was resolved.

Looking forward to your feedback here, thanks !
If it is under warranty then I would send it in just to take advantage of it. More importantly than the seconds per day is the amplitude that is showing. If the amplitude is between 270 to 300 ish degrees then the watch is still fine
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

J

Omega 2254.50 power reserve accuracy query

jspeakman Modern Omega Watches
ErichKeane
ErichKeane
Posts
8
Views
179
T

1958 Seamaster accuracy question

tt500 Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
T
tt500
Posts
7
Views
167
crisss

1942 Omega CK2287-1 27 C12 T1 - Sweep Chronograph Hand Accuracy

crisss Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
cristos71
cristos71
Posts
1
Views
87
D

Omega Seamaster Apnea 2595.50 Caliber 3601, low power reserve and inconsistent accuracy, does it need service?

D_M Modern Omega Watches
D
D_M
Posts
13
Views
2K
K

Incoming + Question about the 8800 movement accuracy

k12123 Modern Omega Watches
Mute
Mute
Posts
4
Views
4K
blkrush

Aqua Terra Shades Cal 8800 Accuracy

blkrush Modern Omega Watches
ErichPryde
ErichPryde
Posts
6
Views
4K