I don’t think I’ve ever bought an old Rolex with a screw-down crown that didn’t need replacement. - either the threads on the tube or inside the crown were shot, and without replacing (usually both), the crown would barely screw down.

The mechanism in the new 300 seems more elegant and quite a bit smoother, but my question is, has anyone who uses their watch regularly had to replace this crown already due to wear, and was it expensive to do so?

 

If you can tell me what "the new 300 series" means in actual models, I can tell you what the crowns and tubes cost...

 

Al, it’s the 233.30.41.21.01.001. I have no idea what the innards look like. Have you needed to replace any of these due to wear, and do they work on a similar principle to the Rolex, meaning threaded tube that the crown threads onto? Thanks.

 

I've had one of these models since 2015, and one of the ways I can estimate it will be due for a service soon is that the crown seems to be loosening over time - that is, it's becoming easier and easier to unscrew it to the winding position. It doesn't feel "snug" anymore.

 

Omega case tubes are internally threaded for the most part, rather than externally threaded...



The threads are not exposed to dirt or damage this way. I've certainly had to change crowns and case tubes before, but it's usually from cross threading...



With any Rolex or Omega, every time to you take it to the service center, they are replacing both these parts anyway, as it's standard practice.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks. Are these internal threads shown replaceable, or are they right in the case?

Edit: Oh, wait, I see: you’ve pulled them out of the case so that’s the answer to the question.

 

So with the Rolex tubes, I understand they are screwed into the case. Are these Omega tubes friction fitted?

 

It varied over time, but currently on steel cases, they are generally threaded...

 

So, from your perspective, comparing the Omega set-up to the Rolex: do you as a watchmaker have a preference of one type vs the other if you were to compare the features of both?

 

In what way?

 

If I’m getting this all correctly, Rolex and Omega are attempting to prevent water ingress through the crown in similar but opposite ways, by creating a screw down/in crown that seals tightly.

The Rolex uses an external threaded tube, whereas the Omega uses an internal one, both with the corresponding crowns.

So I was curious if you thought one design was superior to the other in any parameter you chose to highlight- durability, ease of service, user interface, fit and finish, one easier to cross thread than the other, etc. Or, I does it really make no difference at all, and one could be interchangeable with the other?

 

Just my two cents; I prefer internally threaded stem tubes because, as Al states, they are protected from contamination by the crown gasket. But, external threads are larger and a larger thread is a stronger one. You take your pick and suffer the consequences.

 

I can see that, although when the crown is fully screwed down on a Rolex designed external tube, there are very few threads showing, at least on the more present models.

 

Well, there are a few things off the top of my head...

Internal threads are better protected - just a fact.

They both seal fine, even with the crown unscrewed.

For replacement, Rolex uses a rather crude tool compared to Omega's design, but that's not a significant thing.

Probably the biggest thing for me is the way the crown functions when you screw it down. On all the Rolex watches I've owned or serviced, when you compress the spring inside the crown to screw the crown down, it disengages the stem from winding the movement. There is (for lack of a better term) a little clutch like mechanism inside the crown. I've not taken one apart to see what this actually looks like, but that's not really important to this point - these systems fail. I've had a number of watches where you must apply slight traction to the crown while you are trying to wind the watch, or the crown slips and it won't wind or set. In my experience, once this starts to fail, it's only a matter of time (and often not much time) until it gets to a stage where you can't use the crown any longer.

In an automatic watch, there is absolutely no reason to have this clutch system inside the crown. In a manual winding watch with a screw down crown, it makes perfect sense, because once the mainspring is fully wound, you have to disengage the crown to screw it down. But in an automatic watch, this is just another potential point of failure for no real reason.

In contrast, Omega's screw down crowns (modern versions anyway) do not disengage the stem when you compress the spring inside the crown. I took this photo to show the difference between a fresh seal and a worn seal in the crown, but it also shows the telescoping part of the crown post, and as you can see it can't turn relative to the rest of the crown as it's telescoping in a hexagonal tube:



So in this way, Omega's crowns simply cannot fail in this manner. I prefer this design personally.

Now I'm sure I'll get replies that people have owned Rolex watches for years and never had this issue, or that the Rolex crown must be better because it's Rolex's design after all (I once had a Rolex guy tell me that Kif shock springs were far better than Incabloc, and when I asked him why he responded "because Rolex uses it, it must be better" ). But these are my experiences seeing more watches than most collectors will ever see.

Cheers, Al

 

I have never had a Rolex crown fail. (Just didn't want to disappoint you.) To be fair, I've never had an Omega crown fail either.

I have had this issue with a few watches.

 

Thanks for a great reply.

Just to orient myself: although I can’t make it out, would it be correct that the hexagonal tube you refer to on the Omega tube pictured has external threads?

 

I would just add this, simply from a user perspective: I and other Rolex owners I’ve spoken to note that quite often, they can’t get the crown to screw down unless they give it a few go’s because the spring tension is fairly high for a small part, and one has to push in and turn the crown to engage the threads.

In contrast, the crown on the Omega Seamaster 300 co-axial seems quite a bit easier to engage the threads when screwing down and tightening.

 

Yes.

 

In general, Tag is pretty notorious for this...