I have seen elsewhere about the merits of leaving an automatic watch in differing, rested positions overnight (to even out loss or gain) but was wondering if there is a notable pattern for 2500 movements as to which rest position helps gain/helps loss etc?

 

mine doesn't make any difference.Only ever off wrist overnight but consistently losing 2-3 secs a day no matter how it's kept at night

 

No pattern - you have to experiment to see what it is for your watch.

 

If a watch loses 2 seconds/ day that is less than a minute a month, is that not acceptable?

 

Depends on what you are accustomed to. This one hasn't varied in five days, worn continually. That means, dead on all the time. Not fast then slow, averaging out. I have other watches that come close, but not another one as consistent as this.

 

Wow. I've owned 6 Rolex in my time and three Omega. None of them were as perfectly accurate as that.

 

Yes, I think it's acceptable

 

Totally acceptable. Was just curious if there are 'resting' patterns to offset or affect gaining/losing time. Apparently Rolex used to provide a handy guide with the sale of their watches; whether that was movement specific I'm not sure.

 

Someone eventually posts that graphic in most threads on this topic - it's completely useless. As I said above there is no pattern, so if you want to know what positions run fast or slow, then you will have to experiment with your own watch to see.

And Omega's tolerance for average daily rate is -1 to +6 seconds per day for this watch, so losing 2 seconds per day is out of Omega's tolerances.

 

Thanks. Mine's well within COSC range at the mo. Just curious of there was a method to equal out loss/gain. Archer: why do you say the Rolex info is useless?

 

Mine has ran -2/3 from new and is approx 6 weeks old. I know this may be outside of COSC but I read somewhere that this may change once the watch settles down with use. Can you add anything to this, is it true, should I be concerned? I'm happy with -2/3 per day but strange it's outside of Omega standards. Thanks

 

Wash, rinse, repeat...

 

I'm not really a believer in the "break-in" theories that people post on forums. No new watch I've ever owned has done this, and the watch has already been run in, adjusted, and put through the certification process before it's shipped - why go through all that trouble for certification if it's going to change anyway? Makes no sense...

People certainly do see the rates change, but they attribute it to something that doesn't really happen in my opinion. In my view it's usually variances in how the watch is being worn, with the normal positional variation coming into play.

If this should have you concerned or not, that I can't really answer. It appears it's out of tolerance but that alone doesn't mean a lot.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks for your thoughts. Do you think the fact that the watch was built two years before purchase could be a factor in this?

 

Any variation I've seen for example, after servicing, will happen within about a 12 hour period. So if it was due to sitting for a couple of years, I can't imagine the difference would be there after even a few days of wearing...if the timing bothers you, take it in to get it regulated under warranty.

Omega set out their standards for slow and fast at -1 to +6 as I noted above, but they also set a "target" rate of +3 average daily rate, because people prefer a watch that runs a few seconds fast to even 1 second slow per day.

 

Doesn't bother me, just interested to learn from people with knowledge on the subject. I have warranty so I can get it looked at if it worsens but very accurate on the whole!
Thanks again.

 

So Rolex are wrong, you are saying?

Totally agree re the settling in period btw; makes no sense whatsoever if regulated to COSC standards at source.

 

Sixth day on the wrist. Today, one second slow.

 

So my Seamaster is now settled into near perfect timekeeping after the initial loss of -2/3 seconds a day!

 

Notice that Rolex haven't put that advice on the papers for many years now.