Why? Because they are made of milk chocolate? They withstanding enormous pressure?

In my book, it can be "perishable" for 3 reasons:

1. Low quality rubber
2. Low quality assembling
3. Low quality construction
...?
Profit! [emoji57]

 

This thread appear to have officially gone into the toilet. Might as well argue Hillary vs Trump or abortion vs anti-abortion at this point, and there are clearly two sides and a large gap in between.

 

Et voila...



Took me an arduous 10 seconds or so to find this on the Omega web site...another place you could look is in the manual...shock/horror...yes those are actually meant to be read by the watch owner!

As to why the sales people don't tell you any of this, likely for the same reason they don't tell you anything about servicing or what those costs are - they don't want any information to come into the conversation that would potentially jeopardize the sale. Once again, none of this is exclusive to Omega...

Cheers, Al

 

I would rather the thread went down the toilet and not my PO 600m as its not been pressure tested this year.

 

Omega say we recommend. I feel this should say we STRONGLEY ADVISE

 

do ADs/OBs per default pressure test and certify a new watch that they sell - especially if a year since production date has come and gone? ... I understand they are quite often older than a year from production date to hitting the streets...

anybody knows if that is standard procedure (should be, following their own recommendation)?

 

good point ... what does "recommend" mean anyway? ... does not following a recommendation void a guarantee (imho no, unless it specifically says so)?

 

Good question - you could always call one and ask.

Also, maybe some of our resident grey market dealers could tell us what water resistance testing they do.

 

I don't know what the big deal is. They want 1 year testing and it covers them from liability. When you think about all the things that people could do to their watch or what it could be exposed to I fail to see how any of this is an issue. Chlorine, hot water, some soaps can all damage the rubber in the seals. Extreme heat like leaving it in a car, accidental knocks on the crown....the list is endless.

The car analogy is also BS, if you don't ever change your oil and your engine seizes at the end of your warranty period, you have voided your warranty, having seals checked if you want to expose your watch to water while swimming or more is just normal service.

 

"Put forward (someone or something) with approval as being suitable for a particular purpose or role."
But in all seriousness it's a slippery slope since by nature seals are perishable items and there are just way too many factors that could weaken and/or compromise their integrity for a manufacturer to guarantee a performance timeline or require their replacement.

Hmm, didn't know the Swiss spelled "strongly" that way - JK.
I know plenty of people whose timepieces are strictly desk divers, and having to bring in their piece once a year is a grave inconvenience even though they spent more time on snapchat in the last hour than what would be necessary for the testing. I wouldn't ever strongly advise them to do anything other than add a bear nose to their latest selfie.

Omegas aren't perfect even though the hefty prices probably engender expectations of such. Glad that the OP seems to have gotten some recognition by the OB and a little remedial assistance.

 

True. But I don't need to change the seals and gaskets on my engine every year, if they fail it's under warranty.

 

Please show me where anyone has suggested the seals on your watch should be changed every year...this is the second time you've said that...

I'll say what I said last time again - no one is saying you have to change seals once a year - Omega recommends annual testing to ensure it's sealed.

 

My point is not changing the seals as @Archer stated but normal service to get it checked. This does not mean they will fail in that time period but to check and verify accidental damage did not occur. I fail to see any argument to the contrary.

Some of my dive equipment also has 5 year warranties on it but also require yearly checks to ensure water resistance even if not used. Should I be upset?

 

Okay. My mistake. I will get my engine pressure tested every year.
I see your point of testing to save any damage. Prob a good idea. But please don't tell me they can't make these watches and seals last for 4 years.
I would personally expect it to be covered under warranty. But now I know these are not as good as I thought I will be getting all my watches tested each year just in case I forget to take it off before a shower etc.

 

And again, no one has said they won't. You seem to missing the point of preventative maintenance...

 

Still an incorrect comparison. That will tell you something about the state of the engine (valve guides, etc.) so you have a snapshot in time, or you are alerted to the start of an issue. It rarely alerts you to being on the edge of a catastrophic failure, as those are more typically due to fasteners coming loose, oiling issues, or running too lean.

Annually pressure testing a watch that is expected to be submerged a lot is something that helps *prevent* a catastrophic failure (i.e., water entering the case).

If you insist on sticking with a car analogy, I have one for you. You purchase a Porsche, BMW or Ferrari with the intent on using it on the track. You buy it new, and it has a 3- or 5-year warranty. Are you going to track it a few times a year and never inspect it just because it is 'new, expensive and under warranty'?

On the chance your answer is 'yes, of course!', that is why most clubs require inspections before you can take the car on track -- even if it is brand new.

 

I'm not missing the point. I understand prevention is better.
I'm just making my point.
On a serious note I will now be having my dive watch tested annually as for my other watches they never go near water so not an issue.
I love this site

 

Ok ok. Let it go. But not to deep it may leak.

 

You made a point alright...noted...

 

careful now when washing your hands or walking under rain while wearing the CK2998, the water resistance rating on this one is less than a dive watch.