The recent Father's day post over at Tin Tin's place included some discourse about Rolex watches, buying them, throwing them away in disgust, their accuracy and styling.
I posted in comments that my Rolex GMT-Master II keeps excellent time. I purchased this model 16710 used from an Estate for a very reasonable price and have had it for several years. It has served well under adverse conditions encountered in many sporting pursuits. The 16710 GMT-II was made between 1989 and 2007 and I have been told the mid-90's versions were particularly good.
The Trad maligns the relative accuracy of a Rolex he used to own.I have heard similar complaints before about older models. My GMT is "dead-on-balls accurrate" ( ID the movie quote anyone??) I set it by the U.S. Atomic Clock in Colorado via the Website and the watch will only lose a second or 3 over several months. The thing about these self-winders is you have to wear 'em all the time or remember to wind them when you put them down in favor of another watch.
Tin Tin and I met for drinks a few weeks ago but neither of us has posted about our congenial drinking and bullshitting session. Suffice it to say, he is every bit as engaging and interesting as his Posts.I hope we convene another session soon. I was wearing my Rolex that evening in Philadelphia but the subject never came up....
I never fail to shake my head in total wonder when people complain about the accuracy of a chronometer. Automatic watches can't be expected to be worn every so often or even every day and keep "perfect" time. An automatic movement ensures that the watch movement keeps moving...and that is all.
ReplyDeleteTo maintain maximum precision from such a timepiece, one should wind the watch by hand everyday. Just a few--5-10 is fine--turns on the crown. If people are REALLY losing time on their watches, they should send them to be serviced. The Swiss are very good about keeping chronometers up to COSC standards.
Anyone who is so desperately concerned about a few seconds on a fine timepiece would be better off buying themselves a Casio.
Or a Patek.
Good writing.
That watch is awesome. Top notch.
ReplyDeleteGreat watch! I've got a Sea-Dweller, no complaints here.
ReplyDeleteThere are three Rolexes in my household. Three of them used to keep time beautifully, now only two do (including a Chronograph like yours). Unfortunately, my beloved stainless and gold Daytona, which used to keep time superbly, stopped working one day. It is still sitting at the repair desk at Tourneau, where it is waiting to be picked up by me, unrepaired, as I was told it would cost more than $5,000 to repair it. And no, that isn't a typo, as I had assumed it was when I got the written estimate. Now, when working the watch's retail value is multiples of the repair bill, but even so that is a hefty repair bill to swallow. At least for this working stiff. I do loves it, though...
ReplyDeleteI love your watch. My son would be so thrilled with an older Rolex. He appreciates vintage :-). xoxo
ReplyDeleteNice watch! I gave Hubby a watch for his birthday. No Rolex by any means, but he likes sports watches that assist with his workouts, so I found a cool one at a cool outdoors store in the Outer Banks. Hope you had a wonderful Father's Day - I'm sure your fam showered you with much-deserved love. :)
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question: "My Cousin Vinny."
ReplyDeleteYou got it Anon..
ReplyDeleteReggie,I suspect you can find a more reasonable price for repair...and it is a shame to not have a daytona in working order...that is one helluva watch!
I've been messing around with bad watches for too long. I like the look of the Rolex but I'll never afford one.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking a Seiko automatic diver?
I am somewhat in agreement. There are some bits that are right and some that are wrong, but that my opinion, anyway it is still great stuff so I guess no real complaints from me
ReplyDeletemodern floor lamp