I was initially a bit surprised about the length of the period with no service, but in general sounds like a reasonable approach.

Jul 29, 2020,04:31 AM
 

Regarding your last point, I have also some times wondered about the relationship between the amount of wear and the required service interval. I presume the standard recommendations on the service interval, typically around 5 years, are based on wearing the watch all the time. But when you have many pieces and wear a specific watch only part of the time, this should naturally lengthen the time before a service is required for that watch (all other things being equal) - at least if you don't use a winder (which will cause continuous wear and tear, although maybe not quite as much as actually wearing the watch - less shocks etc.). The question would then be, is there a reliable relationship between the amount of wear and the service interval? For sure it does not scale linearly - e.g. if wearing a watch seven days a week equates to a recommended servicing in 5 years time, wearing it only one day per week would hardly extend the service period seven-fold to 35 years. So any relationship would be sublinear, and there is likely to be some kind of limit as well - that is, a service is probably required at some point, even if a watch is not worn at all (due to the oils drying out etc.) ;-)

  login to reply

Comments: view entire thread

 

ETAs are top! [nt]

 
 By: COUNT DE MONET : July 29th, 2020-01:25

No, not bad at all!

 
 By: countzero : July 29th, 2020-01:31
But if read it right, and the movement not been serviced for 17 years, it is about time! 😉

I don't exactly wait for it to stop. When it starts exhibiting wild swings in accuracy is when I usually bring a watch in. But as what Nico said, as long as it keeps good time, i'll hold off on service. Key here also is if it does stop..

 
 By: Echi : July 29th, 2020-03:03
To not do a force start. Not sure if that's a valid move but I'd rather not risk moving anything. If Seikos are anything to go by, I have friends who have those running more than 20 years without a service. Depending on the model, might actually be cheape... 

I was initially a bit surprised about the length of the period with no service, but in general sounds like a reasonable approach.

 
 By: countzero : July 29th, 2020-04:31
Regarding your last point, I have also some times wondered about the relationship between the amount of wear and the required service interval. I presume the standard recommendations on the service interval, typically around 5 years, are based on wearing ... 

That's impressive. For sure the little wear has contributed to it going so long without a need for servicing.

 
 By: countzero : July 29th, 2020-05:34
Actually, that frequency - roughly once every two or three months - might not be too far from the optimal wearing frequency for this purpose! 😁

And yes, for the 'lower level' Seikos it is actually cheaper to just buy a new watch than to have it serviced.

 
 By: countzero : July 29th, 2020-04:41
At least unless one knows a good independent watchmaker willing to service Japanese watches and with access to parts. Same with Orient. A bit sad, in a way...

Wow!

 
 By: Mary Anny : July 29th, 2020-01:59
Do not know anything about Omegas but I can speak of ETA-movement based Tudors and I can say that they easily outperform their famous siblings in all aspects... (Did I say too much?!) Enjoy it!

-4 / +6. [nt]

 
 By: amanico : July 29th, 2020-03:06

:-) (nt)

 
 By: Echi : July 29th, 2020-03:47
..

Those Omegas are the kings of accuracy.

 
 By: Reuven Malter : July 29th, 2020-02:32
Like the dial a lot, by the way!

Thank you :-) (nt)

 
 By: Echi : July 29th, 2020-03:06
..