Automatic watch servicing
I had two older nice quartz watches with sentimental value and a G-Shock solar atomic for everyday wear. I was getting nostalgic and bought some older automatics for <1K, which I guess is turning me into a collector of sorts. I realized, however, that the cost of service will exceed what I spent on the watches. It made me think is it worth it to buy less expensive new automatics like the Tissot PRX or even a $500 Seiko knowing that the price of service every few years will be $200-400+? Are these watches essentially disposable-just use until they don’t keep time? Or maybe people have figured out cheaper avenues for service. BTW, love my Citizen. Cool looking, never needs a battery, great functionality. Atomic timekeeping. Maybe not a real collector after all, given the low tolerance for maintenance.
Just starting out. Like watches, but don’t want to break the bank.
Everyone should absolutely stop buying watches they can't maintain. Cheaper movements are more economically replaced than serviced. Solar stuff has components degrade or break too.
The PRX has a disposable movement, but Seiko run for donkeys without a service.
Of course you are a collector! We're into the hobby for enjoyment, not to see who spends the most 😉👍🏻
Also, with modern lubricants, you can get away with a service every 10 years or so. I’ve been told by a good friend who’s a watchmaker that you really don’t need to service them until they show signs of needing it
The PRX has a disposable movement, but Seiko run for donkeys without a service.
Of course you are a collector! We're into the hobby for enjoyment, not to see who spends the most 😉👍🏻
This is just false. The movement is not disposable. Just because people complain about TWO parts that are plastic in the entire movement does not mean the whole thing is crap like a system 51. People should actually learn what the C07.111 is instead of complaining about it because of what they read on a forum.
My view is that if one doesn’t plan to actually pay for the maintenance of a mechanical watch, then one shouldn’t bother with them in the first place.
Affordable mechanicals from reputable brands and movement manufacturers aren’t disposable, unless they are $2 Ali buys or Sistem51s. It’s purely a perception thing.
(General rant)
I’s ridiculous that so many watch people view watches the only being worth their time—really— unless they are nosebleedingly expensive. So many people love to complain about the disposableness of everything in today’s culture, but as soon as it comes for them to actually put their money where their mouth is, they will throw their stuff in the trash without even blinking. On top of this, if The Swatch Group does it, everyone will lose their minds, but if they’re watchmaker throws out the movement, it’s a-okay.
I bought my Orient TriStar fulling aware that it would likely need a service— which it desperately does. And I intend to get around to it at some point.
This is just false. The movement is not disposable. Just because people complain about TWO parts that are plastic in the entire movement does not mean the whole thing is crap like a system 51. People should actually learn what the C07.111 is instead of complaining about it because of what they read on a forum.
Let's agree to disagree 😉👍🏻
Let's agree to disagree 😉👍🏻
I can’t speak on watchmaker accessibility to the parts. I’ve seen people say that it will be difficult but I’ve never seen any anecdotes to back this up. And the article does explicitly say that it is not unserviceable. Anyone who knows, knows that the revenant TSG brand will take it back in and service it. If for most parts of it, it will probably probably be easy, because 90% of the parts at the same as the Eta 2824-2. And for the escapement, the plastic one is used only in C07.1xx movements; C07.6xx and C07.8xx use conventional escapement materials
As for the lack of regulator, this is true but misleading. It uses a free spring balance wheel.
This chronometer grade Eta C07.811 has a conventional escapement and a silicon balance spring.
I think this got off track. It isn’t that I don’t want to “bother“ to maintain a watch or that I “can’t” do it. I certainly didn’t mean to discredit a particular watch movement. As a novice, I just wonder whether it makes sense to buy an item (i.e. a relatively low-cost automatic watch) where the maintenance cost will far exceed the purchase cost. I can think of no analogous situation in my life. This is perhaps where the passion part comes in.
The truth of the matter is that mechanical watch, which are very expensive to service, doesn’t make economical sense.
Please keep in mind that while less expensive mechanical movements (e.g., in less expensive Seiko) tend to be “expensive” to service in relative to the price of the watch, they are less expensive to service in absolute amount.
The fact that luxury watch makes more economical sense to service (relatively cost to the watch as a whole, at retail or the secondary market) is because the price of the watch doesn’t make economical sense to begin with. That’s why they make more ”relative” sense.
What I’ve found is that Seiko makes a lot of sense with the ability to do a movement swap. A 4R35 can be swap with an NH35 with relative ease. And you buy the NH35 online for 30USD and buy all the tools you need to swap it yourself for under 40USD. The procedure takes a couple of hours for a novice, or less than half an hour for a veteran. If you are planning on a swap, you can just run the movement into the ground, which would last about 10 years.
If you want to do proper servicing as in re-oiling the movement the interval would be 3-5 years. But there will be more tools and skills involved.
Of course, if you don’t want to do any of this yourself, you can hire someone to do it.
3 is very short. You can at least go 5. And up to 7 is fine.
7 is probably too long for most people. Best case is to measure the amplitude to determine if the watch requires re-lubrication.
Fair