Should I get my GMT-IIC overhauled?

[Tools]

You guys are on the same page... But you are straying afar from the original poster..

His statememts demonstrate that there has not been any real check of the watches true timekeeping ability... only that "it's about a minute or so off in a week or two".. this doesn't give a watchmaker any information to work with except to put it on the machine and note "it's within spec"..

And Rolex has tested it several times saying there is nothing wrong with it based on the original post...

They are simply trying to satisfy the customer by offering an overhaul (in my opinion)... and it is their last resort before they tell him to take a hike the next time he comes in...

But if it comes back still ~3 seconds fast per day...the owner may not believe that anything had changed...

[Ck8]

Originally Posted by dmc

I respectfully disagree with those of you who are telling this guy to not get his watch serviced and accept the poor accuracy of this watch.

To not have this watch serviced, Especially for free by Rolex, would be a missed opportunity in my book. The watch could have dry grease at the escapement pallets, or have depleted oil at some of the jewels, or a problem with the main spring, or a number of other possibilities.

Rolex is recommending it be serviced, you are unhappy with the accuracy, and chances are that it may be more accurate after they overhaul it. The cost of the service you are going to get will be around $500 + parts if you have to pay for it.

Its already there and your going to have to take it to someone to get it serviced in 3-5 years anyway. If you get it serviced and its still not right in a couple of months, you can seek someone who will take the time to regulate it. Or you can send it back to Rolex for regulation under the one year warranty they should provide on the service.

I think its a win win situation for the OP.

But that is just me.

By the way:

I have had my watch perfectly regulated by a watchmaker in Hilton Head, SC, and if my GMT IIC can be made to run perfectly, I would be willing to wager that this guy can at least get an accuracy of much better than COSC. And easily obtain +/- 1 second a day or better.

For example I think my watch was losing as much as 8 seconds a day when I took it in. The first time he adjusted it, he said to keep accurate records of how the watch was doing. 12 days later I took it back and told him it was gaining an average of 3.24 seconds a day. He adjusted it and told me to keep a close eye on it. I called him 5 days later to let him know that it was perfect, quartz accuracy. I am not kidding it is right on time with gmt247.com every time I check it. And I check it at least 7-10 times a day. I set my watch last Saturday at 1600 hrs and I have not touched it, It is perfectly in time with gmt247.

It can be done, by the right watchmaker. Will it be running this good 6-12 months from now? Time will tell!!!!

I totally agree with you; I had my Exp II for 10 years without a service and it ran on time for the whole period. My SS Daytona was running -3 secs/ day sent it back to RSC for regulation and now it is spot on. So it is possible to have accuracy as good as quartz and I think it depends on whether the watchmaker is prepare to spend time on getting it right.

[sturgeon123456]

As stated above................need ACCURATE details.

[Ck8]

Originally Posted by padi56

And any modern day wristwatch chronometers are, by the almost 300 year old 18th century navigational standards imposed on John Harrison,H4 watch,quite laughably inaccurate even by todays standards.How about just 5 seconds slow after 63 days at sea,in one of the toughest environments known to man, not bad for a almost 300 year old watch.Now in those days no modern machinery no computer designs no robots,just his bare hands and crude tools.Now when you look at your watch and only a few seconds out it wont feel so bad,whats in a few seconds a day.

So if 300 years ago with crude tools and no computer design and John Harrison can make a watch that loose 5secs in 63 days, then why can't a modern watch be as accurate?