Help! GMT Master ii broken?

[Manc]

Hi, i have a GMT Master ii which is under 4 years old. It was purchased from new. I only wear it occasionally say twice a month. This weekend when i wound and adjusted it i noticed the hour arm didnt jump cleanly between hours. When i pushed the crown in the hour hand jumped back an hour and it doesnt keep accurate time. Im fearing its not a simple fix but appreciate any advice. This is my first Rolex so not very happy.

[Manc]

Good evening watch lovers. Not sure hope this set works so please help! Not sure why I have not received a reply to the post as it says 600+ views.
Since I sent my watch to Rolex. As it is outside the 2 year warranty they advised they would examine the watch and be back in contact. I have just heard back on got the following within the reply.

"they have inspected the watch and they have found nothing untoward with your watches movement, there is no excessive wear to any of your watches parts, the oils and lubricants have dried and they have suggested that your watch be serviced at the recommended price that was quoted instore at £455.00"

Clearly I am astonished that the watch would "dry out" and stop working in less that four year. I have an Omega Seamaster automatic than has never let me down in 10 years.

Rolex have asked how they would like me to proceed so if anyone can offer any advice I would apreciate your input.

Many thanks

John

[Fenster]

That sounds strange!

Like my father always says, things was better in the old days :)


But it can be due that the watch hasent been used that much!

[rmfnla]

I would be outraged.

Rolex uses modern synthetic oils and lubricants and the movement is totally encased; there is no way anything should have dried out in 4 year's time.

I would ask them to reconsider and if they do not I suggest finding a good independent watchmaker; it certainly doesn't sound as if Rolex is taking very good care of either you or your watch...


Second dead GMT II posted, and both relatively new:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...=1#post5099881

[handsfull]

I would be writing a letter to Rolex Corporate and explaining the situation, including with it the letter that Rolex sent to you stating that the oils were "dried out", that should be enough proof for them to take notice. Like Richard stated above.....oils DO NOT 'dry out' in four years time, period. Not acceptable.

[strafer_kid]

This is a kind of tricky one............even though there are independent views that the oils could not have dried out, Rolex in their capacity of manufacturer and expert, are clearly stating that they have, and that in essence, the watch requires a service. I reckon it would be very hard if not impossible to get them to change their mind and cover this free of charge? Unfortunately one of the disadvantages of owning a Rolex, is that to some degree you are held to ransom!

[brandrea]

This is a tough spot for you to be in ....
In my case I wear my 3 watches in rotation, once every 3 days. I was told early on that owning an automatic watch is a bit like owning a car, in that if you leave it sit, it's worse for the watch than if you simply wear it.

I hope you come to some resolution on this, please keep us posted and good luck.

[Tools]

You guys are nuts .. "outraged" , "strange"....complain ? write letters...

On what do you base these reactions ?

"Dried out" doesn't mean that the oil is dry, it means that the parts that are supposed to have oil on them no longer do - it happens. This is common with any machine where oil is a surface lubricant and the whole reason for periodic maintenance; it is wholly logical that some parts, especially those that are slightly malfunctioning, are dry for whatever reason and no longer engage smoothly.

It also does not mean that the owner must get a service. It just means that if he wants it to be brought back to like-new function, it should be cleaned and re-oiled. It's a choice, and one I would accept knowing that my GMT would come back in proper condition and ready for a decade of trouble-free operation. It isn't really a big deal.....

[rmfnla]

Originally Posted by Tools

You guys are nuts .. "outraged" , "strange"....complain ? write letters...

On what do you base these reactions ?

"Dried out" doesn't mean that the oil is dry, it means that the parts that are supposed to have oil on them no longer do - it happens. This is common with any machine where oil is a surface lubricant and the whole reason for periodic maintenance; it is wholly logical that some parts, especially those that are slightly malfunctioning, are dry for whatever reason and no longer engage smoothly.

It also does not mean that the owner must get a service. It just means that if he wants it to be brought back to like-new function, it should be cleaned and re-oiled. It's a choice, and one I would accept knowing that my GMT would come back in proper condition and ready for a decade of trouble-free operation. It isn't really a big deal.....

That's a pretty lofty assumption considering it didn't last anywhere near that long when it was brand new!

I stand by my original statement; I would be outraged...

[Roger1079]

Originally Posted by rmfnla

That's a pretty lofty assumption considering it didn't last anywhere near that long when it was brand new!

I stand by my original statement; I would be outraged...

Outraged that Rolex wants the customer to pay for a repair when the watch has a 2 year warranty and it is near 4 years old? I don't see what there is to be upset over, but ok.

It is a tiny piece of machinery that relies on proper balance, lubrication, and wear items such as springs that weaken over time. Some watches may go 20 years with no service and no accuracy issues while others may have issues much sooner. At 4 years, I would say that is close enough to the recommended service time that you can't really be upset at having to pay for it. Manufacturers in many industries make warranty repairs well past the warranty window when they do not have to. I would bet that if this had been a true factory defective part, that Rolex likely would have repaired it at no or reduced charge, but lubrication is a wear item just like springs so I can completely understand their position.

[powerfunk]

A jumpy hour hand and poor timekeeping isn't really the same as "broken." The recommended service interval is five years, and sometimes you can go a few years longer than that. In this case you can't. Oh well, I say get it serviced and enjoy it, whether or not you choose RSC as your watchmaker.

[Rikki]

What you may be experiencing is a new wrinkle for this calibre, the hour wheel has a special click spring that allows it to detente anywhere along the line to line up properly with the minute hand, this spring is now breaking and the hour wheel and spring needs to be replaced if it seems to flop around it's broken and the parts have been on back order since February. Rikki

[rmfnla]

Originally Posted by Roger1079

Outraged that Rolex wants the customer to pay for a repair when the watch has a 2 year warranty and it is near 4 years old? I don't see what there is to be upset over, but ok.

It is a tiny piece of machinery that relies on proper balance, lubrication, and wear items such as springs that weaken over time. Some watches may go 20 years with no service and no accuracy issues while others may have issues much sooner. At 4 years, I would say that is close enough to the recommended service time that you can't really be upset at having to pay for it. Manufacturers in many industries make warranty repairs well past the warranty window when they do not have to. I would bet that if this had been a true factory defective part, that Rolex likely would have repaired it at no or reduced charge, but lubrication is a wear item just like springs so I can completely understand their position.

Originally Posted by Rikki

What you may be experiencing is a new wrinkle for this calibre, the hour wheel has a special click spring that allows it to detente anywhere along the line to line up properly with the minute hand, this spring is now breaking and the hour wheel and spring needs to be replaced if it seems to flop around it's broken and the parts have been on back order since February. Rikki

I would be outraged because of the dried lubricant "explanation", especially in light of what Rikki shared. Either way, lubricants simply shouldn't "dry up" in such a short time unless there was not enough used or it was improperly applied in the first place.

From what I've read here on TRF is seems that the RSCs are not always accurate (honest?) with their assessments and that's what bothers me the most...

[GT1]

Hello All! I too am having this issue which has lead me to this forum... My GMT Master ii- Ceramic has experienced this exact issue approx a year ago while within warranty and was sent back to RSC for repair. The repair was successfully performed with no mention as to the cause on the repair receipt (simply "service"). Last week, you can imagine my horror in realizing this exact same issue with my GMT II. Sent the watch back to Rolex yesterday via my retailer and will advise on their reaction. At this point I'm no longer within the warranty period. Could the complicated movement of the GMT II become more susceptible to issue with the "special click wheel as defined by Rikki"? I too wear the watch sparingly. TIA

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by handsfull

i would be writing a letter to rolex corporate and explaining the situation, including with it the letter that rolex sent to you stating that the oils were "dried out", that should be enough proof for them to take notice. Like richard stated above.....oils do not 'dry out' in four years time, period. Not acceptable.

^^this^^

[rmfnla]

Originally Posted by rmfnla

I would be outraged because of the dried lubricant "explanation", especially in light of what Rikki shared. Either way, lubricants simply shouldn't "dry up" in such a short time unless there was not enough used or it was improperly applied in the first place.

From what I've read here on TRF is seems that the RSCs are not always accurate (honest?) with their assessments and that's what bothers me the most...

This is how it should be:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...=1#post5153214

[Rockrolex]

Originally Posted by rmfnla

This is how it should be:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...=1#post5153214

All the other OP's Sub needed was a bit of regulation. What if it had needed service. Would your views be the same?

[rmfnla]

Originally Posted by Rockrolex

All the other OP's Sub needed was a bit of regulation. What if it had needed service. Would your views be the same?

Hard to say since they were two different problems.

My point in posting it was that the other RSC exceeded the customer's expectations whereas this one did not even meet them...

[Chelseafan]

Oh...another argument for keeping your Rolex on winders :)

[Dan Pierce]

Funny how some look at the 3186 and 3187 as ALWAYS being superior just because their the latest.

Makes me love my 16710 even more, if that's even possible.
dP

[GT1]

Update:

RSC sent a standard service estimate for $600.00. Looks like my GMT Master II will have the movement repaired within this standard service procedure, polish, etc.

Im also a firm believer in GMT II superiority! Going forward I will invest in a winder and keep my watch in it while not being worn.

[rolio]

My 16710 froze one day at 5 years. Rolex never said it was the spring, but they said it was due for a service. 6 weeks and $600 later, it was perfect again. It also answered the nagging question of the movement: It was a 3186. Some can go longer without service, but mine was on the 5 year cycle.