ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex Freak · 26 April 2008, 05:56 AM

In comparing my YM or any Rolex to http://accurist123.com/ what should you expect after a month or two. What would be considered acceptable? Many thanks.

karmatp · 26 April 2008, 05:58 AM

I would expect it to be within COSC specs.

toph · 26 April 2008, 06:00 AM

any COSC rolex sould be -4 to + 6 seconds per day. so the limits would be 2 minutes slow or 3 minutes fast for one month

SPACE-DWELLER · 26 April 2008, 06:14 AM

Personally, I expect (or prefer) my Rolex watches to run slightly fast even though up to minus 4 secs. would be within specs.

The accurist123 site has been quite unreliable lately, btw. If you compare your Rolex to the accurist123 site only, you might be surprised to find that your Rolex is up to 30 secs. fast or slow.

A more precise and reliable site is wwp.greenwichmeantime.com

Rolex Freak · 26 April 2008, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

Personally, I expect (or prefer) my Rolex watches to run slightly fast even though up to minus 4 secs. would be within specs.

The accurist123 site has been quite unreliable lately, btw. If you compare your Rolex to the accurist123 site only, you might be surprised to find that your Rolex is up to 30 secs. fast or slow.

A more precise and reliable site is wwp.greenwichmeantime.com

Compared to the site stated above, my watch is about 9 seconds behind. My watch displayed 4:22.10 while the clock showed 4:22.19. Is this ok. What should i be looking for. Thanks.

mike · 26 April 2008, 06:44 AM

Sandro, your YM is capable of excellent accuracy, easily within COSC specs (as is most any decent timepiece). The real issue is consistency of the movement.
That is, is rate of gain (or loss) consistent day after day. IMO this is the real test of an accurate watch, and here Rolex performs like very few I've seen.

Modern movements used in Rolex timepieces are among the most consistent in rate of gain or loss of any watch out there--and under conditions that would make lesser brands fold.

Once that rate is established (through monitoring from a known time source and over a period of time--I don't mess with anything for a month), the watch can be regulated to amazing accuracy.

I have several pieces that are in sync with a known source to less than a minute a month (regulated). My GMT IIc goes WAY better--out of the box.

Rolex Freak · 26 April 2008, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike

Sandro, your YM is capable of excellent accuracy, easily within COSC specs (as is most any decent timepiece). The real issue is consistency of the movement.
That is, is rate of gain (or loss) consistent day after day. IMO this is the real test of an accurate watch, and here Rolex performs like very few I've seen.

Modern movements used in Rolex timepieces are among the most consistent in rate of gain or loss of any watch out there--and under conditions that would make lesser brands fold.

Once that rate is established (through monitoring from a known time source and over a period of time--I don't mess with anything for a month), the watch can be regulated to amazing accuracy.

I have several pieces that are in sync with a known source to less than a minute a month (regulated). My GMT IIc goes WAY better--out of the box.

Sorry but what is "COSC"? Thanks.

toph · 26 April 2008, 06:56 AM

Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres, the Official Swiss Chronometer Testing Institute

kelly56 · 26 April 2008, 07:00 AM

FYI, my 16610 is 2 seconds slow in the past 4 days. Hope this helps.

f16570 · 26 April 2008, 07:04 AM

Is a few seconds a day heare and there going to make the difference.
Damn right. COSC or better for me.

mike · 26 April 2008, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toph

Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres, the Official Swiss Chronometer Testing Institute

SPACE-DWELLER · 26 April 2008, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rolex Freak

Compared to the site stated above, my watch is about 9 seconds behind. My watch displayed 4:22.10 while the clock showed 4:22.19. Is this ok. What should i be looking for. Thanks.

Try comparing your Rolex against wwp.greenwichmeantime.com instead. As stated, often the accurist site is not accurate.

Trurolexer · 27 April 2008, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toph

Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres, the Official Swiss Chronometer Testing Institute

Correct!!!

speicher1 · 27 April 2008, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rolex Freak

In comparing my YM or any Rolex to http://accurist123.com/ what should you expect after a month or two. What would be considered acceptable? Many thanks.

Wow that's a neat site!! Is it atomic? Or just a fancy graphic that's in sync with computer time?

26 April 2008, 05:56 AM	#1
Rolex Freak "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Real Name: Sandro Location: Canada Watch: Rolex/GS Posts: 4,412	How Fast Or Slow Should It Be? In comparing my YM or any Rolex to http://accurist123.com/ what should you expect after a month or two. What would be considered acceptable? Many thanks.

26 April 2008, 06:00 AM	#3
toph "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: ChrisTOPHer Location: Sydney Watch: Rolex, Brellum, Posts: 12,601	any COSC rolex sould be -4 to + 6 seconds per day. so the limits would be 2 minutes slow or 3 minutes fast for one month __________________ "Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." Member No.# 11795

26 April 2008, 06:14 AM	#4
SPACE-DWELLER "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Real Name: Bo Location: Denmark Watch: Rolex, of course! Posts: 22,436	Personally, I expect (or prefer) my Rolex watches to run slightly fast even though up to minus 4 secs. would be within specs. The accurist123 site has been quite unreliable lately, btw. If you compare your Rolex to the accurist123 site only, you might be surprised to find that your Rolex is up to 30 secs. fast or slow. A more precise and reliable site is wwp.greenwichmeantime.com __________________ With kind regards, Bo LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...

26 April 2008, 06:56 AM	#8
toph "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: ChrisTOPHer Location: Sydney Watch: Rolex, Brellum, Posts: 12,601	Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres, the Official Swiss Chronometer Testing Institute __________________ "Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." Member No.# 11795

26 April 2008, 07:00 AM	#9
kelly56 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Real Name: Mike Location: Kentucky Watch: 16610 1675 Speedy Posts: 1,057	FYI, my 16610 is 2 seconds slow in the past 4 days. Hope this helps. __________________

26 April 2008, 05:58 AM	#2
karmatp "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Real Name: Trevor Location: Arizona Posts: 5,740	I would expect it to be within COSC specs.

26 April 2008, 06:44 AM	#6
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,682	Sandro, your YM is capable of excellent accuracy, easily within COSC specs (as is most any decent timepiece). The real issue is consistency of the movement. That is, is rate of gain (or loss) consistent day after day. IMO this is the real test of an accurate watch, and here Rolex performs like very few I've seen. Modern movements used in Rolex timepieces are among the most consistent in rate of gain or loss of any watch out there--and under conditions that would make lesser brands fold. Once that rate is established (through monitoring from a known time source and over a period of time--I don't mess with anything for a month), the watch can be regulated to amazing accuracy. I have several pieces that are in sync with a known source to less than a minute a month (regulated). My GMT IIc goes WAY better--out of the box.

26 April 2008, 07:04 AM	#10
f16570 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: F Location: Scotland Watch: Exp II White Face Posts: 4,272	Is a few seconds a day heare and there going to make the difference. Damn right. COSC or better for me. __________________ Why have what's new when you have what's best. f

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)