How accurate is your Rolex

[Cwall12345]

I think I will wait a while and see if it improves. If not then I will likely take it to an independent shop to check the amplitude prior to sending it back to Rolex.

[Driver8]

All 5 of mine are within COSC and a couple are actually within Rolex's -2/+2.

I agree with the earlier poster in this thread who said that accuracy is something that I think we should quite rightly hold Rolex (and other "expensive" brands) to. They make a big deal out of accuracy in their marketing, and we all know it's eminently possible for them to be regulated to an extremely high standard. Hell, I also have watches by Chinese micro's running Seiko NH35's and even those can be regulated to COSC spec, so it's not unreasonable to expect our Rolexes to be well regulated as well.

At the end of the day I expect everything I buy to do what it's designed and marketed to do. To me it's not about "living your life to the second" or "fretting over inconsequential stuff", it's about expecting products you buy to perform as expected, and holding manufacturers to account when they don't.

Originally Posted by Moondoggy

I don't even set the time....true

Each to their own of course, but this is something I can never get my head around. Reminds me of my dad who used to pay extra to buy cars with every optional extra under the sun, and then never use any of them.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Cwall12345

I think I will wait a while and see if it improves. If not then I will likely take it to an independent shop to check the amplitude prior to sending it back to Rolex.

Sounds like a plan. At the end of the day, it's mostly about convenience. If the RSC was right next door, most folks would take their watches in for a free check-up and regulation, I suppose.

[56Diver]

-1 sec per day

126660 DeepSea black dial

[alphadweller]

+1 s/d, but I'd be ok with +10/-10 s/d.

[77T]

Over the past 20+ years, and more Rolexes than that, many of mine ranged from great accuracy to just being OK...

But none were so poor that a simple, slight turn of the crown made things right for the next business day.

As many have said, in my early years of serial collecting I noted accuracy more-so than today. I'm with PADI now...

As an observation, I believe the advent of smartphones has had a role in the rush to regulate. I'd love to see the data from RSC submissions of regulation requests while under warranty.

Maybe a lagging indicator of a future generation of OCD-ness in horology?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[1William]

The discussion about accuracy is ongoing and the answer lies with what each owner wants to do. With a newer watch I would want to be close or not spot on for accuracy. With the OP's watch gaining a few seconds back each night the watch will be within specs? I would wear the watch, as the OP is going to do, and see in a few weeks.

[lamnyc]

My new Explorer 1 40mm is spot on since the day I got it 3 months ago. My Daytona will gained about a second in a week. My GMT LN and kermit will gained about a second per day.

[mike morris]

116610 SUB after 5 years +4 s.d,6 days a week on wrist , my 116234 dj36 ,+1s.d, 5 y.o but 1day a week on wrist.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by 0nly5iv3Digits

All of mine are regulated to +/- 1s/24 hours.

Yours didn't need a service if its a 23', but rather a regulation. +/-2s is superlative chronometer status, as Rolexes are advertised. It is good.

The words Superlative Chronometer have been on Rolex watch dials for the past 40 odd years .And to bare the word chronometer on the dial it must be certified by the Swiss COSC test which is a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds a day. The main reason for this new spec is that Omega started first so Rolex had to follow. Now the movements are tested by Rolex after the COSC test with the movement in its case which is a good thing. And this new precision test to -2+2 seconds is much like the COSC test at time of testing. This don't mean it will perform exactly the same every day for life, as on the wrist wearing there are many variables to overcome like wearers wearing habits etc.

[slide13]

My 126610 runs a pretty consistent -1 per day with my wearing and resting habits. It loses a little more while worn, gains a hair back when left dial up overnight to come in around -1. Other resting positions will make it slow down a little more. I'm happy with -1.

I will say, on the whole over a handful of watches from each brand, I do think my Tudor watches have been more accurate overall. I don't know if I've ever had one run more than 1.5 seconds off per day either direction. Tudor seems really good about regulating their movements consistently.

[Meyrin]

I last accurately set my 14060 Submariner (no "Superlative Chronometer, Officially Certified" on the dial!) when we went over to Summer Time on Sunday, 31st March. I just checked it against a radio-controlled Casio G-Shock after reading the OP´s post, and it seems to be running about 2 secs. + per day. Good enough for me. My Sub was excellently serviced and regulated in 2019, but it´s always been a very accurate watch.

[Kap007]

My 116900 has always ran too fast. Sent it to RSC 2x. Still under warranty but I'm not parting with my watch again unless I have to. Right now +12 seconds a day for year on wrist; 24/7.

[Gerry62]

Originally Posted by Meyrin

I last accurately set my 14060 Submariner (no "Superlative Chronometer, Officially Certified" on the dial!) when we went over to Summer Time on Sunday, 31st March. I just checked it against a radio-controlled Casio G-Shock after reading the OP´s post, and it seems to be running about 2 secs. + per day. Good enough for me. My Sub was excellently serviced and regulated in 2019, but it´s always been a very accurate watch.

14060 is one of the most accurate Rolexes I've ever had.

[Reddington]

The Sub Date 41 has been my daily for over a year and a half and the performance has only improved over time. At first it consistently ran at -2/day, then progressively got better and better and better... recently checked after 49 days it ran - 0.19387755, at 51 days -0.16666667, at 54 days -0.08333333, and at 56 days 0 secs per day.

[Mystro]

Outstanding accuracy from my BLNR. It’s +0.0 to +2.0 in every resting position. It gains +1.0 on my wrist a day. That is exactly what I would want an automatic to be regulated.
My SS Daytona is -0.50 to +1.5 seconds a day with +0.50 on the wrist. So I extremely pleased with both as I prefer a watch to be on the faster regulation.

[0nly5iv3Digits]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Outstanding accuracy from my BLNR. It’s +0.0 to +2.0 in every resting position. It gains +1.0 on my wrist a day. That is exactly what I would want an automatic to be regulated.
My SS Daytona is -0.50 to +1.5 seconds a day with +0.50 on the wrist. So I extremely pleased with both as I prefer a watch to be on the faster regulation.

I echo this sentiment. Rather show up early than late! One of the few doctors that cares to be "on-time"

[Moondoggy]

Originally Posted by Driver8

All 5 of mine are within COSC and a couple are actually within Rolex's -2/+2.

I agree with the earlier poster in this thread who said that accuracy is something that I think we should quite rightly hold Rolex (and other "expensive" brands) to. They make a big deal out of accuracy in their marketing, and we all know it's eminently possible for them to be regulated to an extremely high standard. Hell, I also have watches by Chinese micro's running Seiko NH35's and even those can be regulated to COSC spec, so it's not unreasonable to expect our Rolexes to be well regulated as well.

At the end of the day I expect everything I buy to do what it's designed and marketed to do. To me it's not about "living your life to the second" or "fretting over inconsequential stuff", it's about expecting products you buy to perform as expected, and holding manufacturers to account when they don't.


Each to their own of course, but this is something I can never get my head around. Reminds me of my dad who used to pay extra to buy cars with every optional extra under the sun, and then never use any of them.

Yeah I hear you 100%, time is something I have plenty of, so time, day of the week really are of little importance to me to a certain extent, when needed phone or the quarter chime of my grandfather clock works a treat.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by padi56

The words Superlative Chronometer have been on Rolex watch dials for the past 40 odd years . . .

More like 65 years by now. It was around 1959/1960 that Officially Certified Chronometer was changed to Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified.

[KatGirl]

I just put my Wimbledon on the Timegrapher. After it settled down, it was consistently 0 to -2. I would rather it were +2, but c’est la vie. It was not as accurate in other positions, but well within COSC specs, so I’ll not worry, until it’s 4 3/4 years old to have it checked. Amplitude was good, as was beat error.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sgt10p]

After 3 months of continuous wear my 126610 runs 0 to -1 second a day.

Sent from my Pixel 8 using Tapatalk

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by 56Diver

-1 sec per day

126660 DeepSea black dial

Shouldn't that be DEEPSEA in all capitols?

[Jamhot]

Accurate enough that I dont notice.

[MrMercedes]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I’m with these guys (minus any classes :chuckle).

To each their own

same as me!

[Dave O]

I use an app called Watch Tracker. I don't obsess about my watches running too slow or two fast, I just like to keep track of how they are doing in case all of a sudden one of them gets way out of wack.

[vesnyder]

My GMT's are -2/+2 spd consistently. My Omega Speedmasters are +2/+6 spd. No complaints here!

[TimeLord2]

I gave watches to each of my two sons, 23 and 21 respectively. They don't even set the time most days and will wear it like jewelry. Made me laugh when they both told me this independently!

[Comandos]

O meu 224270
+0,5 dia

[Kevin of Larchmont]

I’ve had the luxury of not caring too much about accuracy because all of my Rolexes have been good runners. I’m confident that if any of my Rolexes starting running dramatically out of spec that I would care a lot. I observe them all carefully when new and take notes on performance just to get to know them and usually don’t do it again. A few seconds a day one way or another doesn’t warrant a second look.