60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
User avatar
neilj568
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1179
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2015 12:08 pm
CW-watches: 5
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by neilj568 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:28 am

H0rati0 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:21 am
neilj568 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:42 am

I think I'm done with CW watches.... :(
CW can still build great value watches, many with excellent design and can, more often than not, still provide good service.
My statement was nothing to do with the quality of service or otherwise (I have had several bad experiences). I have 5 CW's and they are great but the current design direction leaves me feeling a bit meh...!!!
_________________________________________
Wrist Size 210mm/8.2"

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by DavecUK » Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:32 am

H0rati0 wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 7:58 pm
DavecUK wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 2:48 pm
The modern synthetic lubes should last until then.
I see no obvious reason for a synthetic lube to deteriorate purely over time in a watch at all.
They do deteriorate albeit slowly and the lubrication properties will change, my point was simply 5-7 years was the norm over 30 years ago and there is no reason why that should have come down. My Rolex 1st service was after 12 years and even then it only needed a few parts they would have probably replaced anyway.

I am sure any watch collector/forum member is smart enough to sniff this for what it is....an incorrect service interval recommendation. Especially considering modern lubricants. My wonderment if you like, is not the impact it has on all of us but the impact it has on people who don't really understand. As we all know there are many people who buy watches who have no real idea what they are buying or what an automatic movement is let alone worry about the type of movement in their watch.

The public are going to look at the service interval recommendations and simply think...good watch/bad watch when comparing it to other manufacturers who have 5 or 10 year service intervals. It's why I am confounded by their decision which simply seems to be bad marketing. It would be far better to have come out with a 7 year service interval recommendation?

Their other retrograde step IMO is to not make parts available to watchmakers so customers can get repairs elsewhere. If one thinks really hard about it. They cannot fulfil the work they have on a reasonable timescale, it would be better to get independent watchmakers certified and able to buy parts. This way customers could choose where to have their watch serviced. This drives CW to become better, because most of us would pay a little more for a manufacturer service...or at least that should be the case.

It's really about if you are in a hole....stop digging!

User avatar
H0rati0
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1117
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 7:49 am
CW-watches: 3
Location: Bayern

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by H0rati0 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:44 pm

neilj568 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:28 am

My statement was nothing to do with the quality of service or otherwise (I have had several bad experiences). I have 5 CW's and they are great but the current design direction leaves me feeling a bit meh...!!!
I too am not that comfortable with the current direction (dare I mention the logo position?) but there are exceptions, eg the SH21 C65s and the Military range has potential. However, like yourself I am happy with my current CWs, especially the C8PR, while hoping that the service hiccups get sorted. As to the future......?
"There is no beginning to enlightenment and no end to training" - Dogen Zenji (1200-1253)

User avatar
H0rati0
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1117
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 7:49 am
CW-watches: 3
Location: Bayern

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by H0rati0 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:58 pm

DavecUK wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:32 am
H0rati0 wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 7:58 pm
DavecUK wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 2:48 pm
The modern synthetic lubes should last until then.
I see no obvious reason for a synthetic lube to deteriorate purely over time in a watch at all.
They do deteriorate albeit slowly and the lubrication properties will change, my point was simply 5-7 years was the norm over 30 years ago and there is no reason why that should have come down. My Rolex 1st service was after 12 years and even then it only needed a few parts they would have probably replaced anyway.

I am sure any watch collector/forum member is smart enough to sniff this for what it is....an incorrect service interval recommendation. Especially considering modern lubricants. My wonderment if you like, is not the impact it has on all of us but the impact it has on people who don't really understand. As we all know there are many people who buy watches who have no real idea what they are buying or what an automatic movement is let alone worry about the type of movement in their watch.

The public are going to look at the service interval recommendations and simply think...good watch/bad watch when comparing it to other manufacturers who have 5 or 10 year service intervals. It's why I am confounded by their decision which simply seems to be bad marketing. It would be far better to have come out with a 7 year service interval recommendation?

Their other retrograde step IMO is to not make parts available to watchmakers so customers can get repairs elsewhere. If one thinks really hard about it. They cannot fulfil the work they have on a reasonable timescale, it would be better to get independent watchmakers certified and able to buy parts. This way customers could choose where to have their watch serviced. This drives CW to become better, because most of us would pay a little more for a manufacturer service...or at least that should be the case.

It's really about if you are in a hole....stop digging!
I am in violent agreement....except that synthetic oil of itself does not deteriorate, though any additives that complete the lubricant product probably do and of course any debris from operation must be dealt with at some level of build-up.

I would really like to get an objective handle on the reality of modern watch lubricants, but from what I do know a service interval recommendation of 5-7 years seems realistic tending to pessimistic dependant on actual running usage, thus the 60 month guarantee should cause no difficulty and it's hard to see an acceptable reason for CW to can it - a bad move for all the reasons you have outlined.
"There is no beginning to enlightenment and no end to training" - Dogen Zenji (1200-1253)

User avatar
nbg
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 7947
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:43 pm
CW-watches: 10
Location: UK

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by nbg » Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:40 pm

H0rati0 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:58 pm
DavecUK wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:32 am
H0rati0 wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 7:58 pm


I see no obvious reason for a synthetic lube to deteriorate purely over time in a watch at all.
They do deteriorate albeit slowly and the lubrication properties will change, my point was simply 5-7 years was the norm over 30 years ago and there is no reason why that should have come down. My Rolex 1st service was after 12 years and even then it only needed a few parts they would have probably replaced anyway.

I am sure any watch collector/forum member is smart enough to sniff this for what it is....an incorrect service interval recommendation. Especially considering modern lubricants. My wonderment if you like, is not the impact it has on all of us but the impact it has on people who don't really understand. As we all know there are many people who buy watches who have no real idea what they are buying or what an automatic movement is let alone worry about the type of movement in their watch.

The public are going to look at the service interval recommendations and simply think...good watch/bad watch when comparing it to other manufacturers who have 5 or 10 year service intervals. It's why I am confounded by their decision which simply seems to be bad marketing. It would be far better to have come out with a 7 year service interval recommendation?

Their other retrograde step IMO is to not make parts available to watchmakers so customers can get repairs elsewhere. If one thinks really hard about it. They cannot fulfil the work they have on a reasonable timescale, it would be better to get independent watchmakers certified and able to buy parts. This way customers could choose where to have their watch serviced. This drives CW to become better, because most of us would pay a little more for a manufacturer service...or at least that should be the case.

It's really about if you are in a hole....stop digging!
I am in violent agreement....except that synthetic oil of itself does not deteriorate, though any additives that complete the lubricant product probably do and of course any debris from operation must be dealt with at some level of build-up.

I would really like to get an objective handle on the reality of modern watch lubricants, but from what I do know a service interval recommendation of 5-7 years seems realistic tending to pessimistic dependant on actual running usage, thus the 60 month guarantee should cause no difficulty and it's hard to see an acceptable reason for CW to can it - a bad move for all the reasons you have outlined.
I don’t go with the comment you have made - “synthetic oil of itself does not deteriorate....”

I understand that the lubrications used do generally have an expiry date, which presumably they wouldn’t have if the oil did not deteriorate?
5239FF9C-6058-4354-BB30-57C3EC9E1587.png
Neil
Other watch forums of interest:
TZ-UK

User avatar
golfjunky
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 4908
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 7:32 pm
Location: Essex

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by golfjunky » Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:41 pm

It pops up front and centre which is enough for me to think they are misleading the buyer
608EB6A8-7B48-472E-9BE9-1BEB7209F62F.jpeg
Current collection = Omega Seamaster 2225.80.00, Omega Speedmaster 'Moonphase' 3576.50.00, Seiko SRPB43J1, C60 Trident, Casio G Shock 2327, Garmin Vivoactive

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by DavecUK » Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:05 pm

nbg wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:40 pm
I don’t go with the comment you have made - “synthetic oil of itself does not deteriorate....”

I understand that the lubrications used do generally have an expiry date, which presumably they wouldn’t have if the oil did not deteriorate?
5239FF9C-6058-4354-BB30-57C3EC9E1587.png
Neil
You are correct that anything deteriorates, certainly anything man made doesn't last for ever so any statement they last for ever is of course incorrect. There are certain things to allow the compound to flow that will eventually dry up, depolymerise and change over time, certainly the properties cannot be infinite. I had a Samsonite briefcase once and after about 7 years the soft touch handle simply turned sticky, I also had other similar polymer things that were kept in the dark and not subjected to sweat that deteriorated in a similar way.

Unfortunately the expiry date is a little misleading. If I was a watchmaker and purchased a lubricant with an expiry date of 2024, what does that actually mean.

Does it mean if I service watches with the lubricant, 5 years later it expires within the watch?
Does it mean if I service a watch and use that lubricant in 2022, that the watch is only good for 2 years

Or does it mean that I can service watches with it until it expires in 2024 and any watch I service with it in 2024 will be perfectly well lubricated for 5-7 years after I did the work. I would favour this explanation as being the only logical and workable one. For this to be correct and I am pretty certain it is....any syn lubes or lubes with expiry dates would probably be good for 7-10 years after that date. So a lubricant purchased today with an expiry of 2024 should be fine until around 2034 but shouldn't be used in a watch service after expiry.

So as an educated guess, when used if completely fresh these lubricants probably have a non use (stopped watch) max life of around 16 years inside the watch.

User avatar
nbg
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 7947
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:43 pm
CW-watches: 10
Location: UK

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by nbg » Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:33 pm

^^^^^ Yep I go would also go with the - if expiry date on container 2024, it’s good to use if servicing a watch up to that time and will perform as intended over a good number of years...

How many is a “good number of years”, well I think we all believe that saying “3-4 years before they congeal and deteriorate” is a bit *naughty! :)

*Other adjectives are available! :lol:

Neil
Other watch forums of interest:
TZ-UK

User avatar
neilj568
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1179
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2015 12:08 pm
CW-watches: 5
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by neilj568 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:41 pm

H0rati0 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:44 pm
neilj568 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:28 am

My statement was nothing to do with the quality of service or otherwise (I have had several bad experiences). I have 5 CW's and they are great but the current design direction leaves me feeling a bit meh...!!!
I too am not that comfortable with the current direction (dare I mention the logo position?) but there are exceptions, eg the SH21 C65s and the Military range has potential. However, like yourself I am happy with my current CWs, especially the C8PR, while hoping that the service hiccups get sorted. As to the future......?
I have one of these (and the remainder are Trident C60) but the C8PR is by far the best of the current offerings
_________________________________________
Wrist Size 210mm/8.2"

User avatar
H0rati0
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1117
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 7:49 am
CW-watches: 3
Location: Bayern

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by H0rati0 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:27 pm

nbg wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:40 pm

I don’t go with the comment you have made - “synthetic oil of itself does not deteriorate....”

I understand that the lubrications used do generally have an expiry date, which presumably they wouldn’t have if the oil did not deteriorate?
5239FF9C-6058-4354-BB30-57C3EC9E1587.png
Neil
While making the assumption that the base oil used in watch lubricants is pure synthetic, from my automotive dalliances it seems that pure synthetic oil is supposedly indefinitely re-cycable. However no actual lubrication product is without additives for various reason, so yes, lube products do have use by dates - I would assume set conservatively for all the usual reasons.
"There is no beginning to enlightenment and no end to training" - Dogen Zenji (1200-1253)

MarkingTime
Expert
Expert
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:19 pm
CW-watches: 5

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by MarkingTime » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:33 pm

Take a watch manufacturer that advises a 7 year service interval. Assume that the watch is assembled with oil in date, but with a day or two left until expiry.
That puts the effective serviceability of the oil at least 7 years beyond the expiry date...

Then you have the situation where bulk lubricants that have reached their expiry date are then sent for retesting for assessment and granting of an extended expiry life.

For moving mechanical assemblies, servicing is usually based on expected component wear and contamination of the lubricants, rather than life of any lubricants used and if we say take the example of Sellita or ETA movements, their expected service life will be well documented and established from empirical evidence.

7 years service interval is realistic, more if the watch is lightly used and a little bit less for a daily used beater. 3 or 4 years? Unnecessary.

User avatar
Kip
The Administrator
The Administrator
Posts: 29907
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:45 pm
CW-watches: 146
LE-one: yes
LE-two: yes
LE-three: yes
LE-foura: yes
LE-fourb: yes
LE-five: yes
LE-six: yes
LESeven: yes
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by Kip » Sun Sep 22, 2019 12:59 pm

I have been on holidays the past 2 weeks with very limited access, but wanted to address some statements made that are being made as fact and are not, relative to servicing a watch.

Although I no longer service watches, I have spent many years as a watchmaker and service manager in the watch industry and currently focus on clocks, so I have a bit of experience dealing with all types of watches and brands.

Although there are always exceptions, and we have all heard of watches that run run for 20 + years with no service and remain accurate, the ultimate goal in dealing with a precision instrument is to keep it running at optimum performance.

What one decides to do with their own watch is certainly up to any individual and much is based on usage and conditions that a watch is subjected to. Therefore the industry must go by averages.

First of all, the average recommended watch service 30 years ago was 2-3 years for a mechanical. Not 5-7 years as has been stated in posts here. The current recommendations are 3-5 years by most brands and watchmakers. Remember I said there are exceptions due to individual circumstances and by brands. No different than the industry norm of a 2/3 year warranty, although many are now offering 5. CW was among the first to offer a 5 year warranty in 2005.

As CW says, do your research and you will discover what the norms are for service recommendations and warranties.
Many companies price their service to include replacement of parts that will normally wear which is the reason rates are higher than one might expect. If the parts are okay, they make out, if not the cost is covered. This is normal. Some companies also offer “a la Carte” rates. It is quite a minefield out there and rates must be looked up by brand. Although the major and well known brands have a service center of sorts, of the well over 2000 brands out there, most contract with an independent service center for warranty work.

Warranty service does not extend your warranty. Out of warranty service usually gives you a 1 -2 year warranty, depending on the type work performed. This varies by brand.

Part of the reason that extended service intervals have increased is due to the use of synthetic oils. However, all oils are not the same and do not have the same lifespan. Different oils are used in different parts of a watch. The expiration dates on a bottle of watch oil are confusing. They are meant to be an indicator of shelf life when a bottle is unopened. One cannot know how often a watchmaker changes/cleans his oil cups or the environment he is actually working in. The basis of synthetic oils is that they have additives and although the oil itself might last longer they do tend to evaporate and get contaminated over time. Since there is no such thing as an oil filter in a watch, a service is required to keep lubrication, and thus performance, optimal. A Brand/maker has no idea what happens to a watch when it leaves them, so again I say, they must deal with averages.

Many make a big deal of Rolex extending their warranty and service intervals. No one can seem to identify the actual reasons why, other than marketing in response to several brands moving to 5 year warranties. Since they replace all necessary and worn items at service, it changes nothing that they do. It is all built into their overhaul pricing.

What I have stated above are the norms. Some of the numbers stated in previous posts ae opinions and not facts

While we can all choose to decide what works for us, the industry brands must decide on a balance of what works for them and the majority of their customers.

Do you change your oil every 3000 miles as recommended by quick change oil companies or per the manufacturer’s recommendations? Is your car/watch under warranty or not? It is your watch, do as you wish. Just don’t complain if you do not follow the makers warranty guidelines and have an issue that is declined. If you choose to buy you consent to those guidelines.
While not serving your watch for 7-10 years might work for you, that is not the norm. Much depends on conditions that are far to variable among us to say that it is normal.

I have a rather large collection of watches and clocks. Some are serviced regularly, and others are not. My choice…and based on conditions and usage. If I was a diver, I would be getting my dive watches pressure tested annually. I am not so don’t worry about. I simply replace the seals on the dive watches when I service them. If a buy a watch, such as a CW, and it requires a service after 3-4 years, depending on the conditions/usage….I decide whether to fulfill my obligations to maintain coverage…my obligations….. not theirs. They set the terms.

The point here is that brands make their recommendations based on industry experience. Talk to any watchmaker and research the wear and tear that watch goes through under any conditions and you will find that service recommendations are generally in the same ballpark. What works for you is great, but is not the normal operating procedure. You choose.
Kip

"Asylum Administrator"

Image

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by DavecUK » Sun Sep 22, 2019 1:55 pm

Kip wrote:
Sun Sep 22, 2019 12:59 pm
First of all, the average recommended watch service 30 years ago was 2-3 years for a mechanical. Not 5-7 years as has been stated in posts here.
This is not my experience in the UK, when I purchased my Rolex and AP I was told 5-7 year intervals. All watchmakers I ever spoke to over here said the same for mechanical watches and it has been that way for as long as I can remember. It might be different in the US, but not with any watchmakers I have used here or in Singapore. 2-3 years would simply make the watch uneconomical to service on a daily basis. In fact at CW 3/4 year recommendation "it's getting very close to movement swap when it drops" attitude. Certainly for Sellita movements it's absolutely not cost effective, I doubt it is for COSC grade Sellita ones either. For the SH21, it depends on how much they charge for a new movement. If it's less than £800 to have that done, it's really not worth having it serviced.

So I don't dispute your experience, it's just that mine has been quite different over the last 35 years.

The other thing is CW don't offer a refinishing service, or at least I am not aware of that being a menu priced standard service option. Something they have chosen not to do and it's a shame, because it encourages regular servicing as something you can see and a "refresh" of a treasured possession.

Sure I have only purchased 1 CW watch but if I am honest, the direction things seem moving would make me a little reluctant to buy another. I want to see them successful, but to do that needs a successful approach. I'm happy to defend common sense, but not the sort of policies being adopted at the moment.

Mikkei4
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 7:20 pm
CW-watches: 0
Location: Berks

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by Mikkei4 » Sun Sep 22, 2019 6:42 pm

A comprehensive post from Kip regarding the myths or truths re. watch servicing and old and new lubricants.

The only problem is that the crux of this topic is what is considered as a change by CW to the length of their warranty BEFORE 1 of their watches is to be serviced. Whether it is said by anybody that it's the watch's owner that decide whether to follow recommendations or not it is CW that have now put their 60month movement warranty into doubt.

BUT they still advertise it as 60/60 which it is not.

That is the crux of this topic.

MarkingTime
Expert
Expert
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:19 pm
CW-watches: 5

Re: 60|60 Watch Guarantee - Service Requirement

Post by MarkingTime » Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:39 pm

A few of points.
Firstly, CW most definitely do not offer or provide any sort of refinishing, short of a case replacement. Apparently it can leave scratches on the watch (as told to me by someone in CS a few days ago). Make of that what you will, I was rather nonplussed by that comment.

Secondly, the bulk of CW watches use Sellita or ETA movements and they are hardly an unknown quantity in terms of durability and longevity. All faults will be well documented and empirical evidence will exist as to just how long they will last without servicing. I strongly suspect that if a daily worn watch were left unserviced until it started drifting out of spec it would be well in excess of the CW recommendations.

I would also like to add that none of my watches have ever looked like they needed servicing, all ran or still run within spec and several are older than 5 years.

Analogies to car servicing are a moot point, servicing one of the above mentioned movements will be similar in cost to an oil service on a car, if you could get your car engine replaced for about the same price as an oil service, most people wouldn't bother with the service now would they?
"What'll it be today Sir? Oil and filter?" "No thanks mate, I'll pay the extra tenner and have the new lump fitted, ta very much."

The recently diminished 60/60 warranty is still 60/60, just not unconditional any more. A caveat has been added to reduce the cost of the upkeep of the warranties as paid for by CW.

Post Reply