Inverse relationship between price and accuracy.
Discussion
I am wearing a Parmigiani today. It is a truly beautiful thing. But it is about the most unreliable and inaccurate watch I have ever encountered, despite being quite a pricy thing.
I have owned a number of Rolexes, which have been a bit average with regard to accuracy (but bombproof).
My second "proper" watch was a Cartier Tank Francaise and despite it having no manual wind it was very accurate.
My first ever decent watch, in 1992, was TAG Heuer SEL and it was super accurate for a mechanical watch. If I recall correctly it gained about a second in ten days. It may have been responsible for setting unrealistic expectations for all future mechanical watches!
Has anyone else found that price is no indicator of reliability and or accuracy?
My Rolex (Daytona) isn't great - not dreadful, but noticeably gains time.
Technically - at least the new price - my Breguet is more expensive than the Daytona, and keeps far better time. It's very accurate.
Shame to hear about the Parmigiani though - I would still like to add one of those to my very small collection.
Technically - at least the new price - my Breguet is more expensive than the Daytona, and keeps far better time. It's very accurate.
Shame to hear about the Parmigiani though - I would still like to add one of those to my very small collection.
davek_964 said:
Shame to hear about the Parmigiani though - I would still like to add one of those to my very small collection.
I bought mine on a whim, because it was about the most beautiful watch I had ever seen. I do love it, but it's had a couple of issues which I suspect would not occur with watches manufactured in higher numbers.To add to the problem, Parmigiani has now closed down its only UK boutique and their UK service centre (which is a tiny independent watch repairer) isn't trained on my watch. So it's a question of it returning to Switzerland for any repairs. Which is not a speedy process.
I have not found an inverse relationship as such (my collection had been too small to extrapolate a relationship from) but I suspect that the phenomenon to which you allude is real.
By far the most reliable and accurate watches I have owned have been JLC and Rolex and the worst have been from Patek, AP and RD. The only ‘high end’ brand I have owned that has been an accurate timekeeper is from ALS.
I have had a Patek serviced in Geneva and was pleased with the result but not the wait. Wouldn’t do it again.
Personally (unless the watch had a unique architecture) I would try to find local watchmaker to regulate a badly behaved watch rather than ship to Switzerland.
By far the most reliable and accurate watches I have owned have been JLC and Rolex and the worst have been from Patek, AP and RD. The only ‘high end’ brand I have owned that has been an accurate timekeeper is from ALS.
I have had a Patek serviced in Geneva and was pleased with the result but not the wait. Wouldn’t do it again.
Personally (unless the watch had a unique architecture) I would try to find local watchmaker to regulate a badly behaved watch rather than ship to Switzerland.
My Tag Hueur Chronograph although pretty accurate has fallen to bits over the years and the smaller dials don't work whilst the G Shock that I have owned for far longer, 25 years in fact, is still as good as new.
My current wear is a Lorus Sports from Argos
about £20. Looks like my Seiko 5 but is very accurate.
My current wear is a Lorus Sports from Argos
about £20. Looks like my Seiko 5 but is very accurate.I’m far from an expert on the time keeping piece so stand to be corrected but a Swiss chronometer should be -4 to +6 seconds a day. The one you own will lie somewhere within that tolerance, otherwise it’s a warranty job. Basically, you may get lucky and get one that operates toward the mid point of that range, or be unlucky and get an outlier. Unless you buy several thousand watches it’s unfair and silly to draw any conclusions on price vs accuracy based upon a small number of watches you have bought.
Maxym said:
OP you've put me off Parmigiani! Some models are beautiful but in truth I'm pretty content with my small collection. Ideally I'd downsize a bit but I'd be lost as to which to get rid of.
You were never really a Parmigiani buyer then, if you give a data set of ONE so much weight.The OP is unfortunate, but rather than positively resolve the matter, he’d sooner do nothing and moan about it.
Maybe if he bothered to organise its return to Switzerland, he could report a presumably positive outcome and how accurate his watch is as a result.
PJ S said:
You were never really a Parmigiani buyer then, if you give a data set of ONE so much weight.
The OP is unfortunate, but rather than positively resolve the matter, he’d sooner do nothing and moan about it.
Maybe if he bothered to organise its return to Switzerland, he could report a presumably positive outcome and how accurate his watch is as a result.
A typical response from you PJ S, which is acerbic as it is inaccurate.The OP is unfortunate, but rather than positively resolve the matter, he’d sooner do nothing and moan about it.
Maybe if he bothered to organise its return to Switzerland, he could report a presumably positive outcome and how accurate his watch is as a result.
My watch has been back to Parmigiani and it has not long been returned. The process was not a happy nor a quick one, and the watch is still not quite right. But because it takes so long to return it, I am probably going to put up with it until it needs servicing or I damage it.
Before I bought it, I checked with Parmigiani that they had a UK service point for the watch. They said they did, when in fact they don't.
But back on topic. I have experienced the phenomenon before where a high-end item doesn't actually perform as well as a far cheaper alternative. But buyers of high-end stuff either don't care or they tolerate it because the kudos of ownership outweighs it.
A poster above mentions AP, and it's not the first time I've heard AP owners mention so-so timekeeping. I was intrigued as to whether others had experienced the same with high-end watches.
I haven’t experienced an overly strong correlation between price and accuracy.
My most accurate (in terms of overall daily time loss or gain) watch contains an ETA 2824-2, and shows the excellent performance that can be wrung from those humble (but good) movements in the hands of a watchmaker that takes the trouble to regulate before sale. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it’s a watch from a maker that assembles their watches themselves in low production numbers each year and takes time & care in doing so.
I suspect that with patience, most half-decent watches in good condition, state of lubrication etc. can be regulated to achieve acceptable practical timekeeping, but most manufacturers rarely bother.
My one Rolex is well within its spec of +/- 2 seconds daily. The Rolex 3130 movement is also better equipped to retain accuracy over time and positional variance than the ETA 2824-2.
However, I do wonder by what benchmark people are actually judging timekeeping. There’s so many pitfalls: unsuitable time comparison points; whether something is accurate across all positions or can be ‘gamed’ via overnight positioning to counteract day-time performance; whether the watch is consistent in its amount of daily deviance or all over the place; whether the watch is kept in the most optimal power reserve zone; condition of the watch etc.
A Timegrapher machine can be quite illuminating (or maddening, depending upon perspective).
I have an aged 1980’s Vostok Amphibia that came to me via Macedonia and that’s in dire need of servicing, but it falsely appears quite accurate, keeping time to better than Chronometer spec daily. The actual underlying truth is that it gains like a galloping horse on wrist during the day, but just so happens to shed most of those seconds overnight. That’s not proper accuracy, to my mind.
I also think the whole COSC Chronometer certification ‘thing’ can often create problems in terms of expectations, but I don’t particularly blame watch buyers for their consternation.
My most accurate (in terms of overall daily time loss or gain) watch contains an ETA 2824-2, and shows the excellent performance that can be wrung from those humble (but good) movements in the hands of a watchmaker that takes the trouble to regulate before sale. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it’s a watch from a maker that assembles their watches themselves in low production numbers each year and takes time & care in doing so.
I suspect that with patience, most half-decent watches in good condition, state of lubrication etc. can be regulated to achieve acceptable practical timekeeping, but most manufacturers rarely bother.
My one Rolex is well within its spec of +/- 2 seconds daily. The Rolex 3130 movement is also better equipped to retain accuracy over time and positional variance than the ETA 2824-2.
However, I do wonder by what benchmark people are actually judging timekeeping. There’s so many pitfalls: unsuitable time comparison points; whether something is accurate across all positions or can be ‘gamed’ via overnight positioning to counteract day-time performance; whether the watch is consistent in its amount of daily deviance or all over the place; whether the watch is kept in the most optimal power reserve zone; condition of the watch etc.
A Timegrapher machine can be quite illuminating (or maddening, depending upon perspective).
I have an aged 1980’s Vostok Amphibia that came to me via Macedonia and that’s in dire need of servicing, but it falsely appears quite accurate, keeping time to better than Chronometer spec daily. The actual underlying truth is that it gains like a galloping horse on wrist during the day, but just so happens to shed most of those seconds overnight. That’s not proper accuracy, to my mind.
I also think the whole COSC Chronometer certification ‘thing’ can often create problems in terms of expectations, but I don’t particularly blame watch buyers for their consternation.
liner33 said:
To be brutally honest I don't care about fuel economy in performance cars and I don't care about accuracy in mechanical watches as long as they are running well mechanically whether they are 2 or 20 seconds out a day doesn't bother me
I agree with the car thing, but poor economy is usually due to other benefits (performance). I don't expect quartz accuracy, but I do expect it to tell the time - and 20s a day would definitely be too much. It's primary function is to tell the time after all, even if the reasons we choose specific watches is not that.davek_964 said:
I agree with the car thing, but poor economy is usually due to other benefits (performance). I don't expect quartz accuracy, but I do expect it to tell the time - and 20s a day would definitely be too much. It's primary function is to tell the time after all, even if the reasons we choose specific watches is not that.
Primary function perhaps certainly for some but perhaps not the primary function for everyone, but many other reasons to own a watch rather than tell time accurately, a £5 Casio will outperform a mechanical watch, if accuracy was really the be all and end all mechanical watches would not exist, many people forgive their shortcomings for the beauty of the object So said:
A typical response from you PJ S, which is acerbic as it is inaccurate.
My watch has been back to Parmigiani and it has not long been returned. The process was not a happy nor a quick one, and the watch is still not quite right. But because it takes so long to return it, I am probably going to put up with it until it needs servicing or I damage it.
...
Well, I’m sure as hell not going to call a spade, a trowel – it’s a spade!My watch has been back to Parmigiani and it has not long been returned. The process was not a happy nor a quick one, and the watch is still not quite right. But because it takes so long to return it, I am probably going to put up with it until it needs servicing or I damage it.
...
And you didn’t think it pertinent to mention the watch has already been away in your op? It would’ve certainly negated my presumptive remarks.
That said, if the timekeeping is such that it really does irk you, have a chat with Brendan Hoey (webwatchmaker) and see if it just needs a bit more time spent regulating it to a level you’d be content with.
Regarding AP, they will let a watch leave the factory with a -1/+10 spread, but if a buyer wants it regulated tighter, then they only have to ask the local ASPC, and it’ll be done at no charge.
PJ S said:
So said:
A typical response from you PJ S, which is acerbic as it is inaccurate.
My watch has been back to Parmigiani and it has not long been returned. The process was not a happy nor a quick one, and the watch is still not quite right. But because it takes so long to return it, I am probably going to put up with it until it needs servicing or I damage it.
...
Well, I’m sure as hell not going to call a spade, a trowel – it’s a spade!My watch has been back to Parmigiani and it has not long been returned. The process was not a happy nor a quick one, and the watch is still not quite right. But because it takes so long to return it, I am probably going to put up with it until it needs servicing or I damage it.
...
And you didn’t think it pertinent to mention the watch has already been away in your op? It would’ve certainly negated my presumptive remarks.
That said, if the timekeeping is such that it really does irk you, have a chat with Brendan Hoey (webwatchmaker) and see if it just needs a bit more time spent on it to get it to a level you’d be content with.
PJ S said:
You were never really a Parmigiani buyer then, if you give a data set of ONE so much weight.
The OP is unfortunate, but rather than positively resolve the matter, he’d sooner do nothing and moan about it.
Maybe if he bothered to organise its return to Switzerland, he could report a presumably positive outcome and how accurate his watch is as a result.
You're right about the size of the sample and the credibility of the observed outcome... but in the absence of properly constructed surveys it's difficult not to be influenced by stories like this, especially when positive ones seem to be equally rare or even non-existent.The OP is unfortunate, but rather than positively resolve the matter, he’d sooner do nothing and moan about it.
Maybe if he bothered to organise its return to Switzerland, he could report a presumably positive outcome and how accurate his watch is as a result.
At one time I was seriously interested in the brand but the appeal was waning even before this thread.
Maxym said:
You're right about the size of the sample and the credibility of the observed outcome... but in the absence of properly constructed surveys it's difficult not to be influenced by stories like this, especially when positive ones seem to be equally rare or even non-existent.
At one time I was seriously interested in the brand but the appeal was waning even before this thread.
Before you judge the credibility of the observed outcome read the whole thread. PJ S was making false assumptions - and then being rude based upon them.At one time I was seriously interested in the brand but the appeal was waning even before this thread.
Don't let me put you off Parmigiani. They make some beautiful watches and I love mine. But they are a low-volume maker and the "experience" reflects that, not necessarily in a good way. Message me if you want a more detailed write-up.
But back on topic again. I have been quite surprised how often I have bought high-end products only to find them compromised in some surprising way.It is often difficult to research properly and existing customers either don't care about or don't talk about their negative experiences. I've observed this from cars to watches, guns to bespoke suits. Research a Rolex and there will be 10 people who've bought one and willing to share their experiences. Want to buy a Patek Nautilus? How many owner reviews will you find?
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff