I don’t know you, but part of the overall appeal of watches to me is the concept of longevity. The concept is that if it is cared for and maintained, the watch should last very long. However, recent experience with Seiko has plagued me a little.
The concept of life expectancy is closely tied to our watch hobbies, just like older Toyota pickups and vintage BMW motorcycles. British Car Show Top Gear has a famous video series. In that series, they try to destroy Toyota trucks using increasingly elaborate means. This includes parking your car on top of a high rise before it is flattened by explosives. Surprisingly, Toyota continues to drive after being pulled from the roof rack. You can see it below.
We will provide services to your watch
Beyond the fact that we make incredible television, this episode highlights the notion that the watch industry has failed to remind us. You’re buying the last one made. You may also be spending money on mechanical timekeeping objects. The idea is that one day you can share it with your child. This basic concept is more than just a valuable marketing ploy. There are some truth to the idea of buying something like a well-made mechanical watch, as it contradicts the grain of planned obsolescence seen today on smartwatches and many other devices.
The problem with this concept is that we need to consider servicing the watch every ten years. Normally, it’s not an issue with the first or second service, but if, for example, a 25-year watch is not in production, this can cause some issues. This is likely to happen as most mechanical clocks still click in 25 years unless unexpected tragedy is upon them.
Case Study: Neo Vintage Seiko Services
But it’s not all rosy. Recently I have experienced quite a bit of rigmalol to get Seiko ref. 7002-7000 Dive Watch Service. Seiko produced the 7002 Diver series from 1988 to 1996. My specific version has been welcomed since around 1991. This is the predecessor of the Seiko SKX007, with a similar case profile to its watch, and the 7002 is a handsome piece. According to this excellent article by colleague Mike Stockton, the watch began as a diver with a rating of 150m and evolved into a more robust instrument with a rating of 200m due to changes in construction around the crystal.
Nacho, the managing editor of Fratello, also owns Seiko 7002.
I foolishly made it a fool to swim in the sea without being convinced of the history of its service. When I came out of the ocean I noticed a mist underneath the crystal and I knew I was in trouble! Soon I sent the watch to Seiko and overhauled it and sorted it out. After sitting in the store for a week, I received an email from Seiko saying that the company no longer offered or supported the service of this watch or similar watches from that era. Gobsmacked a bit, I hunted and eventually found a watchmaker in another condition and sent him a watch for an overhaul. Simply put, I noticed that some watch companies refuse to service old watches, but I didn’t think this would apply to large manufacturers like Seiko.
The beauty of the general mechanical caliber
The inherent problem with this is to wonder how long a new Seiko watch can be set up. In 25 or 30 years, is that possible? For me, the lesson here is that there is something really appealing about the typical Swiss caliber. why? Because it’s easier to provide services over the next few years. Something like the ETA 2824-2, Sellita SW200-1, or 7750 series chronographs is much easier to maintain. This is compared to the company’s caliber, such as Seiko produces. Future maintenance is especially affected when you think that Seiko is in-house everything from lubricants to crystals and of course the movement parts of the watch.
In stark contrast to my recent experience, I had an IWC that was served without issue by a Schaffhausen-based watch company since the 1990s. The caliber inside the watch (IWC 3706 chronograph) was based on the Valjoux 7750 movement. This means that IWC can not only provide services easily, but also have a few independent watchmakers in my home country in Australia. Rather than blowing me away like Seiko, IWC was willing to serve my watch.
Image: Zeitauktion
Future maintenance is a serious consideration
Now, this article is not intended to choose Seiko. In fact, this is a problem that many brands share. But I think it serves as a balloon pin for the idea of buying a mechanical watch to escape the disposable capitalism surrounding us. The idea that a watch company will make thousands of watches and then refuse to serve them within 25 years seems like I’ll fly in the face of that idea.
Something happened to me when I was going through this situation. Should a brand state not just the warranty period, but also the period of future maintenance in marketing? Many watch brands offer longer and longer guarantees for their products. These could go beyond the years we had hoped for. For example, isn’t it relevant to consider whether the brand will be happy to see your watch when that third service is scheduled? I think so. For example, people at IWC say they are happy to serve my grandfather Cal. 89 Since the early 1960s. Imagine the same thing that Seiko does something historically important as the original 62mas Dive Watch…
The idea of conclusion
Of course, future maintenance isn’t often in front of our minds, especially when buying new or vintage watches. We often focus more on design, condition and tracking. However, the possibility of maintaining a watch is a key component of long-term ownership. Perhaps it’s time to get more closer to how willing the brand is to serve their products, especially if the product they are advertising is claimed to be beyond their owners. It seems to me that this is an important point to consider.
But what do you think, Fratelli? Should brands get closer to future maintenance, or is it a big enough question to worry about? Please let me know in the comments. I look forward to reading your views on this issue.
