24-05-2019, 08:46 PM
Jeg har på rolexforums.com læst følgende tråd, som handler om forskellen på Rolex værker og Tudor nye in-house værker:
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=673287
Lidt nede i tråden kommer følgende indlæg:
"The new in-house Tudor movements are actually incredibly accurate. They use silicon balance springs which are very stable timekeepers. The construction of certain elements of the movement is similar to their Rolex counterparts. The reversing wheels in the automatic work are the same style of construction that Rolex use.
I have partially disassembled one of the automatic movements and can say that the execution overall is cheaper than a Rolex movement.
The wheels are not as sturdy in their construction, and neither are the bridges. They are more similar to an ETA style movement in that respect. Having said that, they have a very respectable power reserve and as already stated, are very good timekeepers.
They have one HUGE draw-back in my opinion. That is the fact that they cannot be serviced. They are exchange only. When you send the watch in, even for a warranty repair the whole movement is replaced with a refurbished model and then COSC records are updated to match."
Jeg synes, at det er en smule foruroligende, hvis det er korrekt!? Ikke ligefrem bæredygtigt og et stort skridt i den forkerte retning...
Hele sangen om, at man skal huske serviceintervaller er jo så det rene vås. Tudors ure bør så bare køres helt i grøften inden det afleveres til "service"!
Er der nogen, der ved mere om det og eventuelt kan be- eller afkræfte rygtet?
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=673287
Lidt nede i tråden kommer følgende indlæg:
"The new in-house Tudor movements are actually incredibly accurate. They use silicon balance springs which are very stable timekeepers. The construction of certain elements of the movement is similar to their Rolex counterparts. The reversing wheels in the automatic work are the same style of construction that Rolex use.
I have partially disassembled one of the automatic movements and can say that the execution overall is cheaper than a Rolex movement.
The wheels are not as sturdy in their construction, and neither are the bridges. They are more similar to an ETA style movement in that respect. Having said that, they have a very respectable power reserve and as already stated, are very good timekeepers.
They have one HUGE draw-back in my opinion. That is the fact that they cannot be serviced. They are exchange only. When you send the watch in, even for a warranty repair the whole movement is replaced with a refurbished model and then COSC records are updated to match."
Jeg synes, at det er en smule foruroligende, hvis det er korrekt!? Ikke ligefrem bæredygtigt og et stort skridt i den forkerte retning...
Hele sangen om, at man skal huske serviceintervaller er jo så det rene vås. Tudors ure bør så bare køres helt i grøften inden det afleveres til "service"!
Er der nogen, der ved mere om det og eventuelt kan be- eller afkræfte rygtet?
![[-]](https://urdebatten.dk/images/collapse.png)