Worth getting a watch winder?

[10JH]

Anyone know if it is worth getting a watch winder? Is is better for the movement and will it therefore reduce the time needed between services. I'm talking specifically for a Zenith Chronomaster and Chanel J12 Superleggera, which don't really get worn that regularly.

Thanks.
James

[x200sxy]

Different people will give different advice.

I have 2 - a single watch Rapport (cost £160 two years ago) on which I keep my J12 incidentally; and a 3 watch one I bought on fleabay, new from Germnay (about £160), on which I keep my Sinn and Seiko's orange monster/S5.
The new "cheapo" German one is incredibly quiet.

[lowdrag]

Just to give the other side of the coin I have had good automatics for years and never had a winder. I've never had a problem with any watch even after leaving it in the drawer for up to a year. Worked straight away and always kept good time. I guess for peace of mind get one if you feel inclined but when I bought my first decent watch in 1967 they didn't exist to my knowledge and no one seemed to have a problem.

[10JH]

Thanks for that guys. Is the noise of a watch winder a an issue normally with cheaper ones then? Also is it better for chronographs/chronometers to actually be left alone for a bit, rather than being constantly going like in a winder?

[aeropilot]

10JH said:

Thanks for that guys. Is the noise of a watch winder a an issue normally with cheaper ones then? Also is it better for chronographs/chronometers to actually be left alone for a bit, rather than being constantly going like in a winder?

A good winder shouldn't be going constantly....;) as they should be timed in that they will wind for a small amount of time then stop etc.

[taaffy]

I have bought two rapport winders and both motors have failed ....Now I just keep my watches in a non winder type rapport box.

[cyberface]

Everyone has different views on this... one side saying that without use, the lubrication of the mechanisms will pool in one position, leading to wear when you next start the watch up. The other side say that if you leave the watch run-down, then the lack of movement means no friction, leading to greater longevity of the watch.

Personally I think it's a combination of both, a bit like a car engine. Leaving a car engine stood for 6 months, then starting it up and revving it to max revs is going to damage the bits where lubrication has drained off. And with a watch, you can't just 'slowly' start the mechanism - if it beats at 28 kbph then that's the speed it'll run at. Equally if you keep a watch running all the time, it'll wear as all devices do, so I'd rather not have expensive chronographs running all the time.

For example - one of my watches has a flyback chronograph complication. I could bung the watch in a winder (which I'm not at the moment because it's still in 'honeymoon' phase and I'm wearing it daily!) but that would only keep the main watch functions running. There is no, to my knowledge, a winder that periodically operates the chronograph functions (and especially a flyback function)... so putting any complicated watch in a winder won't be keeping the complicated functions going - therefore worthless.

And what about seriously expensive complications like perpetual calendars? There's no way you're going to periodically operate a function that's only meant to work every 400 years.... the mechanisms are designed to work on very wide timescales.

I reckon modern materials and lubricants make watch winders a bit of a waste of time (especially with complications like chronographs) - and even though I can see the point with a vintage automatic, I'd be more concerned about increasing the wear on the movement.

If you're that worried about it, I reckon the best bet is to leave the watch run-down, and give it a quick service before you're going to use it - pop the back off and lubricate the essential points. Just like you'd do with a car that's been stood for a length of time.