[hilbert42]

"Rolex aren't the best watches..."

Has there been a recent independent study of how these luxury watches actually perform as watches (as opposed to their looks and swagger value)?

I'm not likely to ever own one—except for my imitation Rolex clone I bought as a joke in Thailand for about $20 some years back—but it would be interesting to know if there are significant performance and reliability differences between them.

Also, do we know anything about the factory and manufacturing methods that these luxury brands employ. It's said Rolex is very secretive and won't let anyone outside selected employees in its factory so what about the others (Patek Philippe, etc.)?

[aredox]

Rolex has been less secretive nowadays. Still no public tours, but some media types have been invited. https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/inside-rolex

IWC, Zenith and a few other Manufactures do offer tours. It is fairly representative of what Rolex does (on a bigger scale, with more vertical integration). Many other brands and suppliers open their doors every two years in La Chaux-de-fond: https://urbanisme-horloger.ch/biennale-du-patrimoine-horloge...

[benhurmarcel]

> how these luxury watches actually perform as watches (as opposed to their looks and swagger value)?

The entire point is looks and swagger value. You can’t ignore it. In terms of time keeping accuracy (ie. bring a watch) they get easily better by any quartz watch.

[kashunstva]

n of 1 study: the Submariner that I purchased 30 years ago required one maintenance visit during that period. Its accuracy certainly isn’t going to match something that’s talking to a time server but it’s better than the clock in my car which drifts forward by 2 minutes per month. But for a purely mechanical device it’s remarkable.