WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 20 of 194 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
551 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just bought a Lew and Huey Orthos

Issue:
After setting the time, crown doesn't click back into the date/winding mode properly when i push it in
Therefore as I try to screw back down, the time changes at the same time
I would need to push the crown back down multiple times in random angles, until it clicks back into the winding mode, before I can screw it back down

I have spoken to Chris
And he mentioned that this is quite common, and not a mechanism problem
But I believe it is
Chris has agreed to send me a replacement, but I will need to pay for postage to send the watch back to him

I think this would definitely
1. Affect the resale value of the watch, if I do decide to sell it in the future
Would you accept this issue? if you were to buy it from me?

2. Reduce the life expectancy of the mechanism, as I need to poke the crown 4-5 times each time I set the time
And this is a problem, as I rotate over a few watches

Is anyone facing similar issues?
Would like some opinions and comments

Video Link:
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
30,041 Posts
Hi Eng,

You said in your email, "so far I have refrain from posting this on WUS to ask for opinions, as I believe it doesn't serve any purpose". I didn't want to react as if that was some sort of implied threat, but if it was meant to be, I'm sorry to see you've followed through on it.

As I said in our email exchange:

1. Of the four models we've made with screw-down crowns (Riccardo, Acionna, Spectre, and Orthos) - a total of 1551 pieces, the vast majority of which I personally inspected - it is very common for a crown to need some slight lateral pressure applied in order to return it to winding position. You are not the only customer to find this or ask me about it. You are the first one who wasn't willing to accept my assurance that it was normal, or accept my guidance on how to operate it. As I said, it frequently is just a matter of the crown needing to be broken in, but in any case, it is common, and doesn't affect operation. I've yet to have a single instance of the crown or stem failing because of it.

Since my word isn't good enough, here's a video taken by another customer, showing the crown behaving the same way, and him operating it exactly as I advised you to do (at about the 1:40-1:45 mark):


2. When my assurance wasn't good enough, and you insisted I was wrong, I went on to explain...because there is no defect with your watch, I was willing to accept the watch back under my company's 3-day "I just don't like it" return policy, but that would be at your shipping expense. Further, when someone returns a watch for something that is not a defect, I do NOT replace it, instead I simply issue a refund. My thinking is that if someone finds fault where there is none, they're going to find it no matter how many watches I send them, so it's better to just issue a refund and move on.

However, in your case, I said I was willing to make an exception to that policy, and I would replace it, SO LONG AS the watch was unworn, in the original packaging, all protective covers intact, etc. In other words, if you returned the watch AS NEW, at your own shipping expense, then I would accept it back, and I would pay the shipping costs to send a second watch to you - in AUSTRALIA - one which I hand-picked for you from the small amount of inventory I have here with me (and as I said, of the 6 pieces here, the first four I checked all had crowns with the identical feel).

Considering the way you handled our communications, and that you are on the opposite side of the planet, I felt the offer I made was a very reasonable accommodation, considering I was paying to ship a watch to you, twice, something that isn't cheap to do. I'm sad to see you obviously don't agree, and would rather handle this matter this way.

So...from the video you posted, it's clear you've removed the bracelet in order to install a NATO strap. As such, you've forced me to rescind my offer to make an exception to policy, because you've changed the conditions under which the offer was made. At this point, I'm forced to say the watch is now yours. But as I said in our email exchange, if the crown or stem happens to break during the warranty period, we'll have it fixed for you.

If I may offer some advice from the perspective of a business owner...I understand it's tempting to think the threat of making a complaint public will bend someone to your will, but it's not always the case, and never will be with me. We've all had disagreements after a transaction, but in my experience, if someone is responsive to your communications, is courteous, shows they understand the nature of your complaint and is willing to work with you to resolve it, it's generally best to work something out rather than try to force someone's hand by threatening (or attempting) a public spat.

Lastly, if a business has a policy, but offers to make an exception to it, that is not something they want disclosed publicly. Why bother having a policy if everyone expects you to break with it? You should just appreciate the exception being made in order to accommodate you, and recognize that the exception is the other party's effort to keep you happy. When you make a public disclosure about it, you make the business owner regret trying to help you, and make it harder for him to make that exception in the future for others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
551 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
I stand by my opinion that this is a mechanism issue
I'm sorry that you don't see it that way, and justify it by showing more of the same issue from other customers

If its a problem with the watch, I believe you should pickup the bill for the return of it as well
It was like this as soon as it arrived, and not from any fault of mine

I guess I was just too excited to finally receive the watch after the long wait, and replaced the strap immediately as soon as I got home
It will be a lesson to me to check all the mechanism first before doing anything, and not assume everything is in working order
Even something as basic as the movement

Considering all the delays with the watch, because of your high standards of QC, which I appreciate considering the size of your company
I am surprised that you would accept such a basic issue as this to be "acceptable" or "normal"
I can only assume there were just too many of them for you to replace them all

Beautiful watch, unfortunately a big let down
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,432 Posts
IBTL.

If a refund was offered and you were disappointed with the product, you should have simply accepted it - with shipping or without. We all get excited at the arrival of a new watch ... that is why we're all here. Unwrap your watch like it's a chocolate bar ... you wouldn't eat that all in one bite. Slowly inspect and test (nibble by nibble). If you find a fly in your chocolate, stop and contact the seller :p .

FYI, even at that I have paid for shipping back to a manufacturer for what was considered "warranty work". I was happy to get my repaired watch back in a timely fashion. Try that with any "big brand".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
984 Posts
I stand by my opinion that this is a mechanism issue
I'm sorry that you don't see it that way, and justify it by showing more of the same issue from other customers

If its a problem with the watch, I believe you should pickup the bill for the return of it as well
It was like this as soon as it arrived, and not from any fault of mine

I guess I was just too excited to finally receive the watch after the long wait, and replaced the strap immediately as soon as I got home
It will be a lesson to me to check all the mechanism first before doing anything, and not assume everything is in working order
Even something as basic as the movement

Considering all the delays with the watch, because of your high standards of QC, which I appreciate considering the size of your company
I am surprised that you would accept such a basic issue as this to be "acceptable" or "normal"
I can only assume there were just too many of them for you to replace them all

Beautiful watch, unfortunately a big let down
Hey Chris, this was exactly the kind of guy we were talking about over e-mail regarding my Spectre return. Glad I could be the guy on the other side of the pit on this one for you. This is just ridiculous.

I have this response to anyone like the OP - if you want perfect, buy a Rolex. If you want a great value in a watch with a solid movement and operation, and can compromise a little, you can save thousands.

Listen to Bobby McFerrin - Don't Worry, Be Happy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,190 Posts
Idk. I'd be very much pissed off if a watch didn't switch between wind/datechange/timechange positions. Never heard of it being "normal" either.

I'm not gonna go into all the arguing about return policies and so on, but on the specific question of "is it normal that I have to wiggle the crown to get it to switch positions"...

I have a Seiko manual for the 4r35/4r36/4r37/4r38/4r39 movement(s) just at hand's length. Going through it. It doesn't mention anything about position-swapping being hard to engage. The only "normal" warnings are about not changing date between 9 pm / 4am, and that you should move the minute hand back a bit when setting the time. The 'care of your watch' section only mentions cleaning off moisture and stuff, allergy info, and WR basics.
The "Troubleshooting" section also does not have an entry for "help why is the position swapping on the crown not working?".
So, at least as far as official Seiko user manual for this movement is concerned, it's not a "normal" or "well-known" thing. I bet you that if it was, there would be a warning about it. (here, read for yourselves if you want: http://www.seikowatches.com/support/ib/pdf/SEIKO_4R35_4R36_4R37_4R38_4R39.pdf).

So, uh.. can anyone please link to an authoritative information source confirming that it is, indeed, normal/common thing with the movement? 'Cos the first I've ever heard of it being 'normal' was this thread.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
30,041 Posts
Idk. I'd be very much pissed off if a watch didn't switch between wind/datechange/timechange positions. Never heard of it being "normal" either.

I'm not gonna go into all the arguing about return policies and so on, but on the specific question of "is it normal that I have to wiggle the crown to get it to switch positions"...

I have a Seiko manual for the 4r35/4r36/4r37/4r38/4r39 movement(s) just at hand's length. Going through it. It doesn't mention anything about position-swapping being hard to engage. The only "normal" warnings are about not changing date between 9 pm / 4am, and that you should move the minute hand back a bit when setting the time. The 'care of your watch' section only mentions cleaning off moisture and stuff, allergy info, and WR basics.
The "Troubleshooting" section also does not have an entry for "help why is the position swapping on the crown not working?".
So, at least as far as official Seiko user manual for this movement is concerned, it's not a "normal" or "well-known" thing. I bet you that if it was, there would be a warning about it. (here, read for yourselves if you want: http://www.seikowatches.com/support/ib/pdf/SEIKO_4R35_4R36_4R37_4R38_4R39.pdf).

So, uh.. can anyone please link to an authoritative information source confirming that it is, indeed, normal/common thing with the movement? 'Cos the first I've ever heard of it being 'normal' was this thread.
It doesn't have anything to do with the movement. It has to do with the crown and crown stem assembly:

I'd say the movement wouldn't cause this, but the way the spring loaded screw down crown works is likely to be the culprit. I have heard of this happening on other watches with a spring loaded crown.
Exactly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
551 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
I have this response to anyone like the OP - if you want perfect, buy a Rolex. If you want a great value in a watch with a solid movement and operation, and can compromise a little, you can save thousands.
1. Rolex isn't perfect. I am sure many other people agree with me. I for one don't like the style and hands.

2. I don't need to pay a Rolex price to get a new and fully functional watch
The key point is to be on par with your competitors at a certain price point
I don't expect a tourbillon at this price point
But I do expect the crown to be working properly, when all my other cheaper or equivalent watches do not have this problem
Do you buy a new Toyota with rusted rims, and say, if you want perfection, buy a Ferrari?

3. You mentioned, "solid movement and operation"
Well, from my point of view, the movement and operation has a problem
Or to put it more accurately, the crown and crown stem assembly has a problem

I would just like to clearly point out that I do not have any problems with Chris's customer service
From my point of view, he has been very prompt and accommodating
The issue here is whether this crown issue, can be considered an issue with the mechanism
And thus should be replaced by the manufacturer

From Chris point of view, it IS NOT a mechanism issue
Therefore, he is "doing me a favor" by allowing me to return it to him
But with the postage cost paid by me
I am quite sure if the watch was totally dead on arrival, Chris would have no hesitation to get it totally replace on his cost for me

But for me, it IS a mechanism issue
Therefore, from my point of view, Chris asking me to send a faulty watch back to him, on my cost, is unacceptable

Therefore I created this thread, to see what everyone else thinks about this crown issue
Would you consider this a faulty watch, or not?
And for Orthos owners, do you have this problem with your watch?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,196 Posts
Therefore I created this thread, to see what everyone else thinks about this crown issue
Would you consider this a faulty watch, or not?
In my book, that is a mechanical fault. The fact that it is with the crown and not the movement is immaterial.

As to shipping, there are a great many brands which require the owner to pay shipping, even for warranty service. I generally stay out of issues of whether this is right or wrong. It's a fact of life in this market, so I simply deal with it when I have to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,690 Posts
I've got one of each colour Orthos. One works flawlessly, one does what the OP describes.

Chris has been fast and friendly on the support front and I've worked out the 'knack' to getting the crown to go in on the 'tricky' one with a little lateral pressure as I push the crown in. Does it bug me-yes!...a little bit at least.

It's not a big issue and as I've got a Riccardo, an Acionna and one other Orthos that a work fine, so I don't feel too bad, but if it were my first ever L&H purchase, is probably feel a little more unsure.

I spoken to Chris, and told him I don't want the hassle of sending it back...it's already gone easier with use, and as a bit of a modder, I may even open it up and have a little look at what's going on at some point.

If I did choose to return it (assuming I'd been given the same offer) I wouldn't quibble about return postage. Would it annoy me-yes!...but how's it different than buying a watch in my local town and realising it is was faulty?...I'd have to drive into town, pay parking, go to the shop and return it...would I expect the shop to pay my petrol and parking-no!....well that's how I consider return postage on an international item.

I think the original offer from Chris was more than fair.

For what it's worth, I do sympathise with the OP, however, I wouldn't hesitate to deal with Chris again, and would love another Acionna and/or a Cerberus in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,272 Posts
But for me, it IS a mechanism issue
Therefore, from my point of view, Chris asking me to send a faulty watch back to him, on my cost, is unacceptable
Every watch i've returned (including two recently to a well respected company) i've had to pay shipping to get the watch back to them. That's including one DOA.

A replacement was offered when Chris didn't think there was a problem to answer for.
You simply can't get better customer service.
This whole thing has blown way out of proportion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
In my book, that is a mechanical fault. The fact that it is with the crown and not the movement is immaterial.

As to shipping, there are a great many brands which require the owner to pay shipping, even for warranty service. I generally stay out of issues of whether this is right or wrong. It's a fact of life in this market, so I simply deal with it when I have to.
I agree; the customer is not expected to have to know the difference between movement and crown mechanism. No one outside of a watch forum would make that distinction and I suspect neither would a trading standards court. OP, send the watch back, but swallow the postage. Next time you buy a watch you know who and who not to deal with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,767 Posts
I agree; the customer is not expected to have to know the difference between movement and crown mechanism. No one outside of a watch forum would make that distinction and I suspect neither would a trading standards court. OP, send the watch back, but swallow the postage. Next time you buy a watch you know who and who not to deal with.
But, I though Chris offered to send another watch? So, the issue wasn't the mechanical "defect" but the return shipping fee? Maybe I'm lost again....
 
  • Like
Reactions: rpm1974
1 - 20 of 194 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top