WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm really getting concerned about the overall quality of Sinn Watches. This is particularly true considering the current inflated prices of Watchbuys for theses watches. I have three Sinn's; a U1, 756 and an EZM. On the U1, the triangle lume on the bezel has come off twice and the crown has come off once when resetting the time. I had the 756 into RGM late last year (which took three months) to repair the frozen GMT hand and now the second hand has come loose and does not work. In comparison to other watches of similar price point such as Omega or Breitling I'm just not seeing these quality control problems. I was going to by a 556 for my wife who wants a men's mid-sized but I think I'll go another direction. Is anyone else seeing these problems?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
21,244 Posts
The lume triangle on the bezel of my EZM3 fell out. It had to be sent back to Sinn for a bezel replacement under warranty.
A couple of months after I bought the JLC Master Moon, it stopped and had to go back to the factory for a warranty repair/service.

I think these things happen, both on cheap-ish (Sinn) and more expensive (JLC) watches.
I truly do not think that Sinn have lowered the quality.
And, we can not accuse Sinn of what Watchbuys charge!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
264 Posts
One thing I must say here....I've been very impressed with Sinn's service. I think you get a level of personal service that you wouldn't find at Omega, Rolex etc. I am dealing with them now and they are very good indeed.

However, I do wish that my SINN watches didn't have to go to Sinn service so often, and so I agree with the "Sinn Quality Problems".

But I am sure other brands have their issues, probably very similar.

Cheers David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,051 Posts
The lume triangle on the bezel of my EZM3 fell out. It had to be sent back to Sinn for a bezel replacement under warranty.
A couple of months after I bought the JLC Master Moon, it stopped and had to go back to the factory for a warranty repair/service.

I think these things happen, both on cheap-ish (Sinn) and more expensive (JLC) watches.
I truly do not think that Sinn have lowered the quality.
And, we can not accuse Sinn of what Watchbuys charge!
+1 I have had no problems with the 3 I have. But I did have to send a Swiss brand back after 5 days to a manufacturer for repair ( which was done quickly and correctly), so it can happen to any brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
i've brought my U1 to cycling, gyms, rock climbing, snorkeling trips and maybe diving soon but still no problems after more than a year.
I would say that in any product, there bound to be some defects here and there. Quality Standards are still the same but nobody can avoid certain manufacturing issues. If not, customer service people will be out of job. :-d
IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
All good replies. Thanks. I may also be a bit negatively biased at this point due to dealing with RGM for service.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
21,244 Posts
I always deal with the Manufacturer (factory). More expensive - yes, but I believe they provide a higher quality. Just IMHO, of course!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,066 Posts
These things are mechanical devices. They break, they have bugs, some are just flat out lemons. Happens in ALL areas of mechanics from watches to airplanes at any and all price points. Frankly, some people have very good luck with mechanical items, others don't for whatever reason (I have my own personal thoughts on that one.) Anyway, sorry you've had some issues, they are never fun. But I don't think it refects on a quality control issue, or price point valuation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
I want a 103 and just ordered a GLYCINE SST, read the posts on that forum, and the letter from GLYCINE, one after another out of the box NOT working including mine that was 4 HOURS off in a 24 hour period!!!!!!!! I see QC issues with many brands; I agree things break,hell we break as machines, but right from the factory or first 90 days, I am not easy on these mfg'rs, they need to up the QC at THE DOOR! IMHO! dogdoc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,592 Posts
Sinns no different from other manufacturers. You can't check every single watch.....
....They don't have control of how a ad stores or treats there products....
.... As long as the company fixes the watch, what more can you expect?
I disagree with parts of your statement, quoted above.

On the contrary: YES, I do fully expect a watch manufacturer like Sinn (or Breitling, Omega, IWC, etc...) to check every watch.
Absolutely, and without reservations.

If I should believe for only a moment that Sinn would take a movement as it is delivered from ETA, slap dial and hands on it, case it, and put it in a box "ready for delivery" without any checks, I could have saved my money and picked up something like that for a fraction of the costs in the streets of Shanghai. (It might even say "Rolex", "Omega" or "Breitling" on the dial.)
The difference is called quality control, which should be an ongoing process for any manufacturer that intends to stay in business for long, and which I consequently believe is an area where Sinn needs to pay close attention to.

I do not get overly excited when an occasional hidden defect should slip past quality control and becomes apparent only later. I consider that largely unavoidable and manufacturers can soften the impact of defective goods by a generous, quick and unbureaucratic warranty system. But in essence warranties are a remedy - not a substitute - for flaws that should have been detected by Quality Control (often more appropriately referred to as Quality Assurance - QA) before the goods left the factory.

While I noticed that some owners do take their expectations to an extreme, manufacturers of mechanical quality watches have an obligation to ensure that their products leave the factory in a condition that makes them fit for service.

When you say: They {Sinn} don't have control of how a ad stores or treats there products; do you mean to suggest that some Sinn AD's treat Sinn watches harsher than the environment that the eventual buyer exposes the watch to; or that Sinn should pay no attention to the set-up, reputation, expertise and facilities of a dealer they intend to appoint as distributor?

While we need to be realistic with our expectations on how a new watch should perform, we need to be likewise realistic on how manufacturers should keep their part of the bargain, which includes delivering a properly functioning watch.

Discerning customers would find your suggested attitude of "Quality control? What quality control; the manufacturer can always fix it on warranty. So what do you want?" clearly unacceptable.
Particularly it would not be good enough for a manufacturer like Sinn, which depends extensively on Internet sales and a limited network of distributors, with service centers few and far between.

K.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jcp311

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
Great post, Kurt. I agree 100%. I think we must hold the manufacturers to a high standard. It is totally unacceptable to have these kinds of issues on brand new watches.

Even with mass produced consumer goods I expect the products to work properly straight out of the box. As a consumer I demand a much higher level of quality and performance for luxury goods.

I really hope Sinn takes these issues to heart. I am sure they will given that warranty service must really eat into margins.

I disagree with parts of your statement, quoted above.

On the contrary: YES, I do fully expect a watch manufacturer like Sinn (or Breitling, Omega, IWC, etc...) to check every watch.
Absolutely, and without reservations.

If I should believe for only a moment that Sinn would take a movement as it is delivered from ETA, slap dial and hands on it, case it, and put it in a box "ready for delivery" without any checks, I could have saved my money and picked up something like that for a fraction of the costs in the streets of Shanghai. (It might even say "Rolex", "Omega" or "Breitling" on the dial.)
The difference is called quality control, which should be an ongoing process for any manufacturer that intends to stay in business, and which I consequently believe is an area where Sinn needs to pay close attention to.

I do not get overly excited when an occasional hidden defect slips past quality control and becomes apparent only later. I consider that unavoidable and manufacturers can soften the impact of defective goods by a generous, quick and unbureaucratic warranty system. But in essence warranties are a remedy - not a substitute - for flaws that should have been detected by Quality Control (often more appropriately referred to as Quality Assurance - QA) before the goods left the factory.

While I noticed that some owners do take their expectations to an extreme, manufacturers of mechanical quality watches have an obligation to ensure that their products leaves the factory in a condition that makes them fit for service.

When you say: They {Sinn} don't have control of how a ad stores or treats there products? Do you mean to suggest that some Sinn AD's treat Sinn watches harsher than the environment that the eventual buyer exposes the watch to; or that Sinn should pay no attention to the set-up, reputation, expertise and facilities of a dealer they intend to appoint as distributor?

While we need to be realistic with our expectations on how a new watch should perform, we need to be likewise realistic on how manufacturers should keep their part of the bargain, which includes delivering a properly functioning watch.

Discerning customers would find your suggested attitude of "Quality control? What quality control; the manufacturer can always fix it on warranty. So what do you want?" clearly unacceptable.
Particularly it would not be good enough for a manufacturer like Sinn, which depends extensively on Internet sales and a limited network of distributors, with service centers few and far between.

K.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
When I read posts like this, it always reminds me of when I worked in a Toyota car plant in the QC dept. While the big three car plants would be thrilled with results like 10-15 defects out of 100 cars, at Toyota their goal was zero. Anything more was a failure and needed attention. They motivated us to strive for that goal. It was inspiring to work in an atmosphere like that.

This is the kind of attitude I expect from any watch that costs over $1000. I expect the manufacturer to do everything they can to ensure that watch is perfect. Otherwise I'll buy a $300 Nixon or Timex.

Quality is a byproduct of taking pride in your work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
When I read posts like this, it always reminds me of when I worked in a Toyota car plant in the QC dept. While the big three car plants would be thrilled with results like 10-15 defects out of 100 cars, at Toyota their goal was zero. Anything more was a failure and needed attention. They motivated us to strive for that goal. It was inspiring to work in an atmosphere like that.

This is the kind of attitude I expect from any watch that costs over $1000. I expect the manufacturer to do everything they can to ensure that watch is perfect. Otherwise I'll buy a $300 Nixon or Timex.

Quality is a byproduct of taking pride in your work.
Well said! I totally agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
But this beggers the question of whether Toyota actually achieves a 100% fault free production: if so, for what period, then lets move the goal up from 100 to 1000 or 10,000 failure free cars between faults - the point being that high volume cars, watches, washing machines - most manufacturers seek a minimum failure rate as this affects their profit margin.

On this site we will hear of Sinn watch failures and faults more so than we will hear of Omega or Rolex failures - that's the nature of product specific web sites.

It's not all gloom and doom, as many have testified, Sinn is no worse (and may be better) than many other high price watch manufacturers.

I only speak from experience - having 3 Sinn watches and previously owning a bad Toyota!

DMurray
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
But this beggers the question of whether Toyota actually achieves a 100% fault free production: if so, for what period, then lets move the goal up from 100 to 1000 or 10,000 failure free cars between faults - the point being that high volume cars, watches, washing machines - most manufacturers seek a minimum failure rate as this affects their profit margin.

On this site we will hear of Sinn watch failures and faults more so than we will hear of Omega or Rolex failures - that's the nature of product specific web sites.

It's not all gloom and doom, as many have testified, Sinn is no worse (and may be better) than many other high price watch manufacturers.

I only speak from experience - having 3 Sinn watches and previously owning a bad Toyota!

DMurray
Toyota came darn close when I worked there (not because of me), and were playing in a different league than the big three. So the effort made a difference, without a doubt.

I was never implying that Sinn fell into the category of the big three auto makers in my analogy, if it sounded that way, that wasn't my intention. I have nothing but praise for the 5 Sinns I've owned. My point was simply that in watches, as with cars or any manufactured good, the attitude of the manufacturer and the pride of workmanship can go a long way towards reliability and customer satisfaction. Sure toyota's aren't all perfect, but their reputation and reliability speaks for itself.

I expect companies that charge thousands of dollars for a watch to make sure that some of those dollars go towards serious QC before that watch leaves the building. There is no excuse for anything less. No dust under the crystal, no misaligned hands, no jumpy chronographs, no cosmetic issues, timekeeping within spec, its not too much to ask. At the same time, I expect the AD that charges a 100% mark-up to bend over backwards to make sure that the odd watch that isn't perfect is rectified quickly and painlessly. This is a luxury good market and the customer deserves a product crafted with pride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I expect companies that charge thousands of dollars for a watch to make sure that some of those dollars go towards serious QC before that watch leaves the building. There is no excuse for anything less. No dust under the crystal, no misaligned hands, no jumpy chronographs, no cosmetic issues, timekeeping within spec, its not too much to ask. At the same time, I expect the AD that charges a 100% mark-up to bend over backwards to make sure that the odd watch that isn't perfect is rectified quickly and painlessly. This is a luxury good market and the customer deserves a product crafted with pride.
fully agree and I would have same expectations.

In fact I just recently ordered U1 and received a watch with apparent cosmetic problem on a dial. See my other post with a pic.

I wasn't expecting this kind of quality problem from a luxury watch like Sinn. Issues like that should have been spotted and corrected by Sinn QC even before the watch leaves the factory.
If they could miss such obvious flaw on a dial how could Sinn ensure/check the quality of the movement or everything that goes under the 'bonnet'...?

To be honest this worries me a lot and I am looking at other brands atm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
818 Posts
from another forum
"...They politely insisted that this was within their QC specs (loosely defined by them as "If you can't see it at 18 inches it passes specs"). I though this was entirely absurd for a watch of this price."
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top