Cheers bro. COSC is something what I do appreciate, but honestly I am not a second hunter so I am normally fine with what the watches can achieve. The Metas is nice especially the resistance of 15000 Gauß is what makes sense. My IPad cover is magnetic, put once a watch on top of it, well, bad idea... So I think what comes along he certification is what is interesting to me. Great vid, keep them coming, best
Note: METAS also tests some positions at 33 degrees (+/- 2 degrees), while otherwise stating a stipulated constant temperature of 23 degrees (+/-2) for all of its other tests. What do you think of watch certifications, which ones do you put any value in, which ones are just marketing? What in your view should be the standard certification for watches? What do you think of brands like Rolex & JLC certifying their own watches? Let me know what you think in the comments section.
I appreciate a COSC certification just for the technical standard it represents. Same goes for all the other ones. It's a marketing tool as well and one that works on me and I can live with compared to other hollow slogans. It can go overboard (in my opinion), as shown with the block of text on the Daytona's dial with their own fancy names for their tests...but it's Rolex, marketing is where they excel and their history backs the terms up. Thank you for the nice summary! Edit: Loved the sweeping second with the text on the dial appearing simultaneously!
Thanks! Glad you liked it...took forever to get it looking passable but it was worth it :D I agree, there's still a certain satisfaction to take from these, and while I wouldn't use a certification as a deciding factor, it definitely adds that little bit of extra substance to the watch vs one without a COSC/METAS/Superlative/1000 hours etc
Very nice video!!!!!IMHO, I prefer METAS certification and JLC 1000 Master Certification for two factors- METAS id an Independent organization that test the whole watch after been tested by COSC and cased.That shows the level of Quality Control the watchmaker has achieved and is willing to test it against external parameters. And the JLC because even though is an internal qualification. 40 days is a lot of testing that also shows the Quality Control that JLC has achieved. COSC and Rolex are OK, but Rolex have been having producing Chronometers for decades, so they have a fantastic Quality Control!!!!! I am in favor of producing watches that are super efficient and high performance like any brand that can submit their products to these tests......
True, the METAS certification does do some positions tested at 33 degrees +/-2 degrees, and has a stipulated 23 degrees +/-2 as a constant for all the other tests, it doesn't go to the extremes (4 to 40 degrees) that the Master 1000 does so in the end I kept the emphasis for METAS on the other aspects (which admittedly they put mor emphasis on too, had to do quite a bit of digging on the METAS website to confirm their temeprature requirements). In the same way Master 1000 does also do some antimagnetism testing but since they don't publicly disclose to what extent, i preferred to omit it given the lack of specifics or emphasis from the brand themselves. In any case I've added a note in the pinned comment up top. Thanks for watching & commenting :)
Yeah, good point regarding the fact that COSC only certifies movements. People think that there's something like a COSC watch but there's not. Manipulation during assembly and casing can slightly affect accuracy. Plus, nobody wears the watch in standardized positions in controlled environment. COSC is just a marketing tool. Even low grade movements can be regulated to such standard.
Thanks, didn't know Sup Chr was in 7 positions. For me, precision matters in my daily life so it's the number one criteria. But man, Tudor certainly stepped up packing so much punch for so little.
Without a doubt, TBH the METAS certification and movement decoration update alone would have been enough to shake up the sub 5k category, but on top of that they did it in full ceramic too? Really strong move from Tudor, hopefully it pushes some healthy competition and more start adopting METAS too :)
For me it depends on the watch and it’s purpose- so I do want an accurate daily driver that I can rely on to not need resetting every few days. But for my vintage and lesser worn pieces I’m not so fussed. I also have a timegrapher so it’s nice to see how well they do, my Reverso duoface had incredible results across the board and in all positions which I’d never seen before. My Longines x hodinkee chronometer also did surprisingly well but understandably wasn’t as good or consistent as the JLC. I do wish I could find more info on the 1000hours test.
Yeah, it was admittedly quite hard to find specifics on what JLC does in the test - you’d think that for all the work they do in testing it they’d at least make some more noise about it, but JLC is discreet in everything I guess 🤷🏻♂️ - one things for sure though, from what little I did find out they’re definitely quite thorough :) Thanks for watching and commenting 🙏🏼
Another thing to note is that METAS is a Swiss government agency, and not just some random private/non-profit organization. It is a little suspect that METAS doesn't do their testing at their own facility, but it's nice to know that they also test for magnetism. Overall, the way I look at the certification process is that they provide an additional layer of QA/QC as well as a promise from brands regarding the quality of their engineering. In truth, I think most Swiss companies overpromise on their certifications with the life of a watch, which is why I think Seiko's warranties (that comparatively look awful) might prove to be more honest in the long run.
Hey mate...when you say the movement is certified...does it mean that any one piece from every movement at random is tested or actually every single watch produced is tested and certified? Because if it is just a random single movement piece, then again, the certification doesn't matter because the specific piece you own might not be that accurate...please let me know, cheers!! Amazing video btw :)
ISO 6425 is a global standard, but it does not issue (IMO) a certification, so it’s a standard (which may/may not be adhered to). If the COSC & METAS certification applies only to Swiss companies, this would exclude reputable companies such as Länge Sohne, Seiko, Citizen....Bremont, Roger Smith, ..... I’m interested in certification of accuracy, durability for watches relevant to me; (a) Seiko Prospex, (b) Seiko Presage, (c) Grand Seiko, (d) NOMOS ..... comparative (in-case as JLC pointed out to me) testing is applicable, relevant.... where would I look for that?
METAS and Master Chronometer are used interchangably now - there was only a brief moment (i think maybe one model year?) where Omega used Master Chronometer on the dial before they were METAS certified, but since then they've meant the same thing
From my perspective, any certification can potentially have value as long as the manufacturer is willing to stand behind it and honor warranty claims if a watch is not meeting the criteria in actual use. In those situations, it implies a level of quality control that translates to confidence on the part of the manufacturer. If the manufacturer won't stand behind the certification, however, the certification itself has little to no value. My wife had an OP that was running just over -3 SPD, which is beyond the Superlative Chronometer specs. With such a trivial deviation from that standard, I was very pleasantly surprised to see Rolex stand behind it and address that so that it ran within those stated specs.
Very true, in practical terms these certifications serve as a more transparent grounds for warranty claims and as you mentioned - gives the manufacturer an opportunity to really stand by their product not just for defects but even for if it’s just not performing as well as the certification says it should
Technically yes, though the fact that they did it on their “inferior” brand does show that maybe Rolex doesn’t see Omega as competition for the Rolex brand specifically. Or another way to look at it is that they do see Omega as competition but prefer to undercut them vs making changes to the Rolex certification. At the end of the day it’s hard to know what Rolex is thinking, but whichever way we look at it - Omega & Tudor adopting METAS will hopefully push more companies to adopt it as a new standard (since now tons of companies use COSC it’s less of a value add compared to what it used to be)
So true, the biggest advantage to these certifications is they give clear parameters on what a watch promises to do and failing them triggers a warranty claim. I also wouldn't be surprised if the rigorous testing from METAS helped to give Omega the confidence to up their warranty to 5 years as well
I never knew the master chronometer certification was done in only 24h. Rolex will always amaze me, their only goal is cost effectiveness and maximizing profits it seems. While a certification certainly adds value to a watch, to me the sheer quality of the movement is what I look for, a well born movement can be fine tuned well within cosc certification by almost anybody knowledgable enough. At the same time, I can't help but admiring Jlc for their way of doing things: a 1000h battery of test seems like a very serious and extensive way of garantizing a watch accuracy, kudos to them for doing it without over-marketing it or charging unreasonable amounts. That's what I would call added value as opposed to Rolex cuting corners in every way imaginable.
Have to agree, JLC is really taking things beyond the extra mile, and to think they've been doing the 1000 hours since the 90s! I think that's one of the key reasons they were able to increase their warranty to 8 years, after enough time collecting data they probably realized that with over 40 days of quality control their watches weren't coming in for service/issues in 2, or even 5 years so they just put their money where their mouth was and bumped it up to 8 years.
Now breitling needs to be metas certified since they were try to make their whole lineup cosc in the early 2000s they were part of the big mid 3 between Rolex omega then breitling now they’re getting lost hopefully they don’t get like tag
I wouldn't be surprised if Breitling is the next to start with METAS certification - especially since they lend their B01 to Tudor for the BB Chrono, if Tudor ends up going METAS across all the Black Bays then they'll need to update the B01 so I'm guessing from there Breitling will update the B01 to meet that. It'll be interesting to see what Breitling does though since currently they don't use silicon parts or focus much on anti-magnetism, but maybe they'll bring back some of the techniques they used on the B01 Chronoworks :D
I think that what Omega is doing with METAS is great as they make it possible for the watch owner to see the tests results for his watch. I think that the manufacturers of watches which undergo in-house or third party certifications should all allow the owner to see his watch tests results, traceability, etc...
Completely agree, Omega really sets a great standard by sharing the test results for each watch, as well as clearly outlining the standards that they have to adhere to for METAS - admittedly the Rolex & JLC ones took quite a lot of digging to get specifics on what's tested
With Metas, Omega provides the tests results, tolerances, etc… it is all traceable which for a measurement engineer like myself is great. I would like for IWC, JLC, Rolex and others to adopt same. Afterall a watch is an instrument which must be calibrated and tested / recalibrated and recertified at a frequency which depends on its inherent propensity to deviate. In fact I wonder if it will become an industry standard given that most brands are in competition and are looking to increase their products perceived value… One question though: Will serviced watches be Metas re-certified hence potentially leading to an historical certification ?
Cheers bro. COSC is something what I do appreciate, but honestly I am not a second hunter so I am normally fine with what the watches can achieve. The Metas is nice especially the resistance of 15000 Gauß is what makes sense. My IPad cover is magnetic, put once a watch on top of it, well, bad idea... So I think what comes along he certification is what is interesting to me. Great vid, keep them coming, best
Thanks as always bro! Yeah I completely forgot to mention stuff like iPad & phone covers, it’s crazy how many small magnets we have in daily life
Note: METAS also tests some positions at 33 degrees (+/- 2 degrees), while otherwise stating a stipulated constant temperature of 23 degrees (+/-2) for all of its other tests.
What do you think of watch certifications, which ones do you put any value in, which ones are just marketing? What in your view should be the standard certification for watches? What do you think of brands like Rolex & JLC certifying their own watches? Let me know what you think in the comments section.
I appreciate a COSC certification just for the technical standard it represents. Same goes for all the other ones. It's a marketing tool as well and one that works on me and I can live with compared to other hollow slogans. It can go overboard (in my opinion), as shown with the block of text on the Daytona's dial with their own fancy names for their tests...but it's Rolex, marketing is where they excel and their history backs the terms up.
Thank you for the nice summary!
Edit: Loved the sweeping second with the text on the dial appearing simultaneously!
Thanks! Glad you liked it...took forever to get it looking passable but it was worth it :D
I agree, there's still a certain satisfaction to take from these, and while I wouldn't use a certification as a deciding factor, it definitely adds that little bit of extra substance to the watch vs one without a COSC/METAS/Superlative/1000 hours etc
Very nice video!!!!!IMHO, I prefer METAS certification and JLC 1000 Master Certification for two factors- METAS id an Independent organization that test the whole watch after been tested by COSC and cased.That shows the level of Quality Control the watchmaker has achieved and is willing to test it against external parameters. And the JLC because even though is an internal qualification. 40 days is a lot of testing that also shows the Quality Control that JLC has achieved. COSC and Rolex are OK, but Rolex have been having producing Chronometers for decades, so they have a fantastic Quality Control!!!!! I am in favor of producing watches that are super efficient and high performance like any brand that can submit their products to these tests......
BOTH 1000 Hours and METAS include testing over a temperature range. Your vide infers that the temperature range test is 1000 Hours test only.
True, the METAS certification does do some positions tested at 33 degrees +/-2 degrees, and has a stipulated 23 degrees +/-2 as a constant for all the other tests, it doesn't go to the extremes (4 to 40 degrees) that the Master 1000 does so in the end I kept the emphasis for METAS on the other aspects (which admittedly they put mor emphasis on too, had to do quite a bit of digging on the METAS website to confirm their temeprature requirements). In the same way Master 1000 does also do some antimagnetism testing but since they don't publicly disclose to what extent, i preferred to omit it given the lack of specifics or emphasis from the brand themselves.
In any case I've added a note in the pinned comment up top. Thanks for watching & commenting :)
Yeah, good point regarding the fact that COSC only certifies movements. People think that there's something like a COSC watch but there's not. Manipulation during assembly and casing can slightly affect accuracy. Plus, nobody wears the watch in standardized positions in controlled environment. COSC is just a marketing tool. Even low grade movements can be regulated to such standard.
Another great video my friend, I always learn so much from you!
Thanks as always bro 🙏🏼
Very informative! Thanks for this information. Just got my first Rolex, and it's great to know what Superlative Chronometer actually means.
Thanks! Glad you liked it! :) Which Rolex did you get?
Thanks, didn't know Sup Chr was in 7 positions. For me, precision matters in my daily life so it's the number one criteria. But man, Tudor certainly stepped up packing so much punch for so little.
Without a doubt, TBH the METAS certification and movement decoration update alone would have been enough to shake up the sub 5k category, but on top of that they did it in full ceramic too? Really strong move from Tudor, hopefully it pushes some healthy competition and more start adopting METAS too :)
For me it depends on the watch and it’s purpose- so I do want an accurate daily driver that I can rely on to not need resetting every few days. But for my vintage and lesser worn pieces I’m not so fussed. I also have a timegrapher so it’s nice to see how well they do, my Reverso duoface had incredible results across the board and in all positions which I’d never seen before. My Longines x hodinkee chronometer also did surprisingly well but understandably wasn’t as good or consistent as the JLC.
I do wish I could find more info on the 1000hours test.
Yeah, it was admittedly quite hard to find specifics on what JLC does in the test - you’d think that for all the work they do in testing it they’d at least make some more noise about it, but JLC is discreet in everything I guess 🤷🏻♂️ - one things for sure though, from what little I did find out they’re definitely quite thorough :)
Thanks for watching and commenting 🙏🏼
Interesting video. Regards, #WR4K
Thanks :)
Another thing to note is that METAS is a Swiss government agency, and not just some random private/non-profit organization. It is a little suspect that METAS doesn't do their testing at their own facility, but it's nice to know that they also test for magnetism. Overall, the way I look at the certification process is that they provide an additional layer of QA/QC as well as a promise from brands regarding the quality of their engineering. In truth, I think most Swiss companies overpromise on their certifications with the life of a watch, which is why I think Seiko's warranties (that comparatively look awful) might prove to be more honest in the long run.
Hey mate...when you say the movement is certified...does it mean that any one piece from every movement at random is tested or actually every single watch produced is tested and certified? Because if it is just a random single movement piece, then again, the certification doesn't matter because the specific piece you own might not be that accurate...please let me know, cheers!! Amazing video btw :)
METAS is every movement, in fact when you buy one, you get a link to look up the results to YOUR watch.
3:40 no for god's sake. i wanna buy atleast one automatic mechanical watch that is actually a watch that shows time "accurately" for daily driver.
ISO 6425 is a global standard, but it does not issue (IMO) a certification, so it’s a standard (which may/may not be adhered to). If the COSC & METAS certification applies only to Swiss companies, this would exclude reputable companies such as Länge Sohne, Seiko, Citizen....Bremont, Roger Smith, ..... I’m interested in certification of accuracy, durability for watches relevant to me; (a) Seiko Prospex, (b) Seiko Presage, (c) Grand Seiko, (d) NOMOS ..... comparative (in-case as JLC pointed out to me) testing is applicable, relevant.... where would I look for that?
great info. how about vs master chronometer?
METAS and Master Chronometer are used interchangably now - there was only a brief moment (i think maybe one model year?) where Omega used Master Chronometer on the dial before they were METAS certified, but since then they've meant the same thing
Yeah Swiss movements only after Seiko literally single handed put them to shame lol and they are still putting Swiss watches to shame.
From my perspective, any certification can potentially have value as long as the manufacturer is willing to stand behind it and honor warranty claims if a watch is not meeting the criteria in actual use. In those situations, it implies a level of quality control that translates to confidence on the part of the manufacturer. If the manufacturer won't stand behind the certification, however, the certification itself has little to no value.
My wife had an OP that was running just over -3 SPD, which is beyond the Superlative Chronometer specs. With such a trivial deviation from that standard, I was very pleasantly surprised to see Rolex stand behind it and address that so that it ran within those stated specs.
Very true, in practical terms these certifications serve as a more transparent grounds for warranty claims and as you mentioned - gives the manufacturer an opportunity to really stand by their product not just for defects but even for if it’s just not performing as well as the certification says it should
New to this here, but isnt tudor own by rolex? So isnt tudor taking in metas already a rolex response to the omega metas in term of competition?
Technically yes, though the fact that they did it on their “inferior” brand does show that maybe Rolex doesn’t see Omega as competition for the Rolex brand specifically.
Or another way to look at it is that they do see Omega as competition but prefer to undercut them vs making changes to the Rolex certification.
At the end of the day it’s hard to know what Rolex is thinking, but whichever way we look at it - Omega & Tudor adopting METAS will hopefully push more companies to adopt it as a new standard (since now tons of companies use COSC it’s less of a value add compared to what it used to be)
To me, YES!
They matter in terms of warranty. Had my omega Globemaster sent in because it wasn't running within METAS. Had it done without charge.
So true, the biggest advantage to these certifications is they give clear parameters on what a watch promises to do and failing them triggers a warranty claim. I also wouldn't be surprised if the rigorous testing from METAS helped to give Omega the confidence to up their warranty to 5 years as well
I never knew the master chronometer certification was done in only 24h.
Rolex will always amaze me, their only goal is cost effectiveness and maximizing profits it seems.
While a certification certainly adds value to a watch, to me the sheer quality of the movement is what I look for, a well born movement can be fine tuned well within cosc certification by almost anybody knowledgable enough.
At the same time, I can't help but admiring Jlc for their way of doing things:
a 1000h battery of test seems like a very serious and extensive way of garantizing a watch accuracy, kudos to them for doing it without over-marketing it or charging unreasonable amounts.
That's what I would call added value as opposed to Rolex cuting corners in every way imaginable.
Have to agree, JLC is really taking things beyond the extra mile, and to think they've been doing the 1000 hours since the 90s! I think that's one of the key reasons they were able to increase their warranty to 8 years, after enough time collecting data they probably realized that with over 40 days of quality control their watches weren't coming in for service/issues in 2, or even 5 years so they just put their money where their mouth was and bumped it up to 8 years.
Now breitling needs to be metas certified since they were try to make their whole lineup cosc in the early 2000s they were part of the big mid 3 between Rolex omega then breitling now they’re getting lost hopefully they don’t get like tag
I wouldn't be surprised if Breitling is the next to start with METAS certification - especially since they lend their B01 to Tudor for the BB Chrono, if Tudor ends up going METAS across all the Black Bays then they'll need to update the B01 so I'm guessing from there Breitling will update the B01 to meet that.
It'll be interesting to see what Breitling does though since currently they don't use silicon parts or focus much on anti-magnetism, but maybe they'll bring back some of the techniques they used on the B01 Chronoworks :D
Maybe cosc should up it’s game
Do they even matter? Absolutely not since quartz movements came onto the market.
freak the f out. This is so true...so true.
yeah...first time i dropped my Omega...i think my heart stopped
I think that what Omega is doing with METAS is great as they make it possible for the watch owner to see the tests results for his watch. I think that the manufacturers of watches which undergo in-house or third party certifications should all allow the owner to see his watch tests results, traceability, etc...
Completely agree, Omega really sets a great standard by sharing the test results for each watch, as well as clearly outlining the standards that they have to adhere to for METAS - admittedly the Rolex & JLC ones took quite a lot of digging to get specifics on what's tested
With Metas, Omega provides the tests results, tolerances, etc… it is all traceable which for a measurement engineer like myself is great. I would like for IWC, JLC, Rolex and others to adopt same. Afterall a watch is an instrument which must be calibrated and tested / recalibrated and recertified at a frequency which depends on its inherent propensity to deviate. In fact I wonder if it will become an industry standard given that most brands are in competition and are looking to increase their products perceived value…
One question though: Will serviced watches be Metas re-certified hence potentially leading to an historical certification ?