Officine Panerai

I have the same problem to my 270 that i brought in end 2008,it stop in march this year and i sent to service for 6 week,when it return i wore it less than 15 day it stop again and i have to sent it to service for another 4 week,now i been checking it everyday even i m not wearing it all the time,hopefully it will not stop again,otherwise i will ask for refund or change to other model.

Alan

Over the last couple of months, I have been boring people on other boards here with various service-oriented tales of woe relating to  less brawny brands than Panerai. I have been loathe to identify too many of them by name, because of my view that the quality control problem isn't brand-limited, but, rather, industry-wide. Panerai isn't a brand I consider myself well-informed about (the 270 is the only one I own), but your post continues to prove the case. Knock wood, my own 270 has run flawlessly for the seven or so months that I have owned it (though the crystal has probably just cracked by virtue of my having jinxed it by that comment), and it presumably has essentially the same movement in it that yours does.  Even when movements are masterpieces of design (and, you know, for a thin-wristed, dress watch kind of guy, I like the 270 a lot), inadequate quality control can turn a wristwatch into a paperweight pretty quickly. I hope you get good news, and get it fast, from Officine Panerai: you're entitled.

Or after 10 days or so?

Are you sedentary most of the day where your body movement isn't enough to fully wind the watch? 

- AT

No message body

Last week..I took the watch off the watchwinder and noticed the watch had stopped. The power reserve was at 7 days when it stopped. I wound the watch up to the 10 day mark and it started running. About 5 hours later, the watch stopped again. The watch was 12 months old. Very disappointing for a $17K watch, especially after reading similar stories here. Never had a problem with the Unitas movement Panerai's and I have had a bunch of them. Watches do break down, but I do not expect that in an expensive watch. It makes you wonder, what exactly is special about these complicated movements? Isn't the point of a movment to accurately keep time and be reliable? Does anything else really matter?

What's the point of buying a brand new car in the US for $200k, but you can also buy one that costs $10k?  Isn't the main point of a car to get you from Point A to Point B?

It's what's inside that costs money, and the things inside, generally, are made in less quantities and takes more time to finish, hence the higher price points.

Just because the $200k is "expensive" doesn't mean it's not going to break down.  A Ferrari or Porsche can have problems a short time after you drive off the lot, ie: a bubble begins to develop in the tire and eventually leads to a flat time.  These are things out of your control, and it unfortunately happens sometimes.  Nothing is perfect.

It's the thought of knowing that you own something that is more "special" and not mass produced and seen everywhere is the reason why we all pay the higher price for luxury goods.

Cheers,
AT

 

 

This message has been edited by AnthonyTsai on 2009-08-17 13:32:24

A $200K Ferrari will outperform a $10K Hyundai in every respect. The 500HP Ferrari will do 200mph and will run a 0-60 in under 4 seconds. The 100 HP Hyundai will do 100 mph and run a 10 second 0-60 time.The expensive technology that you are paying for actually performs a function that the Hyundai could not dream of.. Now back to watches...If I am paying $17K for a watch with a movement that cannot tell time any better than a $100 Unitas movement and will breakdown more often than the $100 movement...why would ANYONE pay for something that performs in an inferior manner, regardless of how "complicated" and "sophisticated' the movement is? The essential requirement of a watch movement is to tell time and do it accurately. The essential requirement of a car engine is to perform. Both a Ferrari and Hyundai engine will perform the essentials---but the Ferrari will perform at a much higher lever than the Hyundai. The movement in a PAM 270 will not perform at a level that is any better than a $100 movement watch.

No message body

If this is how you really feel about watches, then why even buy mechanical watches?  A quartz watch will be more accurate than any mechanical watch IMO

You shouldn't be buying watches with the expectation that a more expensive watch will keep better time than an inexpensive watch.  If you do, there's probably a 50/50 chance you'll always be disappointed.  Not so good odds!

What you are paying extra for is the added movement decoration (which hopefully means more pleasing to the eye), a hopefully not ubiquitous movement, among other things.  You will not be paying for better performance IMO.

Cheers,
AT

It is one thing to say that the great pleasure we derive from mechanical watches comes at the cost of recognizing that they will be in the shop for service more often than their quartz counterparts, or that their utility to us includes aspects separate from their ability to mimic the accuracy of an atomic clock. If either of those statements doesn't ring true to a reader, he/she might well consider buying quartz. However, it is another thing entirely to say that the mere presence of a sophisticated movement somehow absolves its maker from a baseline responsibility for a level of quality control sufficient to avoid the phenomenon being documented in this thread. Forgive me for repeating what I have had occasion to post elsewhere, but it is important for all of us to remember that we are customers, not beta testers.

The customers who buy the early pieces will be the beta testers, even though the movement has been tested in the lab.  I've seen brands who introduce new movements find design flaws and improve on their designs once the early pieces are out.  This shouldn't happen but unfortunately it does

It's the same thing with technology.  Buy the new iPhone and look at the bugs it had when it came out.  Buy the new BMW M5 when it came out several years ago, and u might find 10 quarts of oil on your floor garage in the morning as the result from a defective part.

I'm not excusing Panerai or any other watch brand for their mistakes, as Alec said be it quality control or design flaw.  What matters most now is how these brands perform in their after sales service.  Some will get poor marks and some great marks.  Hopefully Panerai ends up in the latter.

- AT

This message has been edited by AnthonyTsai on 2009-08-17 20:36:07

As you suggest, manufacturers ought not expect to be excused for turning end-users into beta testers because the referee somehow will miss or ignore the first infraction, and will only complain if the follow-up service is inferior. They have already failed to hold up their end of the bargain by sending goods out into the market before they are ready. Anything they do after that to rectify the problem is just triage. Good MASH surgery is still MASH surgery.

The 1st products that roll out in any industry are the ones that will probably have bugs, even have heavy alpha and beta testing prior to rollout.  If you can't tolerate this, then it's probably best to stay away from any new products until all the kinks are sorted out.  So in reference to Panerai, maybe 2 years in period then. 

- AT

To continue with the car analogy and to continue your BMW M5 example.

If the oil leak was caused by a defective part from a supplier, can you still blame BMW? If it is a design issue, do you consider it a bug??

WIthout knowing exactly what validation and testing plans a manufacturer uses, without knowing what Quality Assurance measures they take, any reference to "bugs' is pure speculation and letting the manufacturer off the hook.

What of all the non-bug launches of new technology? Or is it only premium brands (you cite BMW, Apple and Panerai) that can get away with what would kill an less regarded brand?

The more readily we say "this is how things work..." and shrug, the longer things will continue to work that way. I can't begin to know the economic circumstances of the 50% percentile contributor to these boards, but, for me, buying a fine mechanical watch is not an offhand thing. To expect to be treated with respect by the makers who are dependent on us, and the decisions we make with our disposable income, to keep their doors open, does not strike me as unreasonable. In my eyes, being converted to a beta tester does not equate with respect.

I am a test engineer, and even though designers and testers are doing their best in order to come up with a flawless product, the real test is in the field, where there are situations which were never forseen in developing and production design, and not because of negligence. Also, it is important to mention that people in management, sometimes rush decisions which tend to shorten the testing period of time of the product. Thus, in the field, the end-user is the one who feels the pain.

Just my two cents!

Falcon79

 

And this is why new products are never perfect.  You can test all you want in the lab/factory/manufacture to get most of the kinks out, but the final test will be after the is released when millions of people use your product. 

This is why one of my missions here is to explain to people who demand absolute perfection from their Panerai's or any other watch from another manufacture, that watches will always have problems not matter if it costs $5 or $500,000.

Yes, the brands have no excuse to release watches with problems but the reality of the situation is, beta testing is never completely finished until after the consumer uses the product.  It's just a matter of fact IMO.

sdtom states that people here are "elitist and condescending" but with my belief of the above, doesn't that make me the total opposite?  And people who expect their expensive Panerai to not break down are themselves "elistist"?   Just some musings going around in my head right now...

- AT

1. Surely you are aware that  "millions of people" have not, and never will, use the 270. 

2. Surely there is a meaningful gap between expecting a wristwatch to run and demanding "absolute perfection" from it.

3. My own "musings" do not equate the expectation of value for money with elitism, but to each his own.

 

To use sdtom's analogy:

This is not a matter of accuracy or degrees of function (0-60 times, top speed), this is a matter of even perfoming (engine starting) in the first place.

I dislike the artificial dichotomy between quartz and mechanical movements that is trotted out when accuracy or reliability is mentioned. It's not a matter of choosing one or the other, it's a matter of the movement in question perfoming to expectation. Personally, I am not an accuracy freak and am capable of regulating a watch to a my satifaction. But not running at all.....?

That said, I completely agree with the lack of correlation between price-point and reliability, however human nature will tend that way, I guess.

whether the poor performance of the 270 in question  is a result of less-than-optimal quality control or intrinsic design flaw.   Obviously with the later being a bit more tricky to prove, I would venture a guess that this is probably a QC issue.   

With that assumption in mind, I guess the question we need to ask is whether the QC/aftersales service for the brand, or even for the industry in general, is performing on par w/ the price that they're charging.    For Panerai, it could very well be that the problem is not exactly obvious until the introduction of more complicated in-house movement.

 

No message body

We are on the same page! Positively Good Luck!

I would like to offer some of my opinions.

1) First, there is virtually nothing perfect in today world. It's possible that impossible happens; Tiger Woods failed to win the PGA despite we all expected him to win on Sunday.

2) As consumer, we expect better quality over more expensive goods; you pay what you get. However, most of the time, we still hear a lot of quality issues associate with reputable brands. But we also have to know why we buy that particular brand. Like Panerai, its rich history, passion shares by so many purists, and also a sporty watch that you can wear up and down. I do own few Panerais, yes, one under repair, and few running pretty well.

3) It is very true that when an expensive watch we own breakdown, we get upset and very frustrated. It's human nature. It is how far one want to take. If you feel that it doesn't worth to pursue this brand, by all mean, we can move on the other brands. What I would do when my watch has issue is to take it out to the Boutique or AD and even write to the Service Center to verify the issue. If the issue cannot be resolved, I would then take it to the Service Center to repair.

4) But one thing I am very concern is the service. Good brands have to invest in their Service, I expect some issues with my watches, but I cannot accept bad quality service.

Maybe I am an optimistic person. Always look at the brighter sight!

Cheers!

Nien

No message body