The Watch Site banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Gents,

a couple of days back Rich pointed out that we may have a different understanding of the "urgency" of the calibre 56 QS issue. Thus I would like to briefly come back to this topic in chapter 031 and ask each of you to again state your opinion regarding the occurence of the problem.

Knowing that the results will probably not be a 100% representative from a statistical point of view IMO we still should obtain a better common understanding of what we are dealing with :)


In the problem statement, I said that approx. 50% of all calibre 56 watches with calendar had a defective QS mechanism - and I need to add, that was something of an educated guess.

I recall two noteable threads, one on this forum (quite a number of us participated in the discussion back then ;-)) and one on Seikoholics, giving the impression that almost ALL calibre 56 watches have a defective QS:

http://www.thewatchsite.com/21-japanese-watch-discussion-forum/31561-5606-movement-doesn-t-last.html
http://seikoholics.yuku.com/topic/12#.VHJU4We0MoY

I thus checked my "collection" spreadsheet, where I document all my watches including what I did regarding repair, etc.

I have had 28 calibre 56s in total including some that have been sold again, not counting 5619s, 17 of which had defective QSs (=61 %).


Let's hear your experiences/thoughts, please :)

Best
Hermann
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Thank you for your comments, Peter and Noah!

So quite a diverse range here, with everything from scarcely to always occuring :)

I would agree that the market prospect per se might be somewhat hard to determine.
From my caseback data I can gather that a 7-digit number of calibre 56s must have been manufactured - so in very simplified terms (and assuming that 10% of these are still in good condition) we should end up with a 5-6 digit figure of watches requiring repair...

The availablility of NOS correctors on eBay or the like is low - plus (as I recently experiences myself) the parts are almost always broken, too.

Thus given a decent pricing I would assume that there SHOULD be enough potential buyers for or solution to be developed...

Please let me know what you think!

Best
Hermann
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks Anthony!

Very interesting, it seems like we might end up with the "ballpark estimate" that I came up with from the beginning in total after all?

You also mention something important, IMO: reasonable price for the part.
What would you guys consider to be an acceptable unit price?

For me it should definitely be below 30 USD, or the repair of 56 LMs will not make sense from an economic point of view.

What do you guys think?

Best
Hermann
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Thanks for the additional comments, guys!

So let me try to summarize:
- an overall QS failure occurence of approx. 50% appears to be valid within certain limits
- the max ceiling of unit cost would be 30 USD
- a price of 20 USD per unit should be anticipated

Everyone ok with this?

@ Anthony: interesting remark - I have noticed some differences here between YJ and eBay. I would agree that on YJ prices do not differ much between pieces with functional vs. non-functional QS, maybe 20-30 %. On eBay however, I would think that the gap is significantly bigger, somewhere in the 50% range, or so I have seen.

Best
Hermann
 
1 - 4 of 4 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