If a bezel feels too easy or too hard to turn, I’ll set it aside, get a second opinion, and if need be, send it back to the factory for re-assembly.Ĥ. If bezel slop was going to be a problem, we’d generally spot it in prototyping, and it’s never been a problem with my current factory.įor ease of turning, it’s purely a judgment call. With backlash, it depends on the diameter, but generally, I expect it to be minimal. Anything that doesn’t sound or feel “right” will be set aside for a second opinion (usually from my wife), and if need be, sent back to the factory for re-assembly. With sound and feel, I’m usually just confirming that each bezel sounds and feels more or less the same as all the others. Generally, what I look at is sound, feel, backlash or “slop”, and ease of turning. Thankfully, my factory prefers to use a bezel construction which eliminates any risk of up-down “bounce” in the bezel or incorrect click count. Opinions and preferences regarding bezel action vary even more wildly. Larger diameter bezels will often have a little more play in them than smaller diameter bezels, and bezels can be constructed a number of different ways, with varying amounts of play and bounce, as well as different sound and feel. Bezel action will vary a lot with bezel diameter and construction. Judging bezel “action” is even less of an exact science. If there’s a rotating bezel – inspect the alignment of the insert and check the bezel action. It’s a stupid little thing, but every so often, we’ll find a clasp attached to the bracelet with the logo upside down. Check to make sure the clasp is installed correctly (right-side-up, with logo facing the right direction). I’ll either send those pieces back to the factory for replacement or refinishing, or I’ll use those pieces as parts donors, or I’ll sell them as “irregulars” – pieces sold at a discount, as-is, with the imperfections disclosed prior to sale.Ģ. Visual inspection of case, to include caseback and bezel, looking for any scratches or dings, or uneven patches in the finish.Īny visible marks are an automatic QC failure. My QC process has evolved over time, but currently, this is an as-concise-as-I-can-make-it summary:ġ. The “Vail Standard" – what do I look for? In a nutshell, what I’ve frequently heard is that anything which can’t be seen with a 3x loupe simply “isn’t there”, and even at that, “micro-dust” (tiny particles in the air) may still be visible.īut there’s more to QC than just stuff under the dial, and as such, I and every other person in charge of QC at any company, have had to come up with our own standards for every aspect of operation, fit, finish, and alignment. However, I have found some small amount of consistency among them, and it seems as if most of the industry uses the same standards Rolex does, at least when it comes to stuff under the crystal. What vexes me is the varying answers I’ve gotten when I asked them about QC standards, which only goes to show that those standards are a fungible thing, not something which is agreed upon industry-wide. I’ve been fortunate to know several watchmakers who attended the watchmaking school sponsored by Rolex, as well as watchmakers who went through WOSTEP in Switzerland, and some other watchmakers with unassailable qualifications.
It is only for customers to decide whether or not they are satisfied, and they should decide that before accepting the watch, by which I mean, before they unwrap and wear it, which is an implicit acceptance of its condition, according to most companies' return policies. That is the sole domain of the company doing the selling. In case the point above is too subtle, let me drive it home with some emphasis – it’s not for customers to say what is or is not within QC standards.
If that’s true, and I assure you it is, then it stands to reason that customers aren’t in a position to say what should or should not have passed QC, unless they are intimately familiar with that specific company's QC standards, which seems very unlikely in most scenarios. The topic of QC came up recently in a spirited discussion among some enthusiasts on Facebook, and I thought I should take the opportunity to make a blog post about it, while I'm thinking about it, within the context of today's results.įirst, let me dispel a myth – there is no universal standard for QC. Every company has their own process, and their own standards. I’m writing this at the end of a long day doing quality control, or “QC” inspections on a new model, the NTH DevilRay. Although I look at least that dorky while I'm doing QC.
0 kommentar(er)
