Lucky Watch Winder

Many “cheap” or “affordable” watch winders that are found in the market today are made in China. There’s no doubt about that. Some have performed well and others just fall out after a short period of usage. When I say “perform well”, I mean for duration of a year or so. Why? Because most motors generally have a life-span of about 13 months depending on the number of cycles and the load it carries (axial torque).


It’s really difficult to tell if one brand works better from the other too because within a brand, different batches of motors have different quality standards. So, if you’re lucky, you’ll get a winder unit with a motor lasting a year, if not too bad. But it seems many consumers are happy (or it seems) paying for what they get. Cheaper winders become a disposable device much like printers nowadays.

This was what I experienced after sampling a batch of winders yesterday…


Batch #1
4 units out of 20 were peeling  - Fail

1 out of 20 has loose parts - Pass

6 out of 20 units have lower RPMs than specified - Fail

5 out of 20 units have motors that were noisy and stagger when they move - Fail



Batch #2
3 out of 20 units were scratched - Pass

2 units from the 20 have missing screws - Pass

16 out of 20 units have different RPMs than specified - Fail

10 unit our of the 20 were making grinding sounds when rotating - Fail

1 out of 20 units didn’t power-up - Pass


I’m using a very loose sampling plan from Mil-Std-105E to see the AQL (Acceptance Quality Level). I know it’s not a military product but just the determine if there’s a quality level benchmark somewhere I have to take some sort of standard.

Looking at the statistics, you’ll find that the second batch has a sudden jump in the number of non-spec RPM and noisy motors. The fault lies with the buyer that they didn’t clearly specify what their requirements are and their acceptance quality level. The buyer had only negotiated for the returns of “dead” units and badly scratched units. When I asked for limit samples, the buyer was stunned. There must be a limit sample to show the seller what is the range of “slightly scratched” to “badly scratched” units. This is prevent further arguments during returns. Now they are in a fix because from my experience, the chinese sellers will argue their way out.

With regards to the noisy motors, it’s the same. What are the lowest acceptable noise and the highest? Make 3 sets of such samples – 1 set for the manufacturer/seller, 1 for Marketing and 1 for in-coming inspections.

From the consumer’s point-of-view, they expect every unit to be working, provide the purpose of winding their watches and last for at least a few years. But they wouldn’t know the difficulties the distributor has at the background on what units they received.


If my guess is correct, this company will still sell all the units, minus the ones we detected at the price to make profits. The ones that were rejected were either repaired, salvaged for replacement parts or returned. But I doubt the latter because shipping back to the manufacturer would cost them a bomb.

Hmmm, how are they going to make right the motors with non-spec RPMs?

But anyway, buying a cheap and good watch winder is like winning a lottery. So good luck!

Labels: bad watch winders