Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissSteph
Thank you very much for your clear and precise analysis. I was ready to prepare screenshots of my graphs to include with my complaint to Rolex's parent company. So I'm going to "sit back" a little longer before accessing the building's ticket office.
Based on my latest readings, I thought things were really bad. You've given me some hope, thank you.  |
Your newest Sea-Dweller data posted in
#5698 are not outside the Rolex acceptance criteria of the famous -2/+2 sec/day and no amplitude value is lower than 200° after 24 hours, but all 3 vertical amplitudes are (very) close to 200°.
What I don't understand is why your Explorer II bought in 08/2024 is so much better than your Sea-Dweller bought a month later (09/2024). This time the more complicated 3285 is better than a 3235.
Why is the 32xx performance difference so great for watches sold in 2024?
I cannot explain this with one bad sample out of many many sold watches. The low amplitude problem does not seem to be under control on new watches, the situation may be better on serviced 32xx calibers.