ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
View Poll Results: Does your 32xx movement seem to be 100% ok? | |||
Yes, no issues | 1,031 | 70.04% | |
No, amplitude is low (below 200) but timekeeping is still fine | 61 | 4.14% | |
No, amplitude is low (below 200) and timekeeping is off (>5 s/d) | 380 | 25.82% | |
Voters: 1472. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
29 June 2024, 05:34 PM | #5041 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
Your new 3285 also exhibits a poor isochronism. As a final measurement (after approximately 1-2 months), I recommend to perform again a series of measurements at 0, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 hours to ascertain whether the isochronism has undergone any changes. You probably already thought of that.
|
30 June 2024, 10:04 AM | #5042 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,928
|
Quote:
As much as it goes against the grain and knowing what you know looking under the hood, i'm not so sure that i would pursue it any further and wait and see with it as a point of interest or curiosity until something changes with the timekeeping or something else. Having said that the pull of the 5 year warranty would be the most prudent course of action, especially as accidental damage to the watch can happen at any time which would negate warranty. The run in period has already happened before shipping the watch. They always used to say it was roughly a couple of weeks for them to settle in. |
|
1 July 2024, 02:51 AM | #5043 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Sesame Street
Posts: 6
|
Quote:
Could that at least give a clue as to the problem's origin? |
|
1 July 2024, 04:13 PM | #5044 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
Quote:
Lubrication and epilames have been suspected, read this thread. |
|
1 July 2024, 04:44 PM | #5045 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
32xx movement problem poll and data thread
Does anyone have a watch with a caliber 4131, 7140, 9002?
It would be very interesting to test them (with a timegrapher) immediately after purchase. |
1 July 2024, 07:23 PM | #5046 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Sesame Street
Posts: 6
|
Quote:
I also have seen the posts where it's been confirmed that certain parts are displaying visual wear where none should be, whatever the root cause may be. So, it would be reasonable to ask why changing the pallet fork worked: 1. Is it because it has in fact been modified quietly? 2. Is it because the systemic issue caused premature wear/deformity to the original (possibly difficult to see without magnification)? Another option (couldn't tell if it was already tried during service), is if it's unrelated to the fork itself, and simply the act of uninstalling and reinstalling it solving the problem (perhaps only temporarily)? |
|
2 July 2024, 12:05 AM | #5047 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
From the reported facs that new 32xx watches (2023/24) as well as older (2018/19) but unworn + very little worn 32xx watches have the same type of issue (too low amplitudes after full winding) yields to the conclusion that wear is not the root cause of the 32xx problem. Three supporting posts I quote from a RSC watchmaker:
----- (1) I knew it was worse than we thought when 32xx's come in and have no wear at all, yet run terrible. Or when you serviced one and it's perfectly lubricated, yet it cannot even reach 200 degrees fully wound dial up... (2) Not specific to the 3230, I've unfortunately seen this on all types. Amplitude is checked before the date mechanism is assembled. The plan of action is to start with replacing the balance staff, then pallet fork, escape wheel, rest of the gear train. Pallet fork and balance staff replacement usually get me enough amplitude to barely reach tolerance... (3) Correct, parts that did not show any sign of wear/deterioration at all that are replaced out of desperation to reach a minimum amplitude off 200 degrees after 24hrs. A 24 hours test can be simulated by releasing a couple of ratchet wheel rotations. This problem runs so much deeper than just migration of lubricants and a pivot that occasionally wear out prematurely. ----- I stop here and will not continue with speculations. That is not the objective of this thread! |
2 July 2024, 08:52 AM | #5048 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Brad
Location: Purdue
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 9,147
|
Quote:
I have a 4131. Most accurate and position-independent movement I've owned so far. I have zeroed out my 32xx collection finally. I would sell this Daytona too if it wasn't so accurate. I get +0.3 to +0.6 whether I wear it or leave it on the Orbita for a week. I realize that's not amplitude vs reserve time.
__________________
♛ ✠ Ω 2FA Active |
|
2 July 2024, 12:11 PM | #5049 | |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 X2 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: GA
Posts: 4,610
|
Quote:
|
|
2 July 2024, 12:59 PM | #5050 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Brad
Location: Purdue
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 9,147
|
Quote:
The Daytona truly is pretty damn good. It's easily the best Rolex I've owned and I think I've owned them all except Day Date. I have soured on the brand and what to me feels like fake or overstated luxury. I have been enjoying my Omega 321 which is very legible, has a comically comfortable bracelet, great lume, beautiful movement, and my two remaining VCs. It's safe for now but I won't hold it through service. Once that time comes I'll negotiate that into the sale to a TS here and move on.
__________________
♛ ✠ Ω 2FA Active |
|
2 July 2024, 01:25 PM | #5051 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 1,459
|
Quote:
I think it's appropriate I'm posting this here because I was literally thinking "I must be insane to tolerate being treated like this just for the privilege of purchasing what may be a lemon watch". Anyway, rant over, back to regular 32xx programming... |
|
2 July 2024, 04:31 PM | #5052 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
Quote:
For the many daily guests who read this thread without posting, 70 (!) just at this moment, I want to repeat the following important points: (1) Accuracy of any 32xx watch is NOT the criteria to decide if the caliber has the low amplitude issue or not. (2) The amplitudes, especially in the three vertical positions, are the main criteria. (3) This also applies to the new 2023 watches with 4131, 7140, and 9002 calibers, which all have the Rolex Chronergy escapement. EEpro, do you remember 4668 and 4669? Just kidding, could not resist |
|
2 July 2024, 06:56 PM | #5053 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Brad
Location: Purdue
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 9,147
|
Quote:
I posted that line to avoid the speech, but there it is.
__________________
♛ ✠ Ω 2FA Active |
|
2 July 2024, 10:42 PM | #5054 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Real Name: Tom
Location: SRQ
Watch: 216570 Explorer II
Posts: 156
|
1 of 70, checking in.
This is pretty much the only thread I read on this forum. I think it was over a year ago I decided to pick up a 216570 instead of a 226570 based on what Ive learned here, and I'm happy I did. If I got "the call" today, I'd decline any 32xx model. I don't typically post comments here because I don't have any factual content to add, only my opinions, and I greatly appreciate those experts who have provided facts and data. 1 of 70, back to lurking.
__________________
Life is short - Buy the watch! |
2 July 2024, 10:50 PM | #5055 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
Quote:
|
|
3 July 2024, 06:11 AM | #5056 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,775
|
32xx movement problem poll and data thread
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.