32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[tho68]

Here is a full 60h period measurement. The aplitude goes down but the watch is still very acurate (avareged over all 5 positions). After 72h (60h on the timegrapher and 12h on the wrist) +4s.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by tho68

Here is a full 60h period measurement. The aplitude goes down but the watch is still very acurate (avareged over all 5 positions).

Very good summary of results, they are excellent.

I fitted the data of your SUB (3235) and compared it with the GMT (3285) data presented by FlyinHawaiian in post #5259.

Your 3235 watch has an excellent isochronism!
The 3285 watch is not good as anyone can see.

[SwissSteph]

Hello Saxo3,

This morning I started measuring my two watches. In order to save you too much work to help me analyze my data, could you tell me how I can make the same chart as you (it's been a very long time since I made a chart in Excel).

Example of my first measurements

Thank you

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

Hello Saxo3,

This morning I started measuring my two watches. In order to save you too much work to help me analyze my data, could you tell me how I can make the same chart as you (it's been a very long time since I made a chart in Excel).

Example of my first measurements

Thank you

I can't help you with this wish because my graphs are not produced with Excel. By the way, few understand août 2024. Anyhow not correct? I would replace it with the measurement date (27.09.2024). Good luck!

[SwissSteph]

OK, I'll be back Sunday evening with all my charts (for two watches).

[SwissSteph]

Hello everyone,

Further to my recent registration on this forum, the information taken and your replies (thank you “Saxo3”), here is my feedback concerning the tests on my two watches acquired in 2024 (August and September).

For my test protocol, I followed the very clear instructions in message #5002

I made 35 turns to wind my two watches, then let them rest for 20-30 minutes in the “DU” position.

The configuration of my “Weishi 1900” is as follows, 3 changes with respect to the original parameters (the problem is that they are not saved and therefore have to be reset each time the power is switched on):

Below are the times I chose for these tests. Perhaps this will help some people, as you also need to be outside certain periods which should be avoided because of the drop in caliber amplitude, according to what I've also read here (information from “Saxo3”), i.e. from 23:00 to 01:00 and from 05:00 to 08:00:

0 hours - 8:30 am
12 hours - 8.30 pm
24 hours - 8H30 am
36 hours - 8.30 pm
48 hours - 8:30 am
54 hours - 2:30 pm
57 hours - 5:30 pm
60 hours - 8.30 pm

Each test (DU, 6U, 9U, 3U and finally DD) lasted 2:05 minutes (to be sure of having 2 full 60-second periods, as configured in the “Weishi” parameters under the “Period” option (at point 2 on my image) and between each change of position, I waited 2:00 minutes before launching the next test for a new duration of 2:05 minutes.

An excellent video, in French, on how to use a “Timegrapher”, including advice on the important “Period” parameter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKvmpRUopc0)

What do you think of these results, some of the numbers scared me. Your opinions and comments will be very useful to me, especially if I have to make a complaint (with what arguments?) to Rolex (I walk past their main and historic building every morning, even though I've never been inside) ... and THANK YOU for all your help here!

My apologies for my bad English, I always have to translate my text with an automatic translator before posting.

[SwissSteph]

and the rest...

[JETNASH]

Bought a WGYM42 about 2 months ago (from AD)and the watch is only 7 seconds fast over that time period. I think that is amazing, but I’m not as knowledgeable about watches as some on this forum.

Being a new member, just wanted to thank everyone on this forum for their contributions, as it makes for a very informative site.

[Marast-66]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks for the data. You have a very nice watch with a unique dial.

As I said above in #5249, already after 48 hours (2/3 of the PR), your 3285 does not have enough power to maintain all 3 vertical amplitudes at a sufficient level to ensure reasonable timekeeping.

The good news is that your watch does not lose time in dial up position at rest. Your watch is not even 1 year old and still has 4 years of Rolex guarantee.

Personally, I would prefer the same watch with a 3185 movement.

That is the main reason why I sold my sub 41 and purchased good old 14060m


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

Further to my recent registration on this forum, the information taken and your replies (thank you “Saxo3”), here is my feedback concerning the tests on my two watches acquired in 2024 (August and September). I made 35 turns to wind my two watches, then let them rest for 20-30 minutes in the “DU” position.

Thank you for the interesting data from two new 2024 watches.

You followed the timegrapher procedure posted in #5002 very well, except for some minor changes in steps 4) and 6). I am not sure why you made only 35 turns and whether your watches were fully wound or not?

A graphical representation of your data tables is below.

I have added some coloured question marks (?): what happened to the measurements at 54 h (EXP II) and at 48 h and 57 h (SD43)? I do not think that the movements show such large variations.

The graphs for the rates have different scales! A notable drop in the 3H rate for the Sea-Dweller at 36 h looks strange to me.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

What do you think of these results, some of the numbers scared me. Your opinions and comments will be very useful to me, especially if I have to make a complaint (with what arguments?) to Rolex (I walk past their main and historic building every morning, even though I've never been inside) ...

For your 32xx watches, my opinion is as follows:

Neither the 3235 nor the 3285 have optimal amplitude values* after full winding:

*Optimal amplitudes after full winding (t = 0) are DU-DD: 260°-280°; 9U-6U-3U: 230°-240°

Both calibers are above the 200° minimum amplitude tolerance after 24 hours.

Both watches are within the advertised -2/+2 sec/day after full winding.

Based on these two simple facts, I see no justifiable reason for a complaint.

As one can see from your numbers and (my) graphs, the timekeeping is very similar and very good during the first 24 hours, look at the graph below: the Explorer II (3285) is excellent throughout the power reserve, while the Sea-Dweller (3235) loses more time between 24 and 60 hours.

My conclusion is that you should keep an eye on both watches, especially the Sea-Dweller.

[SwissSteph]

Hello “Saxo3”

Thank you for your analysis. I only did 35 laps because I could tell by the noise and the feeling between my fingers that my two watches were fully wound. One was worn every day before and the other on a “Swiss Kubik” winder,

I also found these huge drops very strange. But I always proceeded in exactly the same way, i.e. all the time 2 minutes of “pause” and then 2:05-2:10 of measurements. Then stopped the Weishi to record the information.


Indeed, for point no. 6, as I was testing two watches, one after the other, I left the last one tested, without touching it, until the next measurement, and then I moved it to the next one... but in fact, when changing to the DU position, I didn't always wait so long. I kind of missed this information, so every other time

[SwissSteph]

Originally Posted by saxo3

For your 32xx watches, my opinion is as follows:

Neither the 3235 nor the 3285 have optimal amplitude values* after full winding:

*Optimal amplitudes after full winding (t = 0) are DU-DD: 260°-280°; 9U-6U-3U: 230°-240°

Both calibers are above the 200° minimum amplitude tolerance after 24 hours.

Both watches are within the advertised -2/+2 sec/day after full winding.

Based on these two simple facts, I see no justifiable reason for a complaint.

As one can see from your numbers and (my) graphs, the timekeeping is very similar and very good during the first 24 hours, look at the graph below: the Explorer II (3285) is excellent throughout the power reserve, while the Sea-Dweller (3235) loses more time between 24 and 60 hours.

My conclusion is that you should keep an eye on both watches, especially the Sea-Dweller.

Many, many thanks for your analysis and your very clear conclusion ... which reassures me.

I must confess that I still don't quite understand all the figures I've come across. But in any case, I'm going to follow the information here to better understand and learn!

I'm going to treasure your conclusion graph

I'm going to take a “break” for a few months and redo these same tests (of course I'll come here to show them off!).

THANK YOU again!

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

Hello “Saxo3”

Thank you for your analysis. I only did 35 laps because I could tell by the noise and the feeling between my fingers that my two watches were fully wound. One was worn every day before and the other on a “Swiss Kubik” winder

Which watch was worn every day and which was left on the winder?

[SwissSteph]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Which watch was worn every day and which was left on the winder?

I've been wearing the Explorer II since I bought it in mid-August. Since its purchase (approximately) in mid-September, my Sea Dweller has remained on the winder all the time (never used and on my wrist).

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

I've been wearing the Explorer II since I bought it in mid-August. Since its purchase (approximately) in mid-September, my Sea Dweller has remained on the winder all the time (never used and on my wrist).

OK, so the worn 3285 watch performs better than the 3235 watch that was kept all the time on the watch winder.

Another question: how much time (in hours) elapsed between taking the Explorer off your wrist and starting the timegrapher measurement?

[SwissSteph]

Originally Posted by saxo3

OK, so the worn 3285 watch performs better than the 3235 watch that was kept all the time on the watch winder.

Another question: how much time (in hours) elapsed between taking the Explorer off your wrist and starting the timegrapher measurement?

I had put down my Explorer II for about 20 hours, then wound (35 turns) my two watches at the same time. As explained, I could feel the “slippage” of the spring, sensation + slight noise. Then let the two watches rest for 20-30 minutes before doing my first tests (DU).

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

I had put down my Explorer II for about 20 hours, then wound (35 turns) my two watches at the same time. As explained, I could feel the “slippage” of the spring, sensation + slight noise. Then let the two watches rest for 20-30 minutes before doing my first tests (DU).

OK, so both watches had the same temperature.

[SwissSteph]

Originally Posted by saxo3

OK, so both watches had the same temperature.

yes, totally

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

I've been wearing the Explorer II since I bought it in mid-August. Since its purchase (approximately) in mid-September, my Sea Dweller has remained on the winder all the time (never used and on my wrist).

Suggestion: I would start wearing the Sea-Dweller all the time and put the Explorer on the winder.

In 1-2 months, I would repeat the timegrapher measurements, for both watches but only at t = 0 and t =24, to see what happens to the Sea-Dweller movement.

By the way, the isochronism of your Sea-Dweller is not good ... the Explorer is much better.

[SwissSteph]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Suggestion: I would start wearing the Sea-Dweller all the time and put the Explorer on the winder.

In 1-2 months, I would repeat the timegrapher measurements, for both watches but only at t = 0 and t =24, to see what happens to the Sea-Dweller movement.

By the way, the isochronism of your Sea-Dweller is not good ... the Explorer is much better.

Message and advice well received, I will test this