32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[JeanGenie]

Originally Posted by saxo3

A new "Land-Dweller" is rumoured to be powered by a 7135 movement, some people say it looks similar to the 7140 caliber used in the 1908. I don't know.

If true, a 7135 will not replace the 32xx as its functionality is limited to day and time, so it can not become a replacement caliber for the GMT's (3285).

As for the name, whether one likes it or not, Rolex registered the Land-Dweller trademark back in 08/2023.

Conclusion, one day before W&W 2025: the Rolex hype and marketing works perfectly, but the 32xx issues will probably continue to entertain us here.

Out of curiosity (not challenging your comment or anything), how do you know the new 7135 is limited to day and date only?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by JeanGenie

Out of curiosity (not challenging your comment or anything), how do you know the new 7135 is limited to day and date only?

Good question.

The launch (01.04.2025) of a new so-called Land-Dweller has been discussed in many different threads on this watch forum over the past few days. There are also other sources. Here are three examples from outside this forum:

https://www.luxurybazaar.com/grey-ma...qSmRj9JrhEeDV8
https://www.lifestyleasia.com/hk/sty...oogle_vignette
https://professionalwatches.com/role...weller-leaked/

All photos show that this new watch only has the day and date, nothing else. I concluded that the 7135 does not have a GMT hand, hence my post. For sure I don't know anything from a credible source.

[JeanGenie]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Good question.

The launch (01.04.2025) of a new so-called Land-Dweller has been discussed in many different threads on this watch forum over the past few days. There are also other sources. Here are three examples from outside this forum:

https://www.luxurybazaar.com/grey-ma...qSmRj9JrhEeDV8
https://www.lifestyleasia.com/hk/sty...oogle_vignette
https://professionalwatches.com/role...weller-leaked/

All photos show that this new watch only has the day and date, nothing else. I concluded that the 7135 does not have a GMT hand, hence my post. For sure I don't know anything from a credible source.

Super helpful thank you. So it's not crazy to think the 71xx could be the next generation of movements and get introduced into to more models and expanded on? Or is there something about the natural escapement that would make it not possible to use in movements with more complications?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by JeanGenie

Super helpful thank you. So it's not crazy to think the 71xx could be the next generation of movements and get introduced into to more models and expanded on? Or is there something about the natural escapement that would make it not possible to use in movements with more complications?

I have described what can be guessed about the new Land-Dweller and its 7135 caliber, unless this is a bluff by Rolex.

Of course, what you say is possible and not crazy at all. I do not know enough about natural escapements to develop this idea further.

I can not rule out the following possibility: a new 7135 could be the successor of the 3235, as both have the date function. The 3230 would be replaced by a 7130 (non-date models), the 3285 by a 7185 (GMT models) and the 3255 by a 7155. Does this make sense to you?

I am not sure that such caliber numbering would make sense for Rolex, as the 31xx was followed by the 32xx. With their previous numbering logic one would expect a 33xx and not a 71xx?

[Seo]

Originally Posted by saxo3

A new "Land-Dweller" is rumoured to be powered by a 7135 movement, some people say it looks similar to the 7140 caliber used in the 1908. I don't know.

If true, a 7135 will not replace the 32xx as its functionality is limited to day and time, so it can not become a replacement caliber for the GMT's (3285).

As for the name, whether one likes it or not, Rolex registered the Land-Dweller trademark back in 08/2023.

Conclusion, one day before W&W 2025: the Rolex hype and marketing works perfectly, but the 32xx issues will probably continue to entertain us here.

That’s a fair analysis.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by padi56

From that time frame Tudor used mainly ETA movements so movement parts easily available to any watchmaker,but parts for case, dial, bracelet, etc Rolex only.

Hi. Yeah, I meant that, since Rolex doesn't service 70's Tudors any more, there's a chance they won't service today's Tudors after a few decades...and the difference is that there will be no parts on the market for 3rd parties to even use at that time. I can still get parts for my older watches from third parties, although they're getting more expensive.

[cascadez71]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Potential issue with the Tudor movements is they’re essentially non-repairable. Tudor simply movement swaps refurbished movements at service time, and they don’t supply parts to third parties. Searchart was even saying they don’t have service manuals at the RSC. Considering Rolex won’t even service my ‘70s Tudor watches now, that’s a concern, since third parties may not be able to fix the new movements in the future.

I have heard Tudor will just swap, but I imagine for their newer well regarded MT movements, they have to have a manual or able to be repaired no? Or would someone like RSC Dallas they really just remove and ship whole movement back to refurb factory in Switzerland.

[cascadez71]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Hi. Yeah, I meant that, since Rolex doesn't service 70's Tudors any more, there's a chance they won't service today's Tudors after a few decades...and the difference is that there will be no parts on the market for 3rd parties to even use at that time. I can still get parts for my older watches from third parties, although they're getting more expensive.

On the other hand maybe tougher and tougher to get legit Rolex replacement parts for movements in future. Already you need a parts account and seems like they are being tighter and tighter with access.

[Omarion07]

Dynapulse escapement just got announced by Rolex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by cascadez71

I have heard Tudor will just swap, but I imagine for their newer well regarded MT movements, they have to have a manual or able to be repaired no? Or would someone like RSC Dallas they really just remove and ship whole movement back to refurb factory in Switzerland.

Baz at RSC showed us a few years ago that even he didn’t get a full Tudor repair manual, and no one gets a parts account for Tudor.

IIRC, he said new watches under warranty get a swap with a new movement, but post-warranty services get a refurbished movement.

[saxo3]

No upgrade to 32xx movements.

New 5 Hz caliber: 7135.

"Inside the cal. 7135 of the Land-Dweller is a double-wheel, indirect-impulse escapement christened Dynapulse. While on its face Dynapulse might seem to be Rolex’s take on the "natural" escapement, Dynapulse is not a natural escapement."

https://watchesbysjx.com/2025/04/rol...dynapulse.html

[T___]

Hi,

Maybe the syloxi hairspring could solve the issue in 32xx?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by cascadez71

I have heard Tudor will just swap, but I imagine for their newer well regarded MT movements, they have to have a manual or able to be repaired no? Or would someone like RSC Dallas they really just remove and ship whole movement back to refurb factory in Switzerland.

It's basically a swap at a regular service out of warranty.
In some ways, one might as well look at going with a Seiko and just put in an entirely new movement for a fraction of the cost of a movement service.

[hl0m4n]

Originally Posted by hl0m4n

pre and post service.

Update: After a month of normal wear, happy to report watch is still performing great .

[CedCraig]

Regarding the 7135, Rolex is not going tighter than -2/+2 spd, despite the theoretical accuracy improvement of a high beat movement. I think -2/+2 spd is the limit of traditional mechanical movements. Grand Seiko’s high beat movements don’t have tighter accuracy specifications than their traditional mechanical movements and I couldn’t find Zenith’s specs but I doubt they are better than COSC. Omega’s Spirate at 0/+2spd is a different beast and hasn’t been introduced into their wider product line.

So this new movement will be no more accurate than their old movements, yet is sacrificing power reserve. That’s something I don’t care about, but boy does it seem to be a big deal for a lot of people, so the 7135 fails on two counts.

Cool new design escapement design? Not really, since Abraham Louis beat the Crown by what, 200 years? And George Daniels by decades. Ok, figuring out mass production is an achievement, but at this point we don’t know that this escapement will be better.

I think the main reason for the 7135 is to usher in a replacement for the 32xx series of movements. As Rolex releases actual new models (not just dial changes or precious metal models, for example), they will not have 32xx movements. Over the next ten years or so, the 32xx will be phased out, so that by 2035 that series will have had a 20 year run. Since Rolex is going more upscale, their cheapo starter models, like the OP and basic DJ could keep the 32xx a bit longer, to amortize the development costs and to differentiate those budget offerings from the premium offerings with 71xx movements.

What I’m interested in hearing is what the minimum amplitude specifications are for the 7135. I’m willing to bet it’s higher than the 32xx, which I think is 200 degrees.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Regarding the 7135, Rolex is not going tighter than -2/+2 spd, despite the theoretical accuracy improvement of a high beat movement.

Incorrect.

Originally Posted by CedCraig

So this new movement will be no more accurate than their old movements, yet is sacrificing power reserve.

I fully agree.

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Cool new design escapement design? Not really, since Abraham Louis beat the Crown by what, 200 years? And George Daniels by decades. Ok, figuring out mass production is an achievement, but at this point we don’t know that this escapement will be better.

That's right, the 3235 and subsequent models (3255, 3285, 3230) were also hailed to be fantastic by Rolex kool-aid drinking journalists. Very detailed 7135 articles, published on the day (01.04.2025) of the Land-Dweller's launch, were most likely written well in advance by Rolex SA.

Originally Posted by CedCraig

What I’m interested in hearing is what the minimum amplitude specifications are for the 7135. I’m willing to bet it’s higher than the 32xx, which I think is 200 degrees.

The max. and min. amplitudes are not so interesting, but whether the 7135 can be measured with a standard timegrapher, or whether a special instrument is required, as is the case with the Omega co-axial movements, and what the 7135's lift angle is.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Incorrect.

I fully agree.

That's right, the 3235 and subsequent models (3255, 3285, 3230) were also hailed to be fantastic by Rolex kool-aid drinking journalists. Very detailed 7135 articles, published on the day (01.04.2025) of the Land-Dweller's launch, were most likely written well in advance by Rolex SA.

The max. and min. amplitudes are not so interesting, but whether the 7135 can be measured with a standard timegrapher, or whether a special instrument is required, as is the case with the Omega co-axial movements, and what the 7135's lift angle is.

Interesting final point. I guess one way to avoid threads like this is to make a movement that can’t be tested by simple timegraphers.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Incorrect.

I fully agree.

That's right, the 3235 and subsequent models (3255, 3285, 3230) were also hailed to be fantastic by Rolex kool-aid drinking journalists. Very detailed 7135 articles, published on the day (01.04.2025) of the Land-Dweller's launch, were most likely written well in advance by Rolex SA.

The max. and min. amplitudes are not so interesting, but whether the 7135 can be measured with a standard timegrapher, or whether a special instrument is required, as is the case with the Omega co-axial movements, and what the 7135's lift angle is.

With all these facts about the new movement, my (maybe stupid) question is: Why did they even introduce the 7135? I mean, if it is no more accurate, has (a tiny bit) less power reserve, what is the advance? Can it go longer in between services?

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

With all these facts about the new movement, my (maybe stupid) question is: Why did they even introduce the 7135? I mean, if it is no more accurate, has (a tiny bit) less power reserve, what is the advance? Can it go longer in between services?

Potentially longer service intervals, although it has a higher beat rate, which could negate that advantage.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Potentially longer service intervals, although it has a higher beat rate, which could negate that advantage.

I have nothing concrete to base this on, but I believe with modern oils and current movement architecture the high beat rate=more frequent service is a non-issue. Also, I have read often enough about how high beat “could,” “should,” and will need more frequent service, but have yet to see anything that actually proves that. Seems like it’s something we all “know” to be true, but maybe it’s not that big of a deal.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Easy E

I have nothing concrete to base this on, but I believe with modern oils and current movement architecture the high beat rate=more frequent service is a non-issue. Also, I have read often enough about how high beat “could,” “should,” and will need more frequent service, but have yet to see anything that actually proves that. Seems like it’s something we all “know” to be true, but maybe it’s not that big of a deal.

I think it stands to reason that 20% more ticks equals more wear and tear.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

I think it stands to reason that 20% more ticks equals more wear and tear.

Like I said…..

I generally don’t like to make a point in a vacuum, but to isolate one element let’s try this example. Older cars, using natural motor oil needed an oil change every 3000 miles. Now, with modern synthetics you can go 5000, 7500, even 10,000 in some cases. Same is likely on a micro level, no?

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Easy E

Like I said…..

I generally don’t like to make a point in a vacuum, but to isolate one element let’s try this example. Older cars, using natural motor oil needed an oil change every 3000 miles. Now, with modern synthetics you can go 5000, 7500, even 10,000 in some cases. Same is likely on a micro level, no?

Sure, but a motor constantly run at 3000 rpms with synthetics is still going to have a shorter service interval than an engine run constantly at 8000 rpm, all other things being equal.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Easy E

…

Originally Posted by douglasf13

…

How about you both join the many other 7135 'expert' threads and leave this one to data and fact based discussions for 32xx? For example a 3285 BLNR

Just a suggestion!

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by saxo3

How about you both join the many other 7135 'expert' threads and leave this one to data and fact based discussions for 32xx? For example a 3285 BLNR

Just a suggestion!

I don’t think a few posts about a movement that’s been discussed
for a few pages is particularly off-topic, especially since it could be a 32xx replacement.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

I don’t think a few posts about a movement that’s been discussed
for a few pages is particularly off-topic, especially since it could be a 32xx replacement.

I did not mention off-topic. I agree in principle with you, but … please tell us something 32xx relevant that you really know about the new 7135.

[subcsteve]

Dynapulse Escapement:
This new escapement, similar to a natural escapement, uses a silicon lever to transfer energy from twin escape wheels to the balance wheel, minimizing friction and the need for lubrication.

Don't know what a natural escapement is but apparently it will change my life.

[SwissSteph]

Following up on a test idea from "Saxo3," which was to let my "Sea Dweller" rest in the "DU" position without touching it for 3 months, here are my new measurements.

Wound 45-50 rpm records, let them rest for 15 minutes before taking the first measurement. Each position was left in place for 6 minutes before recording the numbers.

Your opinions are welcome

[SwissSteph]

I can no longer edit my above, I wanted to clarify that it refers to #5453 (of January 9, 2025)

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

Following up on a test idea from "Saxo3," which was to let my "Sea Dweller" rest in the "DU" position without touching it for 3 months, here are my new measurements.

Wound 45-50 rpm records, let them rest for 15 minutes before taking the first measurement. Each position was left in place for 6 minutes before recording the numbers.

Your opinions are welcome

Thanks for the update on your Sea-Dweller.

I looked at your Sea-Dweller timegrapher data from January and April 2025 and also at your Explorer II by comparing their isochronism. As a rule of thumb, the best isochronism is when the amplitudes of a mechanical watch decrease and the rates remain stable or almost unchanged.

I plotted the average rate (X-Rate) against the average amplitude (X-Ampl.) and fitted these data, see graph below. The higher the slope 'm', the better the isochronism. In the past, I have found that 32xx watches without caliber issues have good isochronism (high 'm' values).

I conclude as follows:

Your Explorer II is very good, it shows high amplitudes, good isochronism, and the accuracy remains good along the power reserve.

Your Sea-Dweller improved a bit during its 3 months resting time. You see that the isochronism became slightly better. The average amplitude and rate, measured in April 2025, is better until 36 hours compared to the 01/2025 measurements. The change is not dramatic.

In January, I did not reveal the reason for this simple test: It was to measure whether the caliber 3235's performance (amplitudes) remained unchanged, decreased or increased.

Now, it would be interesting to test what happens to the amplitudes and rates if you wear this Sea-Dweller for a few weeks or months and then measure again. I think it is too early for a RSC repair.