32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[MikeyV]

The failure rate is 100% if you let it run long enough.

My watch has run continuously for 7 years - been serviced twice and is slowing (very gradually this time) again.

One service at Dallas, one by local AD service - both before 5 years. The first run, and the run after service at Dallas lasted about 9 months before slowing dramatically (-8 to -10 spd). The service from the local AD has been running well for almost two years - which is great. But I have noticed it slowing slightly. Upon receipt - it would run fast by about 1-1.5 spd (depending on resting position) and now - nearly two years later it loses about a half second every onther day. So still very good - but I can't seem to get it to gain overnight anymore - regargless of position.

Saxo - I'm so sorry to say that I still haven't got a timegrapher - but I think we all know that the amplitude is falling - albeit slowly.

I'm enjoying the improved timekeeping - I REALLY wonder what the guy at the SD did versus what Dallas did two times.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

The failure rate is 100% if you let it run long enough.

My watch has run continuously for 7 years - been serviced twice and is slowing (very gradually this time) again.

Thank you for the update. I'm very sorry to hear that, Mike.

You described your Datejust 41 Ref. 126333 (3235), which you purchased new in June 2018?

I haven't seen anyone observe a 32xx watch continuously for such a long period.

For new members, see posts 1415 and 1416 from June 2021.

Originally Posted by MikeyV

...but I think we all know that the amplitude is falling - albeit slowly.

Yes. One new 32xx watch - 2 repairs before 5 years - 100% failure rate after 7 years - next repair to be paid - sell it?

[belutak]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thank you for the update. I'm very sorry to hear that, Mike.

You described your Datejust 41 Ref. 126333 (3235), which you purchased new in June 2018?

I haven't seen anyone observe a 32xx watch continuously for such a long period.

For new members, see posts 1415 and 1416 from June 2021.

Yes. One new 32xx watch - 2 repairs before 5 years - 100% failure rate after 7 years - next repair to be paid - sell it?

My Sub41 32xx is back to RSC the 5th time in its first 12 months of life. After suddenly dropping time overnight on previous occasions it is now running 5s fast.
Interestingly, Melbourne RSC is apparently inundated with repairs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by belutak

My Sub41 32xx is back to RSC the 5th time in its first 12 months of life. After suddenly dropping time overnight on previous occasions it is now running 5s fast.
Interestingly, Melbourne RSC is apparently inundated with repairs.

You posted aleady a lot of details about this Submariner in this thread. Maybe you can list what RSC did each time?

[1William]

Originally Posted by belutak

My Sub41 32xx is back to RSC the 5th time in its first 12 months of life. After suddenly dropping time overnight on previous occasions it is now running 5s fast.
Interestingly, Melbourne RSC is apparently inundated with repairs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. Five times in a year. I would be asking for a new watch.

[nikola0406]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

The failure rate is 100% if you let it run long enough.

As is for any other caliber out-here :)

[cascadez71]

Originally Posted by belutak

My Sub41 32xx is back to RSC the 5th time in its first 12 months of life. After suddenly dropping time overnight on previous occasions it is now running 5s fast.
Interestingly, Melbourne RSC is apparently inundated with repairs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Trade it in for a 3135 Sub. That's what I did. Came out ahead even with full service on new-to-me 3135. Granted I went 126610LV to 116610LN.

[MikeyV]

Originally Posted by nikola0406

As is for any other caliber out-here :)

Yeah, maybe - but I'm tired of people with eighteen watches that say their 32xx runs as it should.

If you wear a watch once a month then it takes 20 years for it to run as much as some other watch that gets worn daily and - literally - never stops.

But that's what a Rolex is supposed to do - run well for 10 years in any condition. That's why it pisses people off when they don't do it.

I don't care what PADI says.

[nikola0406]

Definitely 32xx should run at least 10 years without any issues, because service interval is 10 years. But that is not the case here as we can see

[CharlesN]

we are seeing the demise of the 32xx range of movemets and the replacement by the 71xx movements.

The Land-Dweller is the first to arrive with the 7135 movement.

It seems to be a very different movement with lots of new specifications.

Its 5hz for a start … That should straight away make it far more accurate and precise.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

The Land-Dweller is the first to arrive with the 7135 movement.

Its 5hz for a start … That should straight away make it far more accurate and precise.

That's a wrong conclusion!

[nikola0406]

Yes, and who knows how many "baby issues" there

[TheVTCGuy]

OK… so… update here, with some disappointing news…. Kind of. So, my 126619 has been exceptionally accurate from the two years I have owned it, purchasing it brand new from an AD. I don’t have a timegrapher, (more on that later) but just using time.gov or my internet time, it was one or two seconds off per day off every time I checked it. I remember one time, over a period of one month, it had lost six seconds… TOTAL. I was very happy with this precision. Over the previous several weeks however, it started to lose time, quickly. Within just a couple weeks it went from five seconds a day slow, to eight, to 10 to 15, time to go in. So, the AD took it in and sent it to RSC. Now, Saxo suggested I get before and after Amplitude and other readings, which actually was a good idea, however I don’t own a grapher, but the watchmaker at the local AD is a long-acquaintance of mine. I called him and asked him to take a reading before sending it in and then when it came back. He said he’d be glad to and off the watch went.

Ahem…. Now the disappointing news. Well, the watch came back very quickly, more on that in a sec, and…. My watchmaker friend had left the AD. They are still looking for one by the way, any watchmaker out there want to work in San Diego? I can put you in direct contact with the store manager/decision maker, getting back to the watch… I have only had it three days, but so far it is running at -1 second per day, so while I can’t provide timegrapher numbers, I will say it is running extremely efficiently and much better. (Sorry Saxo, I couldn’t get those numbers )

Now, an interesting part: One Sales Rep, whom I have also known for years, and I had a discussion about the “repair.” I specifically brought up the 32 series and he nodded like he knew what I was talking about, h quietly told me: “I guarantee all they did was replace the mainspring, it will be fine now.” I found that really interesting. Now, he is not a watchmaker, but has been with that AD for several-several years, so it wouldn’t surprise me he knew what he was talking about. Could it be, that mainspring is the source of the issue? And that Rolex has come up with a new “model” of hairspring to address it? Of course, Rolex will never admit to it, but……

PS, Serious about the watchmaker position, anyone PM me for details.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

OK… so… update here, with some disappointing news…. Kind of. So, my 126619 has been exceptionally accurate from the two years I have owned it, purchasing it brand new from an AD. I don’t have a timegrapher, (more on that later) but just using time.gov or my internet time, it was one or two seconds off per day off every time I checked it. I remember one time, over a period of one month, it had lost six seconds… TOTAL. I was very happy with this precision. Over the previous several weeks however, it started to lose time, quickly. Within just a couple weeks it went from five seconds a day slow, to eight, to 10 to 15, time to go in. So, the AD took it in and sent it to RSC. Now, Saxo suggested I get before and after Amplitude and other readings, which actually was a good idea, however I don’t own a grapher, but the watchmaker at the local AD is a long-acquaintance of mine. I called him and asked him to take a reading before sending it in and then when it came back. He said he’d be glad to and off the watch went.

Ahem…. Now the disappointing news. Well, the watch came back very quickly, more on that in a sec, and…. My watchmaker friend had left the AD. They are still looking for one by the way, any watchmaker out there want to work in San Diego? I can put you in direct contact with the store manager/decision maker, getting back to the watch… I have only had it three days, but so far it is running at -1 second per day, so while I can’t provide timegrapher numbers, I will say it is running extremely efficiently and much better. (Sorry Saxo, I couldn’t get those numbers )

Now, an interesting part: One Sales Rep, whom I have also known for years, and I had a discussion about the “repair.” I specifically brought up the 32 series and he nodded like he knew what I was talking about, h quietly told me: “I guarantee all they did was replace the mainspring, it will be fine now.” I found that really interesting. Now, he is not a watchmaker, but has been with that AD for several-several years, so it wouldn’t surprise me he knew what he was talking about. Could it be, that mainspring is the source of the issue? And that Rolex has come up with a new “model” of hairspring to address it? Of course, Rolex will never admit to it, but……

PS, Serious about the watchmaker position, anyone PM me for details.

If it's something as simple as the mainspring, would beg the question as to why they wouldn't just install the "correct" version straight from the factory. Esp since we know these problems have gone on a while and yet there are even 2024 purchases that have gone bad.

OTOH, I think some people here have posited the theory that maybe the issue is resolved and the newish watches that are having issues still have older manufactured movements inside? Dovetailing with what Bas said a while ago about seeing many less of these watches coming for repair.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

OK… so… update here, with some disappointing news…. Kind of. So, my 126619 has been exceptionally accurate from the two years I have owned it, purchasing it brand new from an AD. I don’t have a timegrapher, (more on that later) but just using time.gov or my internet time, it was one or two seconds off per day off every time I checked it. I remember one time, over a period of one month, it had lost six seconds… TOTAL. I was very happy with this precision. Over the previous several weeks however, it started to lose time, quickly. Within just a couple weeks it went from five seconds a day slow, to eight, to 10 to 15, time to go in. So, the AD took it in and sent it to RSC. Now, Saxo suggested I get before and after Amplitude and other readings, which actually was a good idea, however I don’t own a grapher, but the watchmaker at the local AD is a long-acquaintance of mine. I called him and asked him to take a reading before sending it in and then when it came back. He said he’d be glad to and off the watch went.

Ahem…. Now the disappointing news. Well, the watch came back very quickly, more on that in a sec, and…. My watchmaker friend had left the AD. They are still looking for one by the way, any watchmaker out there want to work in San Diego? I can put you in direct contact with the store manager/decision maker, getting back to the watch… I have only had it three days, but so far it is running at -1 second per day, so while I can’t provide timegrapher numbers, I will say it is running extremely efficiently and much better. (Sorry Saxo, I couldn’t get those numbers )

Now, an interesting part: One Sales Rep, whom I have also known for years, and I had a discussion about the “repair.” I specifically brought up the 32 series and he nodded like he knew what I was talking about, h quietly told me: “I guarantee all they did was replace the mainspring, it will be fine now.” I found that really interesting. Now, he is not a watchmaker, but has been with that AD for several-several years, so it wouldn’t surprise me he knew what he was talking about. Could it be, that mainspring is the source of the issue? And that Rolex has come up with a new “model” of hairspring to address it? Of course, Rolex will never admit to it, but……

PS, Serious about the watchmaker position, anyone PM me for details.

Paul, thanks for following up on your service issue. Yours is has pretty much set the land speed record for turnaround time. I’m like maybe the least qualified guy in the entire watch community to make this statement, but I seriously doubt it’s the mainspring and only the mainspring. IDK, maybe it is, but I feel like that has been discussed before and if that’s all it is I feel like we would have other feedback. Anyway, glad yours is back and quick. I hope it runs great for years to come.


I would still like to know how old a movement is in a brand new watch.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

OK… so… update here, with some disappointing news…. Kind of. So, my 126619 has been exceptionally accurate from the two years I have owned it, purchasing it brand new from an AD. I don’t have a timegrapher, (more on that later) but just using time.gov or my internet time, it was one or two seconds off per day off every time I checked it. I remember one time, over a period of one month, it had lost six seconds… TOTAL. I was very happy with this precision. Over the previous several weeks however, it started to lose time, quickly. Within just a couple weeks it went from five seconds a day slow, to eight, to 10 to 15, time to go in. So, the AD took it in and sent it to RSC. Now, Saxo suggested I get before and after Amplitude and other readings, which actually was a good idea, however I don’t own a grapher, but the watchmaker at the local AD is a long-acquaintance of mine. I called him and asked him to take a reading before sending it in and then when it came back. He said he’d be glad to and off the watch went.

Ahem…. Now the disappointing news. Well, the watch came back very quickly, more on that in a sec, and…. My watchmaker friend had left the AD. They are still looking for one by the way, any watchmaker out there want to work in San Diego? I can put you in direct contact with the store manager/decision maker, getting back to the watch… I have only had it three days, but so far it is running at -1 second per day, so while I can’t provide timegrapher numbers, I will say it is running extremely efficiently and much better. (Sorry Saxo, I couldn’t get those numbers )

Now, an interesting part: One Sales Rep, whom I have also known for years, and I had a discussion about the “repair.” I specifically brought up the 32 series and he nodded like he knew what I was talking about, h quietly told me: “I guarantee all they did was replace the mainspring, it will be fine now.” I found that really interesting. Now, he is not a watchmaker, but has been with that AD for several-several years, so it wouldn’t surprise me he knew what he was talking about. Could it be, that mainspring is the source of the issue? And that Rolex has come up with a new “model” of hairspring to address it? Of course, Rolex will never admit to it, but……

PS, Serious about the watchmaker position, anyone PM me for details.

Paul … thanks for the detailed update following the other thread you started.

What did we learn from your 3235 watch?
- Your 126619 (3235) ran very well for 2 years,
- Then, within a short time, it decreased rapidly to about -15 sec/day.
- You don't have a timegrapher … and you don't want one.
- The RSC repair and turnaround was very quick (2 weeks + 1 day).
- The posted RSC document says nothing.
- The AD watchmaker you asked to measure before RSC repair has now left the AD.
- The AD salesperson guarantees that RSC only replaced the mainspring.
- Your watch is running now (for 3 days) with about -1 sec/day.

(1) My suggestion:
Go back to your AD in San Diego and ask a watchmaker to use their timegrapher to measure your watch. They certainly have a (very) good machine. Ask them for the small timegrapher printout showing all the results (amplitudes, rates, beat error). Only this shows us the current movement condition of your watch after the RSC repair.

(2) My view on the mainspring:
- I am convinced that the 32xx mainspring is NOT the root cause of the caliber issues. Here are some technical facts that contradict the idea that the mainspring is the origin of the 32xx issues:

- A weak mainspring would significantly reduce the power reserve of all 32xx watches, which is 70 hours. This is not the case. I have collected (a lot of) data for many 32xx power reserve measurements, also posted in this thread. Even at very low amplitudes the power reserve remains quite high, i.e., above 69-70 hours.

- A defective mainspring would result in low amplitudes of all 5 positions. This is not the case. The 3 vertical positions (3U, 6U, 9U) are the first to be affected, with the 2 horizontal positions (DU, DD) still showing quite high amplitudes. This can be explained by the fact that friction is higher in the vertical positions than in the horizontal positions, independent of the mainspring power. The horizontal positions (which still have high amplitudes) keep a 32xx caliber running quite well, so the owner does not see a drop in timekeeping for a long time. Only when the horizontal amplitudes also decrease significantly will the owner observe a rapid decrease in timekeeping, which is likely what you observed: a rapid change within a few weeks, because the horizontal amplitudes, in addition to the vertical ones, also decreased.

- The 32xx mainspring is assembled in a thin-walled barrel. It is known that the mainspring cannot be exchanged alone due to the thin barrel wall, which makes the process rather complicated. Therefore, during 32xx servicing, RSC replaces the entire assembly, as was also done for your watch. That is probably what your salesperson knows. His claim about the mainspring is fantasy land (to avoid saying AD nonsense).

We remember that the first two movements in the 32xx family, the 3235 and the 3255, were introduced 10 (ten) years ago, in 2015! If the mainspring were the root cause, Rolex would have resolved this well-documented caliber issue many years ago.

Paul, I hope your watch is now running smoothly and will continue to do so for many years. Although, I doubt it. Your observed timekeeping on your wrist is about -1 sec/day. This is still within the expected range of -2/+2 seconds per day specified by Rolex SA as "precision after casing" – precision, not accuracy and not wrist timekeeping. Don't start thinking about these terms ... to protect your head ...

Easy last message: I am happy for you! Go to your AD. Get your watch measured there. They certainly have a good machine and can provide you with a small printout containing all their timegrapher results. Post them here. We can tell you how good the service was. Not the AD stories but 2025 post RSC data would be helpful in this tech thread.

[1William]

Great answer, Thank you. Waiting on updated information to see how this plays out.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Paul … thanks for the detailed update following the other thread you started.

What did we learn from your 3235 watch?
- Your 126619 (3235) ran very well for 2 years,
- Then, within a short time, it decreased rapidly to about -15 sec/day.
- You don't have a timegrapher … and you don't want one.
- The RSC repair and turnaround was very quick (2 weeks + 1 day).
- The posted RSC document says nothing.
- The AD watchmaker you asked to measure before RSC repair has now left the AD.
- The AD salesperson guarantees that RSC only replaced the mainspring.
- Your watch is running now (for 3 days) with about -1 sec/day.

(1) My suggestion:
Go back to your AD in San Diego and ask a watchmaker to use their timegrapher to measure your watch. They certainly have a (very) good machine. Ask them for the small timegrapher printout showing all the results (amplitudes, rates, beat error). Only this shows us the current movement condition of your watch after the RSC repair.

(2) My view on the mainspring:
- I am convinced that the 32xx mainspring is NOT the root cause of the caliber issues. Here are some technical facts that contradict the idea that the mainspring is the origin of the 32xx issues:

- A weak mainspring would significantly reduce the power reserve of all 32xx watches, which is 70 hours. This is not the case. I have collected (a lot of) data for many 32xx power reserve measurements, also posted in this thread. Even at very low amplitudes the power reserve remains quite high, i.e., above 69-70 hours.

- A defective mainspring would result in low amplitudes of all 5 positions. This is not the case. The 3 vertical positions (3U, 6U, 9U) are the first to be affected, with the 2 horizontal positions (DU, DD) still showing quite high amplitudes. This can be explained by the fact that friction is higher in the vertical positions than in the horizontal positions, independent of the mainspring power. The horizontal positions (which still have high amplitudes) keep a 32xx caliber running quite well, so the owner does not see a drop in timekeeping for a long time. Only when the horizontal amplitudes also decrease significantly will the owner observe a rapid decrease in timekeeping, which is likely what you observed: a rapid change within a few weeks, because the horizontal amplitudes, in addition to the vertical ones, also decreased.

- The 32xx mainspring is assembled in a thin-walled barrel. It is known that the mainspring cannot be exchanged alone due to the thin barrel wall, which makes the process rather complicated. Therefore, during 32xx servicing, RSC replaces the entire assembly, as was also done for your watch. That is probably what your salesperson knows. His claim about the mainspring is fantasy land (to avoid saying AD nonsense).

We remember that the first two movements in the 32xx family, the 3235 and the 3255, were introduced 10 (ten) years ago, in 2015! If the mainspring were the root cause, Rolex would have resolved this well-documented caliber issue many years ago.

Paul, I hope your watch is now running smoothly and will continue to do so for many years. Although, I doubt it. Your observed timekeeping on your wrist is about -1 sec/day. This is still within the expected range of -2/+2 seconds per day specified by Rolex SA as "precision after casing" – precision, not accuracy and not wrist timekeeping. Don't start thinking about these terms ... to protect your head ...

Easy last message: I am happy for you! Go to your AD. Get your watch measured there. They certainly have a good machine and can provide you with a small printout containing all their timegrapher results. Post them here. We can tell you how good the service was. Not the AD stories but 2025 post RSC data would be helpful in this tech thread.

Very well put

[saxo3]

@PaulTheVTCGuy

Originally Posted by saxo3

What about buying a timegrapher, measuring and posting some data from your 32xx watch before and after the RSC repair? That would make an interesting contribution.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Good idea!

You are currently discussing the issue of your two-year-old white gold (50k USD) Submariner, in three different threads: in this one, in thread #2 and in thread #3. In a first thread from March 2023, titled "Life is short, Today I got my grail", you proudly introduced this beautiful new watch as a commemorative timepiece with an engraved caseback.

I can understand many things, but why you, as a former US Navy pilot and a former Director of Engineering for Sony's Airpeak drone division, are not interested in the TECHNICAL aspects of this watch (specifically, what was done during the recent 3235 repair at RSC) and post here in (a kind of) bartender style is beyond me.

You don't want to buy a timegrapher, ok, but why make 100 posts in this tech thread and ignore my help or suggestions to analyse this movement after RSC repair? At least once by your AD. It is difficult to get, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. You don't even reply to 5776.

The post-RSC timegrapher data for your 3235 caliber is technically very interesting because it would allow us to assess the quality of the US RSC repair carried out in May 2025. Apart from observed timekeeping, only the caliber amplitudes will tell us something about the success of this repair.

You probably have other priorities. It seems to me that you are afraid of being expelled from the anti-timegrapher club, a group with some very prominent members on this site.

[Toad_99]

Made an account to post a 124060 2021 Sub41 timings from the Rolex AD. It'll be going in for service, shame, i got a great deal on it.

[MikeyV]

It's interesting that you guys bring up the mainspring.

There's one funny thing I've noticed with my watch. I've noticed it in all three "builds" so to speak. First, the factory build, then the build after first service, then the build after second service.

My watch would always jump to running much slower that it had been running right after letting it die completely and re-winding it to start wearing again.

I do this each year - vacation on the same week. I take my Tudor to Mexico.

I take my 3235 DJ off, put it away and it dies.

Say that when I left it was running at -2 spd. When I'd return and wind it 40 times and check it the next day - it would have lost 5 seconds overnight. And that 5 second loss would never be recovered fully. There are times it might go back to runing at -3, or -4, but it would never run at -2 again.

Saxo - you can see that in my log - I note where I've let it die and you can see how it slows right after.

So normally I wear it 16 hours a day, and rest it for 8 overnight. The mainspring may never get down past 80% full. I KNOW that my activity keeps it fully wound, it usually surpasses 70 hours any time I've tested it. (One time - right before I had to send it in - I tried a reserve test and found it was only about 60-64 hours - might be a clue)

So what's happening when you let it die? The main spring is becoming fully unwound.

Does this do something to the spring? Does it distribute lube in an adverse fashion? Does the spring interact with the barrel wall - like it does when it clutches at full wind?

Dunno - might have something to do with it.

But it always does this. When I go on vacation this time - it's going on my wifes watch winder!!

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Toad_99

Made an account to post a 124060 2021 Sub41 timings from the Rolex AD.

Originally Posted by MikeyV

It's interesting that you guys bring up the mainspring.

That was mentioned here as a single quote from a US AD. What does he actually know? Probably nothing, except that 32xx mainspring assemblies are routinely exchanged during RSC repairs. Your observation (data) is interesting, though.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

Saxo - you can see that in my log - I note where I've let it die and you can see how it slows right after.

Your Excel spreadsheet contains 2214 lines of timekeeping data collected between 01/01/2019 and 26/05/2025 (2338 days). Are you kidding me to analyse this? It's time to buy a cheap timegrapher my friend, you (we) will learn much more ... I wrote that before ... but you (and others) don't want ... I can't help more, sorry

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

@PaulTheVTCGuy


You are currently discussing the issue of your two-year-old white gold (50k USD) Submariner, in three different threads: in this one, in thread #2 and in thread #3. In a first thread from March 2023, titled "Life is short, Today I got my grail", you proudly introduced this beautiful new watch as a commemorative timepiece with an engraved caseback.

I can understand many things, but why you, as a former US Navy pilot and a former Director of Engineering for Sony's Airpeak drone division, are not interested in the TECHNICAL aspects of this watch (specifically, what was done during the recent 3235 repair at RSC) and post here in (a kind of) bartender style is beyond me.

You don't want to buy a timegrapher, ok, but why make 100 posts in this tech thread and ignore my help or suggestions to analyse this movement after RSC repair? At least once by your AD. It is difficult to get, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. You don't even reply to 5776.

The post-RSC timegrapher data for your 3235 caliber is technically very interesting because it would allow us to assess the quality of the US RSC repair carried out in May 2025. Apart from observed timekeeping, only the caliber amplitudes will tell us something about the success of this repair.

You probably have other priorities. It seems to me that you are afraid of being expelled from the anti-timegrapher club, a group with some very prominent members on this site.

Actually, I was out of town for work. Is there really a club for anti-timgraphers? No, not against it at all and as you point out, being in technology myself you would think I am all over measuring the efficiency of my watch, that makes sense. I am not sure why I never got one, or am resistant, maybe because this watch (dedicated to the memory of my mother) is very sentimental to me(?) I connect to it more on an emotional level then a technical one like I do with most other things in my life. (?) (?) Really hard to explain, but getting back to the measurement. I am sorry I can’t give you the before but I will get the after. I’ll go in to the AD this week, I am sure someone there can help me by just putting in on the machine. I’ll post as soon as I get them.

Oh, and seriously, anyone know a watchmaker this AD (Ben Bridge Jewler in San Diego) is hiring, I can put them directly in touch with the manager/decision maker.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Actually, I was out of town for work. Is there really a club for anti-timgraphers? No, not against it at all and as you point out, being in technology myself you would think I am all over measuring the efficiency of my watch, that makes sense. I am not sure why I never got one, or am resistant, maybe because this watch (dedicated to the memory of my mother) is very sentimental to me(?) I connect to it more on an emotional level then a technical one like I do with most other things in my life. (?) (?) Really hard to explain, but getting back to the measurement. I am sorry I can’t give you the before but I will get the after. I’ll go in to the AD this week, I am sure someone there can help me by just putting in on the machine. I’ll post as soon as I get them.

Oh, and seriously, anyone know a watchmaker this AD (Ben Bridge Jewler in San Diego) is hiring, I can put them directly in touch with the manager/decision maker.

Message received Paul
Some of us never really see the necessity to have a Timegrapher.
Especially if our timekeeping needs and wants are and have always been fulfilled in numerous other ways. Besides, for my part, i look around and see all the machines and tools spread throughout my and my family's realm and seriously wonder if i am well served by having another one cluttering things up even more. It also saves a bit more money to spend on more watches that don't take up quite as much room and will give more pleasure at the end of the day. My new CASIO GW 9400 Y bears testament and is another useful tool that helps me to track time better than any other in a manner which allows me to be at home in proper time (not after dark) for dinner instead of playing with the other toys.
Time management is becoming ever more important in this busy life of mine.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Message received Paul
Some of us never really see the necessity to have a Timegrapher.
Especially if our timekeeping needs and wants are and have always been fulfilled in numerous other ways. Besides, for my part, i look around and see all the machines and tools spread throughout my and my family's realm and seriously wonder if i am well served by having another one cluttering things up even more. It also saves a bit more money to spend on more watches that don't take up quite as much room and will give more pleasure at the end of the day. My new CASIO GW 9400 Y bears testament and is another useful tool that helps me to track time better than any other in a manner which allows me to be at home in proper time (not after dark) for dinner instead of playing with the other toys.
Time management is becoming ever more important in this busy life of mine.

Nice model.
How do you set the time on your CASIO GW 9400 Y?

Do you use all the information this watch can give you for your work?

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Message received Paul
Some of us never really see the necessity to have a Timegrapher.
Especially if our timekeeping needs and wants are and have always been fulfilled in numerous other ways. Besides, for my part, i look around and see all the machines and tools spread throughout my and my family's realm and seriously wonder if i am well served by having another one cluttering things up even more. It also saves a bit more money to spend on more watches that don't take up quite as much room and will give more pleasure at the end of the day. My new CASIO GW 9400 Y bears testament and is another useful tool that helps me to track time better than any other in a manner which allows me to be at home in proper time (not after dark) for dinner instead of playing with the other toys.
Time management is becoming ever more important in this busy life of mine.

Thanks, and I agree with Eddie, that is a cool watch!

[CharlesN]

I bought my first TimeGrapher (Weishi 1900) some years ago.

I used it for a while and got quite addicted to the measuring of my watches and found it really interesting to watch the degradation of my Rolex watches with 32xx movements as compared with other Rolex watches in my meagre collection.

I decided, I admit with a little assistance from someone else, that I did need to upgrade my Weishi to something that gave me far more data and would seriously show the traits (Both Good & Bad) of my watches.

I bought a Witschi.

Not only did it give me far more data so I could see and begin to understand what was going on with my watches but I could discuss with some form of sensible factual and proven data that showed what was happening at any one time and at various temperatures, etc.

Another BIG advantage is that I had a new hobby, I was home more and enjoying measuring, logging, comparing and writing about my findings. (I am of an ancient age where Spreadsheets etc were not commonly taught at school, or, if they were I was “Missing” for those lessons). Thank heavens for my computer, Spreadsheet programs and more importantly someone to guide me through creating them (Yes I am referring to one particular member on this forum - A BIG thank you goes to him - You ALL know who he is.).

The BIGGEST advantage is I made a couple of new friends in other parts of the world. This is a strange hobby and its good to see others get “Addicted” as I have.

Do yourself a favour …. Stop chatting about getting a TimeGrapher …. As the words of a very well known sports company go (The one with a Tick as their logo) …… Just Do It !

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I bought my first TimeGrapher (Weishi 1900) some years ago.

I decided, I admit with a little assistance from someone else, that I did need to upgrade my Weishi ….

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

Thank heavens for my computer, Spreadsheet programs and more importantly someone to guide me through creating them (Yes I am referring to one particular member on this forum - A BIG thank you goes to him - You ALL know who he is.).

Awwww….. You’re welcome Charles, glad I could help



OK, so maybe it wasn’t me. TBH, I wish I had some of the knowledge you guys do about mechanical timepieces. Electric clocks? Sure, they seem so simple to me, but mechanical…. It easily confuses me (then again a lot of things do). Maybe if I start at the beginning like you say Charles I will pick up on it.