32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by driver8

i'm sorry, but there's a huge difference between knowing and accepting that a mechanical watch will not keep atomic clock accuracy, and a mechanical watch that managed to keep almost perfect spot-on time for the first 18 months of its life, and then for no apparent or discernible reason just started to slow -2 secs per day, then -6 secs per day, then -8, and now -10 seconds per day. That, in my book, indicates a problem.



Just like if you have a car that drives and stops fine for 18 months, and then the next day it suddenly refuses to brake like it did. If that happened to your car, and then you found that a number of other people had the same issue that was consistently not fixed by the manufacturer, you may be a little annoyed.



Not sure why a few people here can't grasp that....

+1

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by Driver8

I'm sorry, but there's a huge difference between knowing and accepting that a mechanical watch will not keep atomic clock accuracy, and a mechanical watch that managed to keep almost perfect spot-on time for the first 18 months of its life, and then for no apparent or discernible reason just started to slow -2 secs per day, then -6 secs per day, then -8, and now -10 seconds per day. That, in my book, indicates a problem.

Just like if you have a car that drives and stops fine for 18 months, and then the next day it suddenly refuses to brake like it did. If that happened to your car, and then you found that a number of other people had the same issue that was consistently not fixed by the manufacturer, you may be a little annoyed.

Not sure why a few people here can't grasp that....

Because they bought it at way above MRSP pricing at the grey dealer.

[shipitfresh]

Originally Posted by saxo3

When did you purchase the SSDJ41? I don't understand the "+/-" You mean about -30 to -40 s/d?

When it went wacky it was off by anywhere from +35 sec to -35 sec daily.

I bought it in Dec 2019 after being on a "list" for about a week.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

It’s a mechanical watch, and incapable of Precision in the sense used by modern technology. Even a cheap quartz watch or phone will be far emore accurate. So why make such an issue over a basic weakness of mechanical timekeeping. It’s still more than good enough for normal life. A few seconds a day means nothing in terms of the usual pace of our lives.
If it does matter, don’t use a mechanical watch.....even a fine design like a Rolex has to live in the real,physical, world.

This is a wonderful straw man argument, but can you link me to the post where any of us suggested these things should keep atomic time? Accuracy of "a few seconds a day", and maintaining that level for more than a few months, would make all of us quite happy. It's a level of precision that previous Rolex movement owners have been able to enjoy, do we not deserve the same?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by shipitfresh

When it went wacky it was off by anywhere from +35 sec to -35 sec daily.

I bought it in Dec 2019 after being on a "list" for about a week.

Thanks for your clarifications.

[TheVTCGuy]

My 3235 is very new, and right now within the +- 2s/day, so I am fine with it. If, in six months, it starts dropping to - 5, 10, 20 seconds per day I would also be upset.

I think what PADI and others have referred to is the +-2/day is an average, and over the course of a week you might expect it to be spot on one day, - a second or two another, + a second or two another so forth and so on, but generally and on average it will be +-2. I am willing to accept that as well, I think most Rolex owners (who are reasonable) should. But what I am reading is that the watch continually slows down and gets worse. THAT scenario, is a problem. My advise would be to watch it, check it once in a while, but if one day it is -2.0001 seconds as compared to the atomic clock, it is nothing to throw a fit about.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by shipitfresh

When it went wacky it was off by anywhere from +35 sec to -35 sec daily.

I bought it in Dec 2019 after being on a "list" for about a week.

I find this very very strange in over 50 years of being around Rolex watches never heard of any Rolex movement going fast then slow + - by 35 seconds daily .What did Rolex state what was wrong with it, as it would be more than just simple regulation's.

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by padi56

I find this very very strange in over 50 years of being around Rolex watches never heard of any Rolex movement going fast then slow + - by 35 seconds daily .What did Rolex state what was wrong with it, as it would be more than just simple regulation's.

You wont believe,but I actually agree on this point .

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by padi56

I find this very very strange in over 50 years of being around Rolex watches never heard of any Rolex movement going fast then slow + - by 35 seconds daily .What did Rolex state what was wrong with it, as it would be more than just simple regulation's.

Going that fast in that short of time has a magnetized feel about it. Then the mainspring not sticking to itself due to being not magnetized quite enough and freeing itself to a normal length would go back to normal. Thats my educated guess.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

My 3235 is very new, and right now within the +- 2s/day, so I am fine with it. If, in six months, it starts dropping to - 5, 10, 20 seconds per day I would also be upset.

Agreed. What do you mean "within the +- 2s/day"?

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

.....others have referred to is the +-2/day is an average, and over the course of a week you might expect it to be spot on one day, - a second or two another, + a second or two another so forth and so on, but generally and on average it will be +-2.

What do you mean with "the +-2/day is an average" and "on average it will be +-2"

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

.....But what I am reading is that the watch continually slows down and gets worse. THAT scenario, is a problem.

Agreed.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

Because they bought it at way above MRSP pricing at the grey dealer.

Are you saying that it's possible or likely some people may be biased and or emotionally invested in their latest and greatest "luxury" watch purchase?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by shipitfresh

When it went wacky it was off by anywhere from +35 sec to -35 sec daily.

I bought it in Dec 2019 after being on a "list" for about a week.

My goodness.
That's almost inconceivable to me unless the watch is magnetised

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

My 3235 is very new, and right now within the +- 2s/day, so I am fine with it. If, in six months, it starts dropping to - 5, 10, 20 seconds per day I would also be upset.

I think what PADI and others have referred to is the +-2/day is an average, and over the course of a week you might expect it to be spot on one day, - a second or two another, + a second or two another so forth and so on, but generally and on average it will be +-2. I am willing to accept that as well, I think most Rolex owners (who are reasonable) should. But what I am reading is that the watch continually slows down and gets worse. THAT scenario, is a problem. My advise would be to watch it, check it once in a while, but if one day it is -2.0001 seconds as compared to the atomic clock, it is nothing to throw a fit about.

Quite right.
The declining daily timekeeping is the only issue of major concern and it is the prime motivating factor behind this poll in order to losely establish the extent of the problem.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Going that fast in that short of time has a magnetized feel about it. Then the mainspring not sticking to itself due to being not magnetized quite enough and freeing itself to a normal length would go back to normal. Thats my educated guess.

If according to Rolex the hairspring is non magnetic which would be the main culprit if magnetised, and in general yes would speed up ,but not then slow down by same amount ,and it's got nothing to do with the mainspring.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by shipitfresh

I did have to return it to my AD's authorized Rolex service center to be regulated (Beverly Hills) about 2 months after purchase due to sudden, inconsistent accuracy (+/- 30 to 40 sec per day). It was fixed and runs great now.

Did you ask the RSC about the origin of this large fluctuations (-35 to +35 s/d)? Do you know what they repaired? Any indication on the invoice?

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Agreed. What do you mean "within the +- 2s/day"?


What do you mean with "the +-2/day is an average" and "on average it will be +-2"

Agreed.

My watch is running consistently -1.3 or .4 seconds slow per day, that is within the +-2 seconds a day Rolex claims it should be.

I will probably not answer this correctly, and don’t claim to know the exact answer, but there was a thread on here (probably years ago) that described the new +-2 seconds a day and explained that it was an “average.” I do not know if it was over 10 days or a month or what, and I hope someone who knows can explain better then myself. The point was in one day, with heat, knocks, sunspots, whatever, it could possible exceed +- 2 seconds, but over all, it will be an average of +- 2.

[Andad]

Watchmakers on this Forum have indicated a problem with the 3235 movement but I can't remember reading about a specific issue that is being addressed by RSC's.
At one time it was a lubrication issue (from memory) on one pivot or cog?

Now it seems to have changed into a possible design, assembly or tolerance issue that may have the potential to cause a problem down the road.

How far down the road I don't know as this depends on how often the watch is worn.

I only have one Rolex with the 3235 movement and have only worn it a few times since it was purchased in November 2019. I have more than a few watches and an issue with this watch may not be noticed until well after the warranty has expired.
If there is a problem I would be interested in finding out now.

So at the risk of antagonizing some on this thread I will post up my results.

I will leave it up to much smarter members to evaluate the results.

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by Andad

I have more than a few watches and an issue with this watch may not be noticed until well after the warranty has expired.
If there is a problem I would be interested in finding out now.

Oom,I am pretty smart ,so,my detailed calculations have shown that if you wear the watch 5 times a year ,for the next 10 years ,you will have no problems .

Its a reading from a brand new 3235 movement .Worn a couple of times.
Amplitude at 48 hours below 200.Accuracy at that stage ok .
As a new movement its actually for practical purposes a 48h movement .

I have to ask ,if the amplitude is below 200 at 48h on a new 3235 movement .Is this really a good 72h design (At this stage of course,since they always improve their movements...eventually ) ?? Lets assume it stays this way and does not get slower after a few months of actual wearing.

[saxo3]

To Andad (post #347) and TsawneNguni (post #348)

Dear both,

Many thanks for your contributions, much appreciated.
Especially the DJ41 vs 14060M data set comparison.

I’ll come back later to a few of your specific points for which I have some concrete data-based answers.

I’m sitting in the same boat as I have more than a couple of Rolex watches, including an unworn BLRO and a rarely worn CHNR, which have remarkable amplitude and rate issues.

In the meantime, you may find explanations already in the data and plots I shared here in posts #11, #197, #240, #269, #317. Anyway, I’m surprised that nobody came back to it until now…

Cheers

[peterskinner]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

This is a wonderful straw man argument, but can you link me to the post where any of us suggested these things should keep atomic time? Accuracy of "a few seconds a day", and maintaining that level for more than a few months, would make all of us quite happy. It's a level of precision that previous Rolex movement owners have been able to enjoy, do we not deserve the same?

The point I am making is a simple one...even good mechanical designs cannot be relied upon for high precision over a long period. I’ve had good designs for some fifty years (frightening really). Most pretty good at timekeeping. But not relentlessly consistent . That’s just how it is; the obsession with two seconds a day is just a product of Rolex marketing. In the real world, in my experience, most Rolexes are not that precise. Where, in the literature, do Rolex ever state that, on the wrist, their products will meet the ‘two second’ guideline? They don’t. Instead they refer to tests in the factory, on machines.

Incidentally I had a Rolex retimed at HQ recently. But only because it was pretty seriously off. Ten seconds a day, while a few months old. That’s my definition of poor timekeeping.

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by saxo3

[B]

I’m sitting in the same boat as I have more than a couple of Rolex watches, including an unworn BLRO and a rarely worn CHNR, which have remarkable amplitude and rate issues.

Yip,32xxs , a few in the collection.

The evidence , from this thread and multiple previous postings,is pretty clear .

The question is :The market is high ,do I keep them or get rid of them ?

Some really nice references ,which I really want to keep ...DSSD JC,SD50th ,DJ 41 blu/Flu/Jub etc.
Or do I make it Rolex's problem by sending them in just before the end of the 5 year warrantee ,by which time Rolex may have sorted out their 32xx series design ?

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

The point I am making is a simple one...even good mechanical designs cannot be relied upon for high precision over a long period. I’ve had good designs for some fifty years (frightening really). Most pretty good at timekeeping. But not relentlessly consistent . That’s just how it is; the obsession with two seconds a day is just a product of Rolex marketing, and heavily caveated. In the real world, in my experience, most Rolexes are not that precise. Neither are rival products. Not consistently.
Enjoying a fine mechanical watch need not be obsessive , just realistic. They are fine as they are.
Incidentally I had a Rolex retimed at HQ recently. But only because it was pretty seriously off. Ten seconds a day, while a few months old. That’s my definition of poor timekeeping.

I agree to some extent. My psychological barrier is +6 - 6 s/d (or 3 minutes off a month) , which is three times less accurate than what Rolex claim.

I don't think anyone is expecting quartz accuracy from their 3235 movement or any other mechanical, that would be unreasonable.

The real problem in my case is my SD43 is consistently negative, it's never positive in any position. So it won't even out, no matter how you wear it. Even if it's just - 5.5 s/d on average, it'll consistently be almost 3 minutes late in a month time, month after month. All my other mechanical watches partially correct themselves with self regulation, but not my 3235 based SD43. I'm holding off taking it to the RSC unless it gets significantly worse.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

Yip,32xxs , a few in the collection.



The evidence , from this thread and multiple previous postings,is pretty clear .



The question is :The market is high ,do I keep them or get rid of them ?



Some really nice references ,which I really want to keep ...DSSD JC,SD50th ,DJ 41 blu/Flu/Jub etc.

Or do I make it Rolex's problem by sending them in just before the end of the 5 year warrantee ,by which time Rolex may have sorted out their 32xx series design ?

I've been debating this too, either sell my SD43 or wait until I'm close to the end of the warranty and get it fixed then. But what if there's still no permanent fix by then? You're kind of on your own after the warranty, for a problem that's been present since day one from factory.

[peterskinner]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

The real problem in my case is my SD43 is consistently negative, it's never positive in any position. So it won't even out, no matter how you wear it. Even if it's just - 5.5 s/d on average, it'll consistently be almost 3 minutes late in a month time, month after month. All my other mechanical watches partially correct themselves with self regulation, but not my 3235 based SD43. I'm holding off taking it to the RSC unless it gets significantly worse.

I’ve had four SD43s (don’t ask!). All were slightly slow ...slightly. Never fast. In fact, all modern Rolexes on my wrist, have been a touch slow, probably because of my sedentary lifestyle. (Guess).
I just set them a little ahead. For instance, four seconds would be about 30s a week. Adjust once a week. Works for me, and no bother.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

I agree to some extent. My psychological barrier is +6 - 6 s/d (or 3 minutes off a month) , which is three times less accurate than what Rolex claim.

I don't think anyone is expecting quartz accuracy from their 3235 movement or any other mechanical, that would be unreasonable.

The real problem in my case is my SD43 is consistently negative, it's never positive in any position. So it won't even out, no matter how you wear it. Even if it's just - 5.5 s/d on average, it'll consistently be almost 3 minutes late in a month time, month after month. All my other mechanical watches partially correct themselves with self regulation, but not my 3235 based SD43. I'm holding off taking it to the RSC unless it gets significantly worse.

Lets get things into perspective first the bare uncased movements are tested at the COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds to get the swiss chronometer certification time of testing only. And on the COSC 15 day test on any one single day the movement could vary by up to 10 seconds and still pass the the test. The movements are then shipped back to Rolex in there many hundreds stored until wanted on production run. Rolex further checks on a machine in the watches case to this new -2+2 spec much like the COSC time of testing to say its been tested and met the spec on a machine. Now this is not a guarantee it will perform exactly the same everyday for life only the fact it was tested on a machine and met the spec. But it could vary a bit as there are many variables to overcome on the wrist on the wrist. Such as gravity, mainspring power-reserve, different temperature's, shocks on the wrist, metal expansion and contraction, subtle changes in lubrication and friction, plus the many others. Plus a simple fact if watch is out a few minutes over a few months its very easy to adjust with the winding setting crown.

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

I’ve had four SD43s (don’t ask!)

I guess it like a love hate relationship... ? Cant live with her,cant live without her ?

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by padi56

Lets get things into perspective first the bare uncased movements are tested at the COSC to a AVERAGE of -4+6 seconds to get the swiss chronometer certification time of testing only. And on the COSC 15 day test on any one single day the movement could vary by up to 10 seconds and still pass the the test. The movements are then shipped back to Rolex in there many hundreds stored until wanted on production run. Rolex further checks on a machine in the watches case to this new -2+2 spec much like the COSC time of testing to say its been tested and met the spec on a machine. Now this is not a guarantee it will perform exactly the same everyday for life only the fact it was tested on a machine and met the spec. But it could vary a bit as there are many variables to overcome on the wrist on the wrist. Such as gravity, mainspring power-reserve, different temperature's, shocks on the wrist, metal expansion and contraction, subtle changes in lubrication and friction, plus the many others. Plus a simple fact if watch is out a few minutes over a few months its very easy to adjust with the winding setting crown.

Yes. Again, I don't think anyone is strictly expecting +2/-2 s/d everyday forever. But I doubt anyone will be happy with sudden drops in accuracy or a consistent -6 s/d on average day in day out, no matter how the watch is worn.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

Yes. Again, I don't think anyone is strictly expecting +2/-2 s/d everyday forever. But I doubt anyone will be happy with sudden drops in accuracy or a consistent -6 s/d on average day in day out, no matter how the watch is worn.

Well again the most important thing with any mechanical watch is consistency so even if it was - 6 seconds its still 99.94% accurate. But if any watch is showing a consistent -+ few seconds all thats needed is simple regulation. But myself would not worry and fret over a consistent 4 seconds over tested Rolex spec. As in a day the escapement of a mechanical watch pushes the gears 432,000 times and there are 86,400 seconds in a day.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

I’ve had four SD43s (don’t ask!). All were slightly slow ...slightly. Never fast. In fact, all modern Rolexes on my wrist, have been a touch slow, probably because of my sedentary lifestyle. (Guess).
I just set them a little ahead. For instance, four seconds would be about 30s a week. Adjust once a week. Works for me, and no bother.

Holy smoly Peter ... I think that might be a record here

[saxo3]

The Saga of -2/+2 sec/day after casing

First, well summarized in post #355, as many times before in other threads, thanks for repeating here too!

Second, I need to add that many TRF's cannot really appreciate what -2/+2 sec/day means "in the real world". I had to laugh during writing, but it is absolute true…

There has been a large number of individual posts, from which I drew the conclusion that authors do not understand, or have not yet tried to find out, what the difference between accuracy and precision means.

Rolex certainly knows the difference between accuracy and precision, hence they define the precision only. All published caliber specs are measured in best equipped and controlled Rolex labs, following defined procedures and acceptance criteria, of course including the application of timegrapher series measurements, they do that since decades.

Having said that, it is clear that they must have millions (!) of data points for rates, amplitudes, lift angles … for the caliber 3200 series. What we try to collect here, including my few measurements, is absolutely nothing (statistically speaking) compared to what they have in their databases.

Rolex also knows (as I do) that it is impossible to specify the accuracy, because it depends on so many parameters (see e.g. #355) that are given by external conditions (gravity, magnetic field…) as well as the owners wearing profiles, which varies a lot.

This misunderstanding of the -2/+2 sec/day saga created and still creates wrong expectations for the 3200 series calibers, as well as for all previous ones.

I have not seen one post here that shows a precision measurement! I have done one with a 3235 caliber, which I could share at a later moment, in case of positive and encouraging feedback. I am not a watchmaker, not a WIS, and have none of the mentioned seconds-checking-syndroms. I am just interested in the technical aspect and don't care if my watches have a rate of +4,5,6… sec/day. As long as this rate remains consistent, i.e. day-to-day similar, everything is fine. Then it is only a matter to get the watch regulated or adapted to your wearing pattern, which I never did. This also holds if a watch runs consistently slow every day. But this has nothing to do with "-2/+2 sec/day after casing" as published by Rolex.

I hope that helps some "critical minds" to understand what we should (or could) aim at. Support and feedback is essential to keep going here.