32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by atxwatch

Let's hope you are right. My wife's 10 month old OP with 22xx just came back from Rolex factory service after 2+ months. It had super low amplitude and was running very erratically. Let's hope it is fixed for good.

You can always have bad luck, generally they run very well with few warranty interventions needed.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Andad

Looks straight forward to me Douglas but what is the problem with these movements?

Do we need any more graphs to confirm an issue?

It's interesting to think about. It's not lost on me that Omega, then Rolex, and now Grand Seiko, have all had issues getting away from the regular Swiss lever by employing new escapement designs. It seems like we're the R&D.

[Seo]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

It's interesting to think about. It's not lost on me that Omega, then Rolex, and now Grand Seiko, have all had issues getting away from the regular Swiss lever by employing new escapement designs. It seems like we're the R&D.

I know omega had issues but did grand seiko also?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

It's interesting to think about. It's not lost on me that Omega, then Rolex, and now Grand Seiko, have all had issues getting away from the regular Swiss lever by employing new escapement designs. It seems like we're the R&D.

The end consumer isn't doing the r&d, but we are basically the beta testers and there's no getting around it.
In ways, it tells us that it's not easy.
The Swiss lever and the Co-axial are clear front runners at this stage and closely followed by Spring Drive.
The development of the Swiss lever is well understood and that of the Co-axial is still fresh and i imagine ongoing.
The Spring Drive took a few decades of fits and starts before they could bring it to market but it's not mechanically regulated.
They all have their pluses and minuses.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

The house is on fire. The fire department has been called. While they are finishing their dinners and trying to figure out where they stored the hoses we're going to deploy thermocouples around the house to see if the flames are, in fact, causing harmful levels of heat. Will have to get back to you on whether or not peak data has been achieved yet. Come to think of it, we might actually need more data to answer that. Hope that helps!

Is this the issue with this thread?

[Andad]

At this point all 3*** owners should return them to a RSC?

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Seo

I know omega had issues but did grand seiko also?

Yeah, a lot of reports of users having to send their brand new watch right away, because they run so fast and can’t be regulated locally. I have no idea about how prevalent it is, but it’s starting to become a thing. This is the new hi-beat, not the spring drive or quartz.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Yeah, a lot of reports of users having to send their brand new watch right away, because they run so fast and can’t be regulated locally. I have no idea about how prevalent it is, but it’s starting to become a thing. This is the new hi-beat, not the spring drive or quartz.

Exactly, there's more than one thread about this issue on WUS with a few people dumping their new watches already as the issue wasn't fixed even after a service.

[Seo]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Yeah, a lot of reports of users having to send their brand new watch right away, because they run so fast and can’t be regulated locally. I have no idea about how prevalent it is, but it’s starting to become a thing. This is the new hi-beat, not the spring drive or quartz.

Wow that’s a shame. I’m after a 5 day spring drive. They’re still relatively new so I guess I’ll wait.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Exactly, there's more than one thread about this issue on WUS with a few people dumping their new watches already as the issue wasn't fixed even after a service.

Ooof, I guess that's one reason used prices on the White Birch seem to have dropped quite a bit.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Seo

Wow that’s a shame. I’m after a 5 day spring drive. They’re still relatively new so I guess I’ll wait.

Problems are reported against the new Hi-Beat movement, the 5-day SD owners are in generally enthusiast about their watches.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Seo

Wow that’s a shame. I’m after a 5 day spring drive. They’re still relatively new so I guess I’ll wait.

Spring Drive is fine. It’s just the new auto, mechanical Hi-Beat movement with the new escapement having issues, but it’s hard to tell how prevalent it is at this point.

[Annan]

So......since moving away from the Swiss lever escapement am I understanding correctly that the Omega 8900 calibre movement has shown problems similar to the Rolex 32XX?

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Annan

So......since moving away from the Swiss lever escapement am I understanding correctly that the Omega 8900 calibre movement has shown problems similar to the Rolex 32XX?

No, Omega had issues with the earlier 2500-series Co-Axial that was based on the ETA 2892. The problem was mostly solved with the 4th iteration/D-variant of that movement, and the all-new 8xxx/9xxx co-axial movements that were released starting in 2007 are fine.

It’s starting to look like a good strategy by Omega. They implemented a new escapement over 20 years ago, spent half a decade or so dialing it in, and then made an all-new, from the ground-up movement designed for the Co-Axial escapement. Now Rolex (and maybe GS) are floundering trying to match them with new escapement tech…although the public is largely still unaware of it, so maybe not.

[Annan]

Interesting....thanks. I've been considering an Omega Globemaster with 8900.

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by Annan

Interesting....thanks. I've been considering an Omega Globemaster with 8900.

8800 and 8900 are outstanding movements

Proceed with absolute confidence

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Annan

Interesting....thanks. I've been considering an Omega Globemaster with 8900.

The Globemaster really looks fantastic. Nothing to worry about there.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by Andad

At this point all 3*** owners should return them to a RSC?

Probably.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by Annan

So......since moving away from the Swiss lever escapement am I understanding correctly that the Omega 8900 calibre movement has shown problems similar to the Rolex 32XX?

Originally Posted by EEpro

8800 and 8900 are outstanding movements

Proceed with absolute confidence

I agree. I have had a very good experience with mine so far.

[Seo]

Originally Posted by Easy E

I agree. I have had a very good experience with mine so far.

Also agreed

My 8500d has been perfect for over ten years now I’d expect the 8900 which is the successor to be absolutely rock solid.

[Seo]

Thank you for the comments re 5 day spring drive.

[atxwatch]

Originally Posted by EEpro

8800 and 8900 are outstanding movements

Proceed with absolute confidence

Agree. I own 2 watches with 8800 (Planet Ocean + SMP300) and 1 watch with 8900 (Aqua Terra) and all 3 are super accurate. And I bang those watches around way more than my BLRO or Sub.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by atxwatch

Agree. I own 2 watches with 8800 (Planet Ocean + SMP300) and 1 watch with 8900 (Aqua Terra) and all 3 are super accurate. And I bang those watches around way more than my BLRO or Sub.

+1. I was an early adopter with the early 2500 movements and had some frustrating issues with some of those watches. It's been quite cool to see Omega figure out the early issues and produce some really great movements starting with the 8500.

In fact it's my experience and frustration with those early 2500s that is making me extremely wary of the 32xx. I don't know if Omega ever came up with a permanent fix specifically for owners of those early calibers. My understanding is the 2500D was a huge change and structurally the movement is closer to the later 8500 than the early 3 iterations of the 2500. So not sure if Omega did movement swaps for those with faulty earlier versions of the 2500s or what.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by the dark knight

+1. I was an early adopter with the early 2500 movements and had some frustrating issues with some of those watches. It's been quite cool to see Omega figure out the early issues and produce some really great movements starting with the 8500.

In fact it's my experience and frustration with those early 2500s that is making me extremely wary of the 32xx. I don't know if Omega ever came up with a permanent fix specifically for owners of those early calibers. My understanding is the 2500D was a huge change and structurally the movement is closer to the later 8500 than the early 3 iterations of the 2500. So not sure if Omega did movement swaps for those with faulty earlier versions of the 2500s or what.

Yes, there was some trouble with the earliest 2500's and their Co-axial and that prompted the re-design of the escapement. The earliest indications were that Omega hadn't got the lubrication of the escapement right and it was easy to over do the lubrication when effecting warranty repairs.
But it wasn't until Omega slowed the rate down to match the one that Daniels had advised in the first instance being 3.5hz, that things started to improve.
My 2403 is one of the earlier slower beat movements and it's been great ever since the first day i brought it home new in 2005 iirc. She's a keeper in every respect with it being rugged, accurate and precise, not to mention quite cost effective to maintain with only one service under its belt after the first 13 years

[Omarion07]

Cals 4131 (Daytona), 9002 (Skydweller), Cal 7140 (New 1908) are all Chronergy escapements now. Seems to me Rolex have faith in this escapement design. Let's see if these will behave differently to the 32xx movements.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[Seo]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Cals 4131 (Daytona), 9002 (Skydweller), Cal 7140 (New 1908) are all Chronergy escapements now. Seems to me Rolex have faith in this escapement design. Let's see if these will behave differently to the 32xx movements.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

I hope the escapement is not the root cause of the issues.

[saxo3]

New watches 2023 with new/existing calibers

My Table, all information taken from Rolex.com (27.03.2023)



Calibre 4131
The Cosmograph Daytona is equipped with calibre 4131. This new chronograph movement, entirely developed and manufactured by Rolex, is an evolution of calibre 4130. Unveiled in 2023, it incorporates a number of the major innovations that Rolex has brought to its movements, including the Chronergy escapement to reduce energy loss (among other advantages); Paraflex shock absorbers to protect the heart of the movement; and an optimized ball bearing to enhance self-winding.
This calibre features a new aesthetic for the brand: a cut-out oscillating weight and, on the bridges, an exclusive Rolex Côtes de Genève decoration – a reinterpretation of an iconic finishing in traditional Swiss watchmaking.

A new calibre – the 7140
To drive the 1908, Rolex watch engineers developed calibre 7140, a completely new self-winding movement, with two centre hands and a small seconds at 6 o’clock. Five patent applications have been filed for this slim movement, entirely developed and manufactured by Rolex.
Fitted with the Syloxi hairspring, Chronergy escapement and Paraflex shock absorbers, it guarantees a power reserve of approximately 66 hours and offers outstanding chronometric performance (–2/+2 seconds per day).

To slim down the timepiece, the Rolex teams worked on reducing the thickness of the case by a third compared to the watches in the Oyster Perpetual collection, without sacrificing any of the movement’s performance. The calibre was designed to accommodate the stringent Superlative Chronometer demands of precision and reliability. Creating a slimmer case called for the development of innovative technical solutions, for example to perfectly master the assembly of the oscillator.

Calibre 9002
The new-generation Sky-Dweller is equipped with calibre 9002. A derivation of calibre 9001, which has driven the model since its launch in 2012, it is among the most complex movements designed by Rolex engineers.
Enabling the display of the hours, minutes, seconds, the date and the month, as well as an additional time zone in 24-hour format, calibre 9002 includes the latest technical innovations that Rolex has brought to its movements – Chronergy escapement, Paraflex shock absorbers and a new oscillating weight with an optimized ball bearing.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by seo

i hope the escapement is not the root cause of the issues.

-> 3161 (p. 106) and 3182 (p. 107)

[Michael N Q8]

Welcome back Michael,

Thanks for joining again with an update and good news.

Your 126710BLRO (3285) runs fine 25 months after repair.
I remember you bought it in June 2018, now 3 months guarantee left, right?

My 126600 (3235) needed a second repair 35 months after the first repair.
I see you also own a 126600?

Time to upgrade from your iPhone app and get some reliable timegrapher (~200 $) data measured before the end of the BLRO warranty?

Hi, yes the warranty will expire 26 June 23...I need to update my watch list, I don't have the 126600 anymore, I changed it for a 116600.

I took measurements over three days, without winding and leaving the watch Dial Up all the time. The results are that the amplitude does go below 200, but after 71 hours the watch was still keeping/gaining time. Over the 3 days it gained 7 seconds. The average amplitude measured on each position decreased from 234 to 194, but after 52 hours the average amplitude was lower (184).

Based on these measurements and actual timekeeping performance I would conclude that 2 years after the service, this movement does not seem to have the issue anymore.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Michael N Q8

The results are that the amplitude does go below 200, but after 71 hours the watch was still keeping/gaining time. Over the 3 days it gained 7 seconds. The average amplitude measured on each position decreased from 234 to 194, but after 52 hours the average amplitude was lower (184).

Thanks, the text marked in green I understand