32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[alphadweller]

Following the methodology from post #97 (no timegrapher, real accuracy against atomic clock), here’s my latest data using WatchCheck app in 9 up position (crown down). The watch is unworn, model SD43 126600 (3235 movement). I bought it new in 2017 from a local AD.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

Following the methodology from post #97 (no timegrapher, real accuracy against atomic clock), here’s my latest data using WatchCheck app in 9 up position (crown down). The watch is unworn, model SD43 126600 (3235 movement). I bought it new in 2017 from a local AD.

Thanks a lot for this systematic study.
Very interesting unworn 126600 from 2017

I have a question for all your average rate (s/d) numbers:
Example: 49.00 hours, deviation -21,30, should that not give -10.43 s/d?

What is the marginal rate and how do you calculate it?

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks a lot for this systematic study.
Very interesting unworn 126600 from 2017

I have a question for all your average rate (s/d) numbers:
Example: 49.00 hours, deviation -21,30, should that not give -10.43 s/d?

What is the marginal rate and how do you calculate it?

You're welcome!

At 49h, deviation -21,3s gives me a rate of -10.04 s/d on average, bearing in mind I started at -0.8s with the full wind, not at 0 deviation, i.e. (-21.3 - (-0.8))/49*24.

The marginal rate is the rate between two data points.
E.g. After 37h, deviation was -13.6s. After 49h, deviation was - 21.3s. The marginal rate is the rate between 37h and 49h. This is (-21.3 -(-13.6))/(49-37)*24= -15.4 s/d during those elapsed 12 hours. The WatchCheck app does the calculation but I checked it and it tallies with the spreadsheet's own calc.

From the first trackings I did with the SD43 back in 2017 and 2018, I remember that marginal rate would fall off a cliff after 48h. This obviously affects the average rate which will also fall albeit not so abruptly. My conclusion was the trade-off for that extra day of power reserve is the significant loss in precision on those last 24h. But in light of the problems reported with this movement, there might be other reasons at play for this behaviour.

[saxo3]

Thanks, I didn't take into account the start offset (-0.80 s).
You know that 9U is not the "best" position for the caliber.
Better results are obtained in DU, but that's not the point here, I agree.

Measurement in 5 positions (except 12U) would give you an average rate, which is more representative for a movement. For that you need a timegrapher, which is (in my opinion) worth the investment compared to the 126600 price, also checking possibility before/after a service/repair.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks, I didn't take into account the start offset (-0.80 s).
You know that 9U is not the "best" position for the caliber.
Better results are obtained in DU, but that's not the point here, I agree.

Measurement in 5 positions (except 12U) would give you an average rate, which is more representative for a movement. For that you need a timegrapher, which is (in my opinion) worth the investment compared to the 126600 price, also checking possibility before/after a service/repair.

Yes, I collected the same data with dial up in post #318. Once I've got data for DU, 9UP, 3UP, 6UP and DD, I'll do the average. l'll probably get one of those cheap timegraphers also, especially to observe amplitude and beat error.

[saxo3]

I saw #318 and now understand how you calculated, you had -0.3 s offset there.

[HiBoost]

I did a full power reserve test on my new Sub41 (126613LB) purchased 1 month ago. The watch stopped 5 minutes short of 71 hours. The overall timekeeping was excellent the entire way. After 70 hours it had lost a total of 2 seconds, after being fast as much as 4 seconds at 48 hours. The watch remained on the timegrapher (Weishi 1000) for the entire test. It sat in the dial up position except for the few minutes at each check point where I would also test the crown down position.

Amplitudes were very low across the board. This is the most interesting part to me. I was seeing 184 degrees crown down after 24 hours. But the timekeeping accuracy maintained. The amplitude dropped so low that the timegrapher was unable to read it in the later tests.

Based on my results, I feel that this movement (my unit at least) has a very usable power reserve until around 65 hours or so. At 64 hours it was -7 spd, at 66 it was -11 spd, and at 68 it was -16 spd. At 48 hours where the 31xx movement would run out of steam, mine was still doing +0.5 spd. Again, excellent values. If the amplitude wasn't scary low I'd be overjoyed (insert comment from others about why I shouldn't be looking at the amplitude, blah blah)

I plan to repeat this every 6 months to see if there is any change over time.

[thenewrick]

My OP41 loses about 1-2 seconds a day resting crown up and gains about 1-2 seconds a day dial up. So I can adjust each night accordingly and that works pretty well. Resting position and how much it’s worn seems to make a huge difference. The watches don’t like being unworn and resting and they like resting in different positions

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I did a full power reserve test on my new Sub41 (126613LB) purchased 1 month ago.

I propose to integrate your data in my graphs.
OK, file received already, thanks.

[saxo3]

Caliber data comparison 3130, 3187, 3235, 3285
Plot updated

Added data: Submariner Ref. 126613LB (caliber 3235)
Reference: HiBoost
Comment: Datejust and Submariner data are very close

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Caliber data comparison 3130, 3187, 3235, 3285
Plot updated

Added data: Submariner Ref. 126613LB (caliber 3235)
Reference: HiBoost
Comment: Datejust and Submariner data are very close

My ym40 and new op36 are like 280 amp 3235s. My issue 3235 in my dj36 plots like your one where the full wind amp is 250.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Good News
126600 Sea-Dweller from Dec. 2017 to Jan. 2021
Decreasing performance after purchase and recovery after Rolex repair.

The 3235 rate as a function of amplitude, measured during three periods from 12/2017 to 01/2021, are displayed in the graph below.




Data 2017/2018:
- After purchase in 2017, a very good performance (rates, amplitudes) was measured for the first 13 months.
- The timekeeping was extremely good, i.e. the position-averaged rate was close to 0 s/d.
- There was absolutely nothing to worry.
- Therefore, I continued to wear the watch without any accuracy check or timegrapher measurements.

Data 2019:
- 10 months later, the next measurements showed a significant change.
- As one can see from the figure above, all amplitudes and rates were reduced, timekeeping (accuracy) also became much worse than before, despite full winding of the caliber.
- I decided to give it to Rolex within the 5-year warranty period.

Data 2019/2020
- On return from Rolex, the watch was repaired, without any information what was done.
- This "fix" cured the problem, i.e. the amplitudes and rates jumped up again to expected values, where it remains now since about 15 months.
- As one can see from the graph, amplitudes > 280 degrees are always obtained for positions DU and DD.
- For all other positions (6U, 9U,12U, 3U) amplitudes are between 243 and 260 degrees, after each full watch winding.
- For an early 3235 caliber these are good values for me.
- Data points below 200 degrees were measured only at 46.7 h and 58.7 h after full watch winding, but the accuracy did not drop dramatically as before.

Conclusion
- The good news is, that by end 2019 this 3235 was very well repaired by Rolex.
- Problems did not come back until February 2021.
- The averaged rate slowly increases, it now is about +4 to +5 sec/day, which only is a question of regulation.

[richard371]

So basically this is a design flaw of the movement? Im surprised Rolex has not come up with a perm fix so it doesn't get worse over time.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by richard371

So basically this is a design flaw of the movement? Im surprised Rolex has not come up with a perm fix so it doesn't get worse over time.

They may have. Bas reported that the lift angle on the technical document was updated from 55 to 53.

So for 5-6 years Rolex had incorrectly calculated the lift angle or has something changed? You can't tell me they miscalculated the lift angle 5 years ago and this is simply an error fix.

I have the new 3230 movement in one of my watches I'll monitor it and report back if i noticed any trends like I did with my DJ36.

So far it's doing +2.4 dial up Amp 283 full find, +2.6 Amp 262 24hrs.

Very happy with it but i only started having issues 1 year into ownership so lets see.

[francis]

Have a 2019 Datejust 41 126300 under warranty that was running 30 seconds slow. Rolex had it for 2 weeks and sent it back. Now it’s +1 a week! Had taken it first to a watchmaker that I really trust to have him regulate it. He took it to the back and in 5 minutes came out and said “you should send this back as I can’t adjust it because he put it on the machine it has “no movement”.. He said he could regulate it but it wouldn’t last. Rolex told me they completely serviced the movement..

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by francis

Have a 2019 Datejust 41 126300 under warranty that was running 30 seconds slow. Rolex had it for 2 weeks and sent it back. Now it’s +1 a week! Had taken it first to a watchmaker that I really trust to have him regulate it. He took it to the back and in 5 minutes came out and said “you should send this back as I can’t adjust it because he put it on the machine it has “no movement”.. He said he could regulate it but it wouldn’t last. Rolex told me they completely serviced the movement..

yeah, that's pretty consistent with a lot of experiences noted in this forum.

The key issue is if the issue returns. Mine did in about 5 months back from RSC.

[jssans]

Originally Posted by amanbra

yeah, that's pretty consistent with a lot of experiences noted in this forum.

The key issue is if the issue returns. Mine did in about 5 months back from RSC.

I have a 2019 41 Datejust that is around 20 sec slow. So is the consensus not to have it serviced till there is a fix announced?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by jssans

I have a 2019 41 Datejust that is around 20 sec slow. So is the consensus not to have it serviced till there is a fix announced?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure we have anything that would pass for a consensus, but since you still have several years of warranty there's no rush in that sense. If you are losing 20 seconds a day that's kind of the gray area. We've had others report 1 minute a day and that's pretty obviously in the "needs to go in" territory whereas others are "only" losing 10 seconds a day and are waiting it out. Usually when the timekeeping degrades owners report that it happens pretty suddenly. You might just want to keep an eye on it over the next couple months and see if it continues to get worse or if it plateaus. If it's the latter, it might just need a simple regulation.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by jssans

I have a 2019 41 Datejust that is around 20 sec slow. So is the consensus not to have it serviced till there is a fix announced?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

no consensus but what i'm going to do the 2nd time round is to wait for it to get super bad and then send it in hoping for a completely new movement under warranty.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by jssans

I have a 2019 41 Datejust that is around 20 sec slow. So is the consensus not to have it serviced till there is a fix announced?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Send it in now. 20 seconds a day is extremely bad. Rolex can’t work out a fix if they don’t have your watch.

[Tritto]

What would be interesting would be if someone experiencing put out of spec but not terrible performance (-20 seconds per day for example) were to write to Rolex asking if they should send their watch in now for rectification or whether they should wait until Rolex has a permanent fix for the premature wear issue. It would be interesting to know how Rolex responds to that question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by Tritto

What would be interesting would be if someone experiencing put out of spec but not terrible performance (-20 seconds per day for example) were to write to Rolex asking if they should send their watch in now for rectification or whether they should wait until Rolex has a permanent fix for the premature wear issue. It would be interesting to know how Rolex responds to that question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The official statement from my local RSC last month over the phone was "There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 3235 movement, not even with the first batches. It might just need a regulation, that's all." They denied the existence of a premature wear on the seconds hand wheel pivot.

Mine is losing 6s/d on average and I was offered to have it looked at and regulated, under warranty. I have a bit more than a year left on the warranty, I'm going to wait it out until I'm near the end, unless precision further degrades.

[Tritto]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

The official statement from my local RSC last month over the phone was "There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 3235 movement, not even with the first batches. It might just need a regulation, that's all." They denied the existence of a premature wear on the seconds hand wheel pivot.

Mine is losing 6s/d on average and I was offered to have it looked at and regulated, under warranty. I have a bit more than a year left on the warranty, I'm going to wait it out until I'm near the end, unless précision further degrades.

Good strategy. It maximises the chance you get the best upgrade/fix available before your warranty expires.
My suspicion is that Rolex will never publicly acknowledge an issue (assuming that there is actually an issue, as indicated by this thread and others).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

The official statement from my local RSC last month over the phone was "There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 3235 movement, not even with the first batches. It might just need a regulation, that's all." They denied the existence of a premature wear on the seconds hand wheel pivot.

Mine is losing 6s/d on average and I was offered to have it looked at and regulated, under warranty. I have a bit more than a year left on the warranty, I'm going to wait it out until I'm near the end, unless precision further degrades.

Yeah they're never going to admit...

you know what would be cool? if Joe Biden's DJs starts running slow and he tweated about it.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by amanbra

you know what would be cool? if Joe Biden's DJs starts running slow and he tweated about it.

He's old school, probably doesn't have a timegrapher. But if the state of the Union address starts 10 minutes late we can float the "32xx conspiracy theory" as an explanation.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

He's old school, probably doesn't have a timegrapher. But if the state of the Union address starts 10 minutes late we can float the "32xx conspiracy theory" as an explanation.

And would expect he is a more sensible Rolex owner like around 98% of Rolex owners, who just wear there watches and have no need of todays timegraphers etc.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by padi56

And would expect he is a more sensible Rolex owner like around 98% of Rolex owners, who just wear there watches and have no need of todays timegraphers etc.

One thing we can all set our watches to is the consistency of your comments. Don't ever change my friend :)

As for me, you may have just inspired me to make myself a t-shirt that says "part of the unsensible 2%". Would at least spark some good conversation at the AD.

[padi56]

Agree about the un-sensible part.

[LNGSD43]

I bought a brand new SD43 in 2019. Was -2 spd out of the box, stayed that way for about a year then dropped to -6 to -8 spd. Worn every day and left in various positions overnight with no noticeable difference in accuracy. Sent to RSC (UK) where they had it for the best part of 5 months. I’ve had it back a week and it runs around +0.25 spd regardless of resting position as far as I can tell. As expected no explanation given but I hope I’m late enough to this party that my watch now has a permanent fix. I guess time will tell unless someone knows what Rolex now do to address this problem?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

One thing we can all set our watches to is the consistency of your comments. Don't ever change my friend :)

As for me, you may have just inspired me to make myself a t-shirt that says "part of the unsensible 2%". Would at least spark some good conversation at the AD.

"At 12 I was trying to play Baseball. He sent me a text back saying Laughing my ass off"