32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by saxo3

With all respect, can you please show us only one 'complete' (5 positions) Witschi timegrapher measurement, as a Witschi screenshot, with 300° amplitudes in dial up and/or dial down?

Regrettably, we just don't keep that sort of documentation in my shop, and I cannot produce that on demand. I have been servicing 32's for a few years now, and in that time I have only seen a couple with amplitudes that high. If I see another one, I will post it.

[nikola0406]

So I would guess that rate issue is due to seconds wheel lubrication problem, that was mentioned somewhere and not to a low or lower amplitude, as we can see on new watches that it keeps perfect time with a really low amplitude. I heard many stories about that problem with lubrication.

[Pepperjack]

A quick search yielded this timing sheet as posted by DJ2020. It's not quite the 300, but I can see someone rounding it to 300. This thread discussed the lift angle of the 32xx, and the difference between using 55 vs 53 could also explain the following amplitude.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=699001

Originally Posted by DJ2020

Here's a photo of my new DJ 126200 timing .

[saxo3]

What do you want to tell me?

High amplitudes (298°; 290°) measured with a wrong lift angle (55° instead of 53°) for a new 32xx watch that has a power reserve of only 54 hours?

Come on! You are a professional watchmaker? This piece of paper is worth nothing.

FACT: the difference between 55° and 53° lift angles is about 11° in amplitude.

My measurements (below) and a very simple calculation proof that. The shown error bars (in the graph) are measured precision numbers.

I am afraid that this thread has now taken a wrong direction.
In my view we should discuss correctly measured 32xx data, especially of new 2023-24 watches.

[maratka]

Originally Posted by saxo3

I am afraid that this thread has now taken a wrong direction.
In my view we should discuss correctly measured 32xx data, especially of new 2023-24 watches.

Agree.

[digiwatch]

My blue Yachtmaster (Reference 126622) started losing time exactly one year after purchase. Picked it up in June 2023, and today at the AD the timegrapher measurements confirmed that it'll need a trip to Rolex HQ.

- Watchmaker: what did you do to the watch?
- Me: nothing
- Watchmaker: that's what they all say!
- Me: I know about the low amplitude issues in your 3235 movements.
- Watchmaker: don't worry, we'll fix it under warranty.

[maratka]

I am waiting for the timegrapher. In the meantime, the watch runs steadily at +0.5-1,5 seconds per day, regardless of position. I am continuing the tests.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by digiwatch

My blue Yachtmaster (Reference 126622) started losing time exactly one year after purchase. Picked it up in June 2023, and today at the AD the timegrapher measurements confirmed that it'll need a trip to Rolex HQ.

- Watchmaker: what did you do to the watch?
- Me: nothing
- Watchmaker: that's what they all say!
- Me: I know about the low amplitude issues in your 3235 movements.
- Watchmaker: don't worry, we'll fix it under warranty.

First post welcome!

Thanks for the info and timegrapher data, your 06/2023 watch has caught the virus.

Questions/Answers suggest that this watchmaker is an AD (Bucherer?) liar and incompetent.
Otherwise he would have known that Rolex movements are not regulated in 6 but 5 positions and should have skipped the measurement in 12U.

Anyhow, sorry to hear that also your watch has the well known 32xx caliber issue.
With X = -2 s/d, how much is this watch losing on your wrist?

[Easy E]

I have another one slipping. Its a 2021 model.

[digiwatch]

Originally Posted by saxo3

First post welcome!

Thanks for the info and timegrapher data, your 06/2023 watch has caught the virus.

Questions/Answers suggest that this watchmaker is an AD (Bucherer?) liar and incompetent.
Otherwise he would have known that Rolex movements are not regulated in 6 but 5 positions and should have skipped the measurement in 12U.

Anyhow, sorry to hear that also your watch has the well known 32xx caliber issue.
With X = -2 s/d, how much is this watch losing on your wrist?

Thanks!

I'm a long time lurker, and was hoping that by 2023 Rolex would've addressed the issue in production...

When I got the watch in June 2023, I used WatchTracker to measure its accuracy:

• Best-fit rate (per day): -0.07 s
• Best-fit accuracy: ± 0.02 s
• Total days: 24

I did the last measurement 6 months later:

• Best-fit rate (per day): -1.3 s
• Best-fit accuracy: ± 0.1 s
• Total days: 4

I just picked up my new Submariner (124060), and after two days it's running slow at -1.4 s/d. However, it's too early to draw conclusions, so I'll keep wearing it and measure its accuracy.

I also ordered a Weishi 1900, and will post results here.

[Annan]

Originally Posted by digiwatch

My blue Yachtmaster (Reference 126622) started losing time exactly one year after purchase. Picked it up in June 2023, and today at the AD the timegrapher measurements confirmed that it'll need a trip to Rolex HQ.

- Watchmaker: what did you do to the watch?
- Me: nothing
- Watchmaker: that's what they all say!
- Me: I know about the low amplitude issues in your 3235 movements.
- Watchmaker: don't worry, we'll fix it under warranty.

When the watchmaker responded: don't worry, we'll fix it under warranty, I would have responded: that's what they all say!

[maratka]

So, the watch is from 05/2024, caliber 3235, lift angle 53 degrees, fully wound. Weishi 1900.

Dial UP +3 s/d 270 degrees BE 0,2ms
Crown UP -1 s/d 236 degrees BE 0,1ms
Dial Down +0 s/d 269 degrees BE 0,0ms
Crown Down +1 s/d 233 degrees BE 0,3ms
12H UP -1 s/d 228 degrees BE 0,0ms
6H UP +0 s/d 230 degrees BE 0,2ms

What do you think about it?

I will conduct a repeated measurement in 24 hours.

[CharlesN]

Viral Infection
Viral infections occur when a virus enters the entity and successfully takes over a host cell to begin the process of causing problems. This can occur at the site of entry, also known as a localized infection, or the virus can spread throughout the body, causing a systemic infection and failure in varying degrees.

Contagious
The duration that an infected watch can be contagious varies and can be impacted by the severity of the viral infection. It is usually only deemed to only reach full good order after a visit to a spa aka Service Center.

It is possible for a watch to be a carrier of a virus without showing any symptoms in the beginning but spreading the virus to others around them who immediately reach for a timegrapher to hopefully understand the situation..

[maratka]

Here are the results after 24 hours:
DU +2 s/d 243 degrees 0,1 ms
Crown Up +0 s/d 215 degrees 0,0 ms
DD +0 s/d 244 degrees 0,1 ms
6H Up +0 s/d 212 degrees 0,2 ms
12H Up -4 s/d 207 degrees 0,0 ms
What do you think about it?

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by maratka

Here are the results after 24 hours:
DU +2 s/d 243 degrees 0,1 ms
Crown Up +0 s/d 215 degrees 0,0 ms
DD +0 s/d 244 degrees 0,1 ms
6H Up +0 s/d 212 degrees 0,2 ms
12H Up -4 s/d 207 degrees 0,0 ms
What do you think about it?

It looks like you are measuring slightly wrong

You are measuring 12H. That’s something that’s not measured

The 5 positions to measure in no particular order are …
CH, CB, 3H, 6H and 9H.

Rolex 32xx movements are measured in 5 positions (Not 6) leaving out 12H

[maratka]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

It looks like you are measuring slightly wrong

You are measuring 12H. That’s something that’s not measured

The 5 positions to measure in no particular order are …
CH, CB, 3H, 6H and 9H.

Rolex 32xx movements are measured in 5 positions (Not 6) leaving out 12H

I just decided to provide all the information, as there is an opportunity.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by maratka

So, the watch is from 05/2024, caliber 3235, lift angle 53 degrees, fully wound. Weishi 1900. 
 
Dial UP +3 s/d 270 degrees  BE 0,2ms
Crown UP -1 s/d 236 degrees  BE 0,1ms
Dial Down +0 s/d 269 degrees  BE 0,0ms
Crown Down +1 s/d 233 degrees  BE 0,3ms
12H UP -1 s/d 228 degrees  BE 0,0ms
6H UP +0 s/d 230 degrees  BE 0,2ms
 
What do you think about it?
 
I will conduct a repeated measurement in 24 hours.

Originally Posted by maratka

Here are the results after 24 hours:
DU +2 s/d 243 degrees 0,1 ms 
Crown Up +0 s/d 215 degrees 0,0 ms 
DD +0 s/d 244 degrees 0,1 ms 
6H Up +0 s/d 212 degrees 0,2 ms 
12H Up -4 s/d 207 degrees 0,0 ms 
What do you think about it?

Well done

Your data, amplitudes summarized below, show that this new watch has no issue.

You forgot to measure in position 9U after 24 hours?

[maratka]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Well done

Your data, amplitudes summarized below, show that this new watch has no issue.

You forgot to measure in position 9U after 24 hours?

I forgot to write ��
Crown Down -1 s/d 207 degrees 0.3ms.
Thank you very much for your tabular presentation.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by maratka

I forgot to write ��
Crown Down -1 s/d 207 degrees 0.3ms.
Thank you very much for your tabular presentation.

You are welcome

[saxo3]

5000 posts, 452.000 views, 41 months

[CharlesN]

The information given in this thread has been a great help to me for one.

I am sure many others have been fascinated by the data and what it has proved and shown also.

Thank you for your contributions.

[CharlesN]

I felt it was probably time for a small refresher for one and all as to the correct procedure for measuring watches with a 32xx caliber.

The procedure is very simple and it is the same if you have almost any brand of timegrapher.

It would seem that many of the members here have bought Weishi branded timegraphers and although they are relatively inexpensive they do give very good, clear and accurate results.

So …. Here is a simple to follow guide of what the correct procedure is …..

For everybody joining in the fun of caliber investigations using a timegrapher, I fully recommend you follow these simple steps:

Do the following procedures in a quiet environment as noises can affect the readings. (Turn the Taylor Swift music down).

1). Firstly set your Timegrapher to measure with the lift angle of 53 degrees. This is the angle that Rolex have designed into the watch, any other angle will result in false inaccurate readings.

2). Use the highest possible setting for sensitivity - On a Weishi 1900 model this is 99.9

3). Measure your watch in 5 positions (DU, DD, 3U, 6U, 9U) (Not the 12U position) and note down the rates, amplitudes, and beat errors. All of this data is very useful.
Rolex watches are measured in only 5 positions.

4). Start off by fully winding your watch (40+ complete crown turns as a minimum)

5). Place the watch on your timegrapher, in the DU position.

6). Wait (10-15 minutes) for stabilisation. (Please be patient !) Don’t touch the watch

7). Start your timegrapher measurements, which usually takes about 2 minutes in each of the 5 (NOT 6) positions.

8). Change watch position after 2 minutes, wait (2 minutes) and then measure the next position and so on until you have completed all 5 positions

9). This you do sequentially for all 5 positions. I recommend you use the sequence of DU, 6U,9U, 3U and lastly DD

10). Save all data in a spreadsheet file (Preferably an Excel file).

11). Calculate average values and error bars (standard deviation).

12). Save the file.

On some machines you will see the positions as:
CH, 6H, 9H, 3H, CB. Don’t worry, many machines use French as their language but the order is the same. Either method of writing the results is good as they are exactly the same.

For long term measurements, leave your watch (at rest) in DU position on the timegrapher, repeat the sequence with certain time intervals. Such as 12 hour, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hour intervals.

But … Between these intervals leave your watch still and undisturbed and untouched in the DU position

Note: The more data you collect the better; with 0, 24, 36 etc. intervals … If you don’t follow a full sequence you are likely to miss detecting some caliber characteristics, e.g. a fast decrease in amplitudes after full winding.

Following these simple procedures will allow us to obtain comparable data sets, which can be visualised in graphs, as done previously in this thread.



Glossary:
DU (or CH). = Dial Up
DD (or CB). = Dial Down
3U (or 3H). = 3 Up
6U (or 6H). = 6 Up
9U (or 9H). = 9 Up

To calculate the average reading …
Add all 5 figures in a sequence and then divide by 5. Thats the average.

The Sigma is the difference between the highest and lowest reading in a set.

Note:
A lot of the procedure typed here has been copied and pasted from posts and advice given by our good friend here on this forum Saxo3

[maratka]

Is it true that the problem with this mechanism is still unknown? Is it correct that the number of complaints about new watches has indeed decreased, which possibly means the issue has been resolved?
At the moment, it is still possible to buy watches with the old 3135 movement. Should I consider purchasing a watch with the old mechanism, or is it not worth it?

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by maratka

Is it true that the problem with this mechanism is still unknown? Is it correct that the number of complaints about new watches has indeed decreased, which possibly means the issue has been resolved?
At the moment, it is still possible to buy watches with the old 3135 movement. Should I consider purchasing a watch with the old mechanism, or is it not worth it?

My understanding is the causes of the issues are all guesses at this point, many seem to point towards some kind of lubrication issue.

The "decrease" in problems seems to come from a recent post by Bas saying he's seeing much fewer 32xx movements coming in with issues than in the past.

That does make me hopeful, but I'd personally want to see a lot more evidence that Rolex has come up with a permanent fix.

FWIW, my personal opinion is these movements are duds. I think what is most likely is Rolex comes up with a new movement (either the 33xx or a massive change in the architecture of the 32xx) and moves on, and the 32xx watches end up needing service at much more frequent intervals than other watches.

[maratka]

Originally Posted by the dark knight

My understanding is the causes of the issues are all guesses at this point, many seem to point towards some kind of lubrication issue.

The "decrease" in problems seems to come from a recent post by Bas saying he's seeing much fewer 32xx movements coming in with issues than in the past.

That does make me hopeful, but I'd personally want to see a lot more evidence that Rolex has come up with a permanent fix.

FWIW, my personal opinion is these movements are duds. I think what is most likely is Rolex comes up with a new movement (either the 33xx or a massive change in the architecture of the 32xx) and moves on, and the 32xx watches end up needing service at much more frequent intervals than other watches.

**My humble opinion:** Unfortunately, I probably have to agree with you. Rolex is a very large company with surely competent engineers on board. If the problem hasn't been definitively solved in 6 years (or more?), it's likely that the solution somehow impacts the claims they've made (particularly regarding the power reserve). However, as we know, creating a movement with a 70-hour power reserve is not that difficult a task (considering we're talking about Rolex) and without losing accuracy. But I think the solution to this problem requires such a substantial change to the current design that most parts would need to be replaced, and it just wouldn't be the same anymore. Hence, I conclude that you are right, and there will either be a deep modernization or a new caliber (or they'll call this modernization a new caliber :) ). If we assume that fixing this defect involves replacing, say, 80% of the parts (I'm just making this up), then such an operation could likely only be done at the factory, which is essentially assembling new watches with a new mechanism that requires complex quality control and a lot of time. Currently, Rolex is focused on producing and selling rather than halting production to deal with millions of already released calibers. Therefore, I am almost certain that there will be no solution to this problem. They will continue with "quick" repairs that do not require large production capacities, which are much more needed for new watches. This conclusion makes me think that, unfortunately, the only options left are to either endure the problem and constantly take them to the service center, buy a 3135, or wait for the new generation.

[Toshk]

Originally Posted by maratka

**My humble opinion:** Unfortunately, I probably have to agree with you. Rolex is a very large company with surely competent engineers on board. If the problem hasn't been definitively solved in 6 years (or more?), it's likely that the solution somehow impacts the claims they've made (particularly regarding the power reserve). However, as we know, creating a movement with a 70-hour power reserve is not that difficult a task (considering we're talking about Rolex) and without losing accuracy. But I think the solution to this problem requires such a substantial change to the current design that most parts would need to be replaced, and it just wouldn't be the same anymore. Hence, I conclude that you are right, and there will either be a deep modernization or a new caliber (or they'll call this modernization a new caliber :) ). If we assume that fixing this defect involves replacing, say, 80% of the parts (I'm just making this up), then such an operation could likely only be done at the factory, which is essentially assembling new watches with a new mechanism that requires complex quality control and a lot of time. Currently, Rolex is focused on producing and selling rather than halting production to deal with millions of already released calibers. Therefore, I am almost certain that there will be no solution to this problem. They will continue with "quick" repairs that do not require large production capacities, which are much more needed for new watches. This conclusion makes me think that, unfortunately, the only options left are to either endure the problem and constantly take them to the service center, buy a 3135, or wait for the new generation.

I have the same opinion. Think new calibre will be released soon. Just wonder what they will manage to disguise it as. Silicon hairspring perhaps? Improved anti magnetism for the new Millgouse? And then fit in whatever models are due next.

[Poodlopogus]

Mostly lurk here but took a recent interest in this thread as I believe I may have an affected watch (was always +0.5-1 s/d, then all of a sudden a few weeks ago -1.7 s/d). Has anybody had a 3230 that genuinely just required regulation?

Originally Posted by the dark knight

The "decrease" in problems seems to come from a recent post by Bas saying he's seeing much fewer 32xx movements coming in with issues than in the past.

That does make me hopeful, but I'd personally want to see a lot more evidence that Rolex has come up with a permanent fix.

I have two hypotheses about why that could be the case without any actual "fix" implemented:

1. Rolex is calibrating movements at the factory to run much closer to the +2 end of the tolerance. That could potentially delay the time it takes for the watch to fall out of spec. I guarantee 99% of people making warranty claims are doing so based on timekeeping (that is either obvious or they track on an app) as opposed to amplitude.

2. Rolex is voiding more warranties of watches traded on the secondary market.

Originally Posted by maratka

However, as we know, creating a movement with a 70-hour power reserve is not that difficult a task (considering we're talking about Rolex) and without losing accuracy. But I think the solution to this problem requires such a substantial change to the current design that most parts would need to be replaced, and it just wouldn't be the same anymore. Hence, I conclude that you are right, and there will either be a deep modernization or a new caliber (or they'll call this modernization a new caliber :) ).

Rolex did develop a 70hr PR movement that can fit in a relatively thin 36mm case and maintain better-than-COSC-accuracy. However, they use Kenissi to produce it and it's fitted to the latest generation of Tudors. Still amazes me that somehow R&D was unable to replicate real-world conditions well enough to catch this during development.

As for repairs to 3230-series watches, I wonder when it'll get cheap enough to replace the movements with the "new" series at service?

Originally Posted by Toshk

I have the same opinion. Think new calibre will be released soon. Just wonder what they will manage to disguise it as. Silicon hairspring perhaps? Improved anti magnetism for the new Millgouse? And then fit in whatever models are due next.

If they're savvy in this department, they'll start with a Tudor MT design, then "enhance" it enough to make it relatively unrecognizable. Or it'll be based on the one they brought out for the 1908.

Unfortunately, there aren't too many in-production 36mm watches with manufacture calibers and 100m (or more) depth rating. Tudors look great, but I don't like the idea of movement swaps at service (especially ones using used parts).

[nikola0406]

Mine is -2s on a wrist out of a box and it is brand new, so they are not regulated to +2s. Also my friends OP is -2s a day on the wrist.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by nikola0406

Mine is -2s on a wrist out of a box and it is brand new, so they are not regulated to +2s. Also my friends OP is -2s a day on the wrist.

Regulating a watch caliber in a well controlled laboratory environment and timekeeping on an owners wrist is NOT the same.

The achieved accuracy on a wrist depends on many individual parameters, including temperature.

[nikola0406]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Regulating a watch caliber in a well controlled laboratory environment and timekeeping on an owners wrist is NOT the same.

The achieved accuracy on a wrist depends on many individual parameters, including temperature.

Sure, I agree and that is why I think that change of a sec or two up or down in a couple of months is not valid and nothing to worry about. I would not send my watch with that kind of variation, more then 10s per day is something to worry about