Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
|
This is really great, thank you for taking the time to collect! I'm in the middle of a 72 hour test on my 32xx currently. In your case, even though the last part of the 72 hour PR is pretty bad for accuracy, the PR overall still seems to be a winner compared to the 31xx (higher amplitude and better accuracy in the 4x hour range). Although your 32xx amplitude is definitely better than mine. I was at 184 crown down after only 24 hours. I'm testing every 12 hours and from 60 to 72 I'll test every 2 hours. Will post when completed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy
If, and I am not doubting your assessment, if, all this issue is caused by a single part wearing out excessively fast, why couldn’t Rolex solve the problem by replacing it with a more robust part? Or modifying the part it connects with to offer less resistance/friction/wear? I realize there are microscopic and extremely complicated interactions between all the parts in an automatic watch, and it may not be THAT simple, (just make the part out of a higher grade metal) but Rolex has been in business for 100 years making fine timepieces, I am sure if they identified the problem as this one part, WHY can’t they come up with a permanent solution?  |
I'd almost be content having the problem if I could just understand what the problem is. I have the same types of questions you do. It seems baffling that if a part is wearing (as Bas said from improper tolerances) that those tolerances couldn't just be tweaked. The 32xx represents an evolution in movements, not a revolution. I fail to see how any wheel or pivot in this movement is so fundamentally different than any predecessor that Rolex truly may just have a bad design here.