3230 Movement, no paraflex?

[JohanJvR]

Good morning all

Can someone please help me understand how paraflex shock absorbers work?
On the website, it specifically mentions paraflex together with the parachrom mainspring on all the 3235 movements.

But with the new submariner and 3230 movement, the website only mentions parachrom mainspring. Therefore I assume no paraflex shock absorbers fitted.

What I want to try and learn - what is the function of paraflex shock absorbers, is it linked to the date function of a movement only or not? Therefore not needed/beneficial if the movement does not have a date?

Thank you in advance

[Hub6152]

Originally Posted by JohanJvR

Good morning all

Can someone please help me understand how paraflex shock absorbers work?
On the website, it specifically mentions paraflex together with the parachrom mainspring on all the 3235 movements.

But with the new submariner and 3230 movement, the website only mentions parachrom mainspring. Therefore I assume no paraflex shock absorbers fitted.

What I want to try and learn - what is the function of paraflex shock absorbers, is it linked to the date function of a movement only or not? Therefore not needed/beneficial if the movement does not have a date?

Thank you in advance

A paraflex shock absorber is the little spring device that sits on top of the cap jewels of the balance wheel pivots that allows a little movement if the watch were to be dropped or subject to a shock thereby preventing the balance staff pivots from breaking. Paraflex is just the name for the Rolex proprietary design. In other words it’s an anti shock device.

[mdx77]

Originally Posted by Hub6152

A paraflex shock absorber is the little spring device that sits on top of the cap jewels of the balance wheel pivots that allows a little movement if the watch were to be dropped or subject to a shock thereby preventing the balance staff pivots from breaking. Paraflex is just the name for the Rolex proprietary design. In other words it’s an anti shock device.

This. Exactly. Also, just to note, Rolex has had this for almost 2 decades and isn’t anything “new”. And you’ve seen them before, but probably never knew what it was exactly. Here’s a photo:

[JCF81]

i think this page explains the shock absorption concepts quite well: http://watchonado.com.au/watch-shock-protection-basics/

the 3230 is equipped with Paraflex.


In contrast the 3130 used KIF.

[alphadweller]

An illustration of the 3230 main features, including paraflex shock absorber.

[Hub6152]

Many older watches would actually say Incabloc on the dial to indicate they’d been fitted with shock protection and therefore would be more robust. Incabloc is still in use today by many brands but Rolex went their own way.

[Bill_H]

The spec on the website is probably wrong. The photo of the 3230 on this page shows a paraflex shock absorber holding the jewel for the balance wheel.

https://www.rolex.com/watches/oyster...4300-0001.html

[JohanJvR]

Thank you for all the reply’s.

Very informative! Enjoy the weekend everyone.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Hub6152

Many older watches would actually say Incabloc on the dial to indicate they’d been fitted with shock protection and therefore would be more robust. Incabloc is still in use today by many brands but Rolex went their own way.

Rolex use the KIF system before using their own in-house made paraflex,but in the real world would doubt its any better than the other shock systems used on all watches world wide.

[Hub6152]

Originally Posted by padi56

Rolex use the KIF system before using their own in-house made paraflex,but in the real world would doubt its any better than the other shock systems used on all watches world wide.

Yes - I was generalising a little. Interesting that KIF wasn’t so widely adopted in the industry as was/is Incabloc. I guess that’s because Incabloc was much easier to utilise given it’s hinge and no need for a special tool to fit it so I wonder why Rolex (and Tudor) did use KIF?

[illiguy]

Was paraflex fitted on the 3130 and 3135?

[watchmaker]

Originally Posted by Hub6152

Yes - I was generalising a little. Interesting that KIF wasn’t so widely adopted in the industry as was/is Incabloc. I guess that’s because Incabloc was much easier to utilise given it’s hinge and no need for a special tool to fit it so I wonder why Rolex (and Tudor) did use KIF?

Not all Kif systems require a key to fit and remove the springs. The version used by Rolex on the 31xx being an example.

As for incabloc vs kif and why choose one over the other. There’s no significant benefit or drawbacks in either camp which is why they are fairly evenly utilised throughout the industry. Not sure what makes you think otherwise.