ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
View Poll Results: Does your 32xx movement seem to be 100% ok? | |||
Yes, no issues | 1,059 | 69.67% | |
No, amplitude is low (below 200) but timekeeping is still fine | 62 | 4.08% | |
No, amplitude is low (below 200) and timekeeping is off (>5 s/d) | 399 | 26.25% | |
Voters: 1520. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
10 April 2021, 05:59 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,918
|
Thanks for coming back here. I agree with what Scott (aka Watchmaker) wrote "High amplitude is not analogous to good performance of a watch" I add that its starting value and time dependance is a very good indicator of movement health, see several graphs in this thread.
Interesting "that lower amplitude contributes to longer power reserve". I can't confirm but would like to see measurement data for this. Your SD43 came back from RSC Dallas in Dec 2019. Lift angle 55 degrees gave: DU: 284, +3 CL: 253, 0 CD: 267, +3 CR: 253, +1 DD: 293, +4 Your data yield to X = +2.2 and D = 3, which is very good. I don't understand why you measured in position CR = 12U and not CU = 3U. Is that right? For a watch serviced by a RSC in 12/2020 it would be interesting if you could measure for DU the amplitude decrease with time, i.e. from full caliber winding (t = 0) to the end of the power reserve (t = 70-72 h) using 53 degrees lift angle. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 13 (0 members and 13 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.