32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[saxo3]

I will not respond or argue back and forth with some of the participants here and in other 32xx threads.

Their last posts about the 32xx topic are not factual, some other contributors are permanently provocative without any tiny content. We all know the most prominent guys doing that nearly every day. Why they do it? Because they can.

My interest in this topic is, and always was, purely technical and far beyond any sarcastic or destructive debates.

I have tried to help a few members here, which took quite some time for certain fellows, but it did not matter because I enjoyed it, including producing the graphs which (for me) are a nice way to visualize and compare different watches.

I'm not going to explain the difference between accuracy and precision again, nor translate poorly written timegrapher manuals.

Certainly no (watch) discussion is worth to end up in personal communication fights on the Internet; not with me.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Your post record on the 32×× related threads is also bordering insanity



Live & let live.

I have never disputed the existence of an anomaly or questioned your personal credibility, I have merely expressed doubt about the ubiquity and apocalyptic inevitability of the problem as amplified by a disproportionately vocal few.

Your exhortation to live and let live can apply to many strong opinions on these multiple 32XX related threads, not just mine.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

O To say owning the 1000 is a "pity" is just more condescending crap that is unhelpful and rude (but on-brand).

I don't think I have said owning a Weishi is a "Pity" at all.

I certainly did not want to or attempt to be condescending in any way.

I am trying to be helpful and answer questions honestly and truthfully and using my own opinion based on my personal experience.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Imagine having to buy a special machine so you can more precisely hate your watch. Insanity.

This is the epitome of the divide between forum goers who view watches as fashion/collector baubles and forum goers who view them as precision instruments meant to be studied.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I don't think I have said owning a Weishi is a "Pity" at all.

I certainly did not want to or attempt to be condescending in any way.

I am trying to be helpful and answer questions honestly and truthfully and using my own opinion based on my personal experience.

I already quoted the person who said it was a pity. I won't mention his name because now he's not mentioning my name and that is apparently the way mature people communicate with each other

What you did say, Charles, is that the 1900 produces "much greater information with which a much better understanding of errors can be calculated and seen." Of the 1000 you also said "I found the data I was collecting was nowhere near accurate enough for serious recording of data." I'm calling BS. You and "the other guy" have turned this movement problem into a fetish over data collection. That's great, enjoy your fancy machines. I like cool tools as well. But it's completely disingenuous to suggest that anything beyond integer values are necessary to know if these watches have a problem. That cannot be disputed. This thread would not even exist if the problem at hand were a matter of fractions of a second.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

This is the epitome of the divide between forum goers who view watches as fashion/collector baubles and forum goers who view them as precision instruments meant to be studied.

This is the epitome of attempting to elevate one’s argument through the personal diminishment of others. I am well aware of the performance characteristics of each of my watches, as I wear them in rotation I check them for accuracy daily over periods of weeks and months. I have not however purchased a special machine to hunt for performance abnormalities because my watches all do what I need them to do, they keep consistent time. This is a valid use of and appreciation for watches. My disinclination to hunt for problems does not lessen or invalidate my credibility on the subject of discussing watches on an online forum nor does it define me as motivated by fashion. I got my first watch fifty-five years ago and I still have it among many others. My observation is simply this, if you invest in hunting for a problem you’re gonna find one and if a small group of people get together to discuss their similar findings then the noise they make will undoubtedly be larger than the problem itself. This is a very small dataset of very focused individuals, hardly class-action lawsuit numbers and hardly a conspiracy. This is an echo chamber.

[atxwatch]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

...This is a very small dataset of very focused individuals, hardly class-action lawsuit numbers and hardly a conspiracy. This is an echo chamber...

For now. Time will tell. Some of us will keep following this thread and report our findings. You can simply leave the echo chamber and read other threads. That simple, really.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

This is a very small dataset of very focused individuals, hardly class-action lawsuit numbers and hardly a conspiracy. This is an echo chamber.

Well, a couple of things in the spirit of the hobby. It's not that small a data set; over 1200 contributions to the poll. The poll is not perfect; we don't know the bias towards over or under reporting but an N greater than 1000 is a decent sample size, of which roughly 25-30 percent are reporting problems. It could be less, it could be more but it's not zero. Even at 10% that's 100K watches a year. So there probably is something to it.

The other thing is that in any hobby forum, there will always be a subset of people who are interested in performance. Cars/computers/kitchen knives/doesn't matter. Go to a computer forum and some people are into over-clocking and will go on about that, some people are into speed of rendering and will compare graphics cards and stated vs measured performance in excruciating detail. Knife guys will compare steels and ease of sharpening vs cutting yada. It's kinda what distinguishes a hobbyist from a casual user. Hobbyists enjoy digging in a little more. Which is all we are doing here.

Rolex makes a big deal of their movements being rugged, reliable and accurate. They invented their own "superlative chronometer" certification and print it on every dial. Some people who spend 10K on a watch which promises a certain level of performance expect that level of performance. The same as computer or automobile that publishes a spec. Some people will never take their car to the track or max out the rendering capabilities of their graphics card but superior performance usually comes at a superior cost. Not all but some of those users will want the performance they paid for. That seems reasonable to me and investigating and documenting performance is a part of any hobby but might not be the part that everyone is interested in. For my part I think this discussion is far more interesting than squeaking bracelets, the size of the glidelock or which shade of green is more green. It goes to the heart of what Rolex, at least to some of us, has always been about.

[Mountain]

Come on guys, this is a very useful thread for data and technical discussion. Let’s not degenerate into emotional juvenile squabbling!

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

This is the epitome of attempting to elevate one’s argument through the personal diminishment of others. I am well aware of the performance characteristics of each of my watches, as I wear them in rotation I check them for accuracy daily over periods of weeks and months. I have not however purchased a special machine to hunt for performance abnormalities because my watches all do what I need them to do, they keep consistent time. This is a valid use of and appreciation for watches. My disinclination to hunt for problems does not lessen or invalidate my credibility on the subject of discussing watches on an online forum nor does it define me as motivated by fashion. I got my first watch fifty-five years ago and I still have it among many others. My observation is simply this, if you invest in hunting for a problem you’re gonna find one and if a small group of people get together to discuss their similar findings then the noise they make will undoubtedly be larger than the problem itself. This is a very small dataset of very focused individuals, hardly class-action lawsuit numbers and hardly a conspiracy. This is an echo chamber.

I certainly didn’t mean you have to own a timegrapher to care about watch performance, but, if you ridicule others for buying one, it's suspicious. I mean, many of us have owned timegraphers for years, and I can't imagine being in a tech forum for any enthusiast topic and telling others that buying diagnostic tools is a poor decision. Heck, figuring out what's wrong with my vintage car is unfortunately a daily occurrence for me.

Plus, calling someone a fashionista and/or collector of watches wasn't a negative attack. I'd imagine a large majority of the Rolex forum members would happily admit to simply being into the fashion/collecting aspect of the hobby, and there's nothing wrong with that. I’d imagine we all straddle those lines to some degree.

[Mountain]

Originally Posted by Mountain

Come on guys, this is a very useful thread for data and technical discussion. Let’s not degenerate into emotional juvenile squabbling!

Please let me clarify as my comment may be misinterpreted. I have valued all of the technical discussions and guidance when buying and subsequently operating a timeographer. I think others have benefited from this too. In fact, I only joined this forum after my watch developed problems.

I think the thread would benefit from the technical conversation continuing, but without the unnecessary one liners from those in denial. In fact, I’m not sure why you even open this thread if not interested!?!

Anyway, that’s me for now. Thank you, Saxo3, HiBoost, CharlesN et al for the great contribution- I’ve learned a lot!

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Imagine having to buy a special machine so you can more precisely hate your watch. Insanity.

As has been said, do you mean ‘more accurately’?

[sski]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I'm not 100% clear on what you are describing. But if the watch lost 35 minutes (and was still running) that is quite bad. When I have monitored mine all the way to the end of the PR the timekeeping does fall off a lot more near the very end, but there isn't enough time spent in this condition for the net time error to add up to that much.

For example... lets say in the final hour of power reserve the watch is losing 30 seconds per day (this is the worst I have seen)... well in that final hour of running, a rate of -30 s/d amounts to a total of 1.25 seconds being lost compared to the atomic clock. In order to accumulate 35 MINUTES of error you would have to be running really, really slowly which even at low power reserve would be abnormal.

I suggest getting some kind of measuring device or taking it in to a watchmaker. Based on the little info you have given, something does not seem right.

Thanks HiBoost! since I still have the Rolex warranty on it, i'll just take it in to the AD for warranty service.

any idea how to get something in writing to gauge what it may be? this is not the first time i have noticed this behaviour either.

I had taken it on vacation and had it on 24/7 on my wrist. in the 2nd week while on vacation, i noticed it fall behind by 40+ mins.

Since the more recent occurrence showed the same behavior, somethings up with it. Would love to know the exact cause.

[Tridor]

This purported "conversation" has devolved significantly into a pi$$ing contest between folks who can't or won't play nicely in the sandbox. Can we please get back on track to the problems with the 32xx? Thank you.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SearChart

…post record…

Understandable why some dinosaurs are clueless in the fog

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

This is the epitome of attempting to elevate one’s argument through the personal diminishment of others. I am well aware of the performance characteristics of each of my watches, as I wear them in rotation I check them for accuracy daily over periods of weeks and months. I have not however purchased a special machine to hunt for performance abnormalities because my watches all do what I need them to do, they keep consistent time. This is a valid use of and appreciation for watches. My disinclination to hunt for problems does not lessen or invalidate my credibility on the subject of discussing watches on an online forum nor does it define me as motivated by fashion. I got my first watch fifty-five years ago and I still have it among many others. My observation is simply this, if you invest in hunting for a problem you’re gonna find one and if a small group of people get together to discuss their similar findings then the noise they make will undoubtedly be larger than the problem itself. This is a very small dataset of very focused individuals, hardly class-action lawsuit numbers and hardly a conspiracy. This is an echo chamber.

You've made your point multiple times yet apparently feel the need to continue doing so.

Is the irony of your position perhaps lost on you? Or are you hoping that by making enough of your own noise the problem will somehow disappear?

Let it go. Move on. Let those with a genuine interest in this continue without you feeling the need to fix or stop what you clearly perceive as in some way a waste of time (no pun intended)

As has been said, live and let live.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Devildog

You've made your point multiple times yet apparently feel the need to continue doing so.

Is the irony of your position perhaps lost on you? Or are you hoping that by making enough of your own noise the problem will somehow disappear?

Let it go. Move on. Let those with a genuine interest in this continue without you feeling the need to fix or stop what you clearly perceive as in some way a waste of time (no pun intended)

As has been said, live and let live.

Just block him...

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by sski

any idea how to get something in writing to gauge what it may be? this is not the first time i have noticed this behaviour either.

The only thing concrete you can get from a local watchmaker is a timegrapher printout. It will show amplitude and timing in various orientations of the watch and will provide an overview of the movement health. Think of it like a set of blood results from your doctor. It won't directly tell you *why* things are bad, but it will usually show *if* they are bad, as well as how bad they are.

Also don't count on anything useful from RSC when it comes back from service. They are notorious for not telling you what they found or did, they'll simply say "performed serviced" and send it back. Especially when it is warranty work and you aren't being charged for individual items, you most likely won't even know if parts were replaced or if it was just cleaned/oil and put back together.

[thxv009]

got my BLNR last week and didn't know about this issue. I even had dust under crystal. Went to the AD they removed it and checked the movement for 24h. No issues but i didn't know of this problem so I don't know if they just looked at the time or amplitude as well.

But again my watch is less than 2 weeks old. Currently it's my most accurate watch. Set time 6 days ago and the watch gained about 0.3 sec TOTAL.
I don't plan to buy a timegrapher bc that would make me paranoid and I want to enjoy the watch.

My hope is they fixed it somehow bc I don't read much about 21-22 watches (yes they are newer but i think I've read that some 2018-19 watches already have send to service after 6-9 months)

[rbndylan]

Hello, sorry in advance for my English. I bought at the end of February an OP41 silver which has the 3230 movement. For 2 months, it was constantly stagnating at 0 and now, it turns at about -1 per day. I bought a 1900 timegrapher to check how my watch was behaving. I will do in a few days the test in 24h / 48h / 72h.

Completely rolled up, the measurements are as follows:
DU : +1.4 : 267 : 0ms
9H : -3.5 : 231 : 0.1ms
3H : -2.3 : 224 : 0.3ms
6H : -3.7 : 211 : 0ms
DD : +0.5 : 250 : 0ms

What I find strange with the measurements is that for example I left the watch at the dial up for 1h without measuring on the timegrapher and when I tried to measure, the amplitude was 278. I don't know if I missed something but I position the watch then I usually wait 5min before launching the measurement which I leave for 5/10min. If you have an opinion on this and also on the measurements I gave previously, thank you!

[Andad]

That 6H reading looks low to me at full PR.

I am intersted to see the readings at 24 & 48.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by rbndylan

Hello, sorry in advance for my English.

Bienvenue, pas de soucis
We speak Franglais here

For comparison, very good 3230 amplitudes and rates, measured for a 124060 Submariner bought in March 2023, you will find here.

A timegrapher measurement procedure you can find in this thread in posts #1425 and #771

DU: +1.4 : 267
9H: -3.5 : 231
3H: -2.3 : 224
6H: -3.7 : 211
DD: +0.5 : 250

Average rate X = -1.5 s/d is ok
Your 3230 amplitudes are too low for all 3 vertical positions and DD, imo.

Optimal amplitude values after full winding, measured myself and posted by Bas here, are as follows:

DU, DD: 260° - 280°
3U, 6U, 9U: 230° - 240°

[rbndylan]

Thank you! I read almost all of this thread, I discovered it just after I got my OP, it's scary! Saxo, you who manipulate a lot in relation to the timegrapher, do you have an opinion on what I mentioned?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by rbndylan

Thank you! I read almost all of this thread, I discovered it just after I got my OP, it's scary! Saxo, you who manipulate a lot in relation to the timegrapher, do you have an opinion on what I mentioned?

What exactly?

[rbndylan]

The fact that when I waited 5min and measured in DU, I got 267, when I left the watch on for 1h and to test, I restarted the measurement, the amplitude was 278. When I woke up this morning, I measured 281 as it was still at rest in DU.

[rbndylan]

The fact that when I waited 5min and measured in DU, I got 267, when I left the watch on for 1h and to test, I restarted the measurement, the amplitude was 278. When I woke up this morning, I measured 281 as it was still at rest in DU.

[rbndylan]

Saxo,
The fact that when I waited 5min and measured in DU, I got 267, when I left the watch on for 1h and to test, I restarted the measurement, the amplitude was 278. When I woke up this morning, I measured 281 as it was still at rest in DU.

[CedCraig]

Here’s another data point, with 2 out of 3 32xx movements gone bad. He’s aware of this thread but hasn’t posted. On Instagram when there’s a Rolex-related post I sometimes make a comment. In this case Adrian Barker of Bark&Jack posted about problems with his Explorer, though I think his is an older model so I don’t think it has the 3230 movement, but based on his comment “Although the movement is fudged again” it seems this isn’t the first time he’s had problems.


image0.jpeg

[Omarion07]

His is a 5 digit Explorer.. I don’t understand why comment about 32XX movement issues?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by rbndylan

Saxo,
The fact that when I waited 5min and measured in DU, I got 267, when I left the watch on for 1h and to test, I restarted the measurement, the amplitude was 278. When I woke up this morning, I measured 281 as it was still at rest in DU.

Ok, understood.

Each measurement (amplitude, rate, beat error) has an error.

A healthy 32xx movement, analyzed with a professional timegrapher, has a measurable amplitude 'variation'. I often measure about 3-4 degrees. This variation is called precision.

Therefore, your 278° and 281° are in fact 278° +/- 3° and 281° +/- 3°, which are identical numbers within the precision of your measurement.

267° vs. 278° is probably another effect resulting from the 3230 movement.

I have measured the same for a 3235 movement: the amplitude after full winding was 265° and 6 hours later it was 279°. This amplitude rise is reproducible for my watch and only appears in one specific position: DD. The initial DD amplitude is lower than for DU and approaches the DU value within a few hours after full winding. (Of course, I have a graph to illustrate this).

Another important point is that the watch must be in thermal equilibrium before you start to take data.

I hope that answers your question.