32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[tothemoon]

I’m surprised I don’t see many YouTube influencers covering this. If this is widely known, this bring down the waitlist drastically and force Rolex to act more urgently.

Let’s all try to get YouTubers to cover this issue more.

[krounchou]

So my 126610 that was running 4 seconds slow a day was regulated 10 days ago. Now it’s going between 4 and 5 seconds fast a day. Should I bring it back for adjustment ?

[Dr. Robert]

Originally Posted by krounchou

So my 126610 that was running 4 seconds slow a day was regulated 10 days ago. Now it’s going between 4 and 5 seconds fast a day. Should I bring it back for adjustment ?

Better fast than slow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[krounchou]

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

Better fast than slow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks. And why so ?
Also, isn’t it quite out of spec ?
What would be a trigger to you to get it regulated ?

[maratka]

I wonder if I should buy an old 31xx in like new condition or a new 32xx, funny thing is both are probably best taken straight to service.

[Dr. Robert]

Originally Posted by krounchou

Thanks. And why so ?
Also, isn’t it quite out of spec ?
What would be a trigger to you to get it regulated ?

Four or five seconds fast is ok
If it was running very fast then a visit to the watchmaker would be in order


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[krounchou]

Perfect. Thanks ! I will track how it goes

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by maratka

I wonder if I should buy an old 31xx in like new condition or a new 32xx, funny thing is both are probably best taken straight to service.

I vote for the 31.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by krounchou

So my 126610 that was running 4 seconds slow a day was regulated 10 days ago. Now it’s going between 4 and 5 seconds fast a day. Should I bring it back for adjustment ?

My understanding of the 32 issue is that it can’t really be regulated out. It is my opinion that the regulation you had done was really just a hack and if your watch does have the 32 issue it will come back. Of course, without any real data to go off of, this is just speculation of my part. I would take the watch to your AD or RCS and ask to have a timegraph test run.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by krounchou

Thanks. And why so ?
Also, isn’t it quite out of spec ?
What would be a trigger to you to get it regulated ?

Easier to manage a fast one than a slow one.
The key to success is precision. One needs a movement that's showing precision before it becomes a reasonable proposition to pursue accuracy.

To answer your question.
Yes, it would appear to be out of spec.
I don't know if I would send it in under the circumstances as it may be a bit fast for my liking, but if it's precise I may well let it slide given they start running slow when they've gone bad

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by maratka

I wonder if I should buy an old 31xx in like new condition or a new 32xx, funny thing is both are probably best taken straight to service.

It's purely a judgement call.
You have around a 75% chance that you will get a good one with a 32xx movement.
But closer to a 100% chance with a 31xx movement.

It's your money.
How much do you value the cost of your money?
And how much do you value a 70 hour power reserve ? Can you realistically use it?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Dirt

It's purely a judgement call.
You have around a 75% chance that you will get a good one with a 32xx movement.
But closer to a 100% chance with a 31xx movement.

It's your money.
How much do you value the cost of your money?
And how much do you value a 70 hour power reserve ? Can you realistically use it?

Can you please explain how you derived the 75%?

Why it is not 90% or 50% or 10% or less?
Don't refer to the poll results...

It may help to look back at my post 3860 from April 2023.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Can you please explain how you derived the 75%?

Why it is not 90% or 50% or 10% or less?
Don't refer to the poll results...

It may help to look back at my post 3860 from April 2023.

The poll is the best set of numbers we have available to us.
As most people are drawn to this thread and the thread title spells out its intent, I believe it's entirely reasonable to refer to it or draw conclusions based on the figures.
I never said the numbers were absolutes and have always based my replies on approximations. As has been discussed in this thread and others that relate to the issue, nobody can possibly know what the actual figure is as the only ones in a position to determine and ascribe a final figure aren't going to tell let alone admit anything.

Anyway, the around 75% figure I put forward was a comparatively number just as the number I put forward for the 31xx movement was.
It's simply a matter of perspective

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Dirt

The poll is the best set of numbers we have available to us.

Yes, but I draw different conclusions than you and others.

Originally Posted by Dirt

As most people are drawn to this thread and the thread title spells out its intent, I believe it's entirely reasonable to refer to it or draw conclusions based on the figures.

The intention of the OP and me was to have a data-based discussion on the 32xx topic, which was heavily bombarded by some prominent member who did not deliver one single fact, others joined him as well.

Originally Posted by Dirt

As has been discussed in this thread and others that relate to the issue, nobody can possibly know what the actual figure is …

Correct, because it depends on (what I call) the 32xx defect rate, which is not known to us.

About the poll numbers: in my view these numbers are totally misleading since many of the "no-problem voters" did not participate with one single post in this thread and also never proofed that their 32xx watches have NO problem with loo low amplitudes. It's easy to vote "no problem" and move on without any contribution and without any data input.
Therefore, I believe that the defect rate is MUCH higher than the 29.6 % taken from the poll as of today.

Let's take your approximate 75 % of "good" 32xx movements and about 25 % of "bad" 32xx movements.

Now have a look at my post 3860 and explain how one member (Easy_E) can own 6 (out of 8*) watches with the well-known 32xx low amplitude issue.

Explain that to me, with numbers, assuming that the defect rate only is about 25%.

*6 out of 8 was in April 2023. As of today, Easy_E had owned 7 defective 32xx watches (out of 9 in total so far), see his post #43 in another thread.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Yes, but I draw different conclusions than you and others.


The intention of the OP and me was to have a data-based discussion on the 32xx topic, which was heavily bombarded by some prominent member who did not deliver one single fact, others joined him as well.


Correct, because it depends on (what I call) the 32xx defect rate, which is not known to us.

About the poll numbers: in my view these numbers are totally misleading since many of the "no-problem voters" did not participate with one single post in this thread and also never proofed that their 32xx watches have NO problem with loo low amplitudes. It's easy to vote "no problem" and move on without any contribution and without any data input.
Therefore, I believe that the defect rate is MUCH higher than the 29.6 % taken from the poll as of today.

Let's take your approximate 75 % of "good" 32xx movements and about 25 % of "bad" 32xx movements.

Now have a look at my post 3860 and explain how one member (Easy_E) can own 6 (out of 8*) watches with the well-known 32xx low amplitude issue.

Explain that to me, with numbers, assuming that the defect rate only is about 25%.

*6 out of 8 was in April 2023. As of today, Easy_E had owned 7 defective 32xx watches (out of 9 in total so far), see his post #43 in another thread.

I know where you are coming from. Don't get me wrong.
I actually agree with your analysis and if you go way back in this, you may well find that I was the very first on the forum to put that possibility forward.
I was the first to attribute dog status to the 32xx movement.
I was also the first to put forward that only a 33xx movement could provide some kind of salvation, and that was assuming The Mothership could get their house in order.
It's just that 25% is an incredibly high number for a failure rate to start with in any ones language, that if it were cars, electric kettles, microwaves or hammers that had the handles breaking off it would normally spell the end of the brand. With the reality being that Rolex is literally too big now to fail as far as the industry and general public are concerned.
Except that with just about every report in the media about shady people, crime syndicates or big international drug busts and the name Rolex always being mentioned along with very flash cars and illegal weapons, one may think Rolex invented Teflon and perfected protection rackets around the brand.
There certainly are willing influential conspirators that have more sway by their silence than a few faceless people shoved aside and into a cupboard within an obscure corner of the internet.
I think those of us who have had a good many Rolex watches with movements dating back a number of decades and have grown to admire and respect how reliable they can be would probably find any number north of 5% utterly incredulous for any consumer goods let alone 25% or potentially more.
Probably way more as you and i suggest, as EasyE is a prime example of an unimaginable worst case scenario that it's difficult to fully comprehend and I have communicated with another from the forum with equally disastrous experiences as EasyE.
It's not good either way
For me, communicating with a member who is potentially a bit on the fence, I had determined that 25% was a good number to put out there that would make an ordinary person truly take stock and motivate them to move in a direction which is in their best interests.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I know where you are coming from. Don't get me wrong.
I actually agree with your analysis and if you go way back in this, you may well find that I was the very first on the forum to put that possibility forward.
I was the first to attribute dog status to the 32xx movement.
I was also the first to put forward that only a 33xx movement could provide some kind of salvation, and that was assuming The Mothership could get their house in order.
It's just that 25% is an incredibly high number for a failure rate to start with in any ones language, that if it were cars, electric kettles, microwaves or hammers that had the handles breaking off it would normally spell the end of the brand. With the reality being that Rolex is literally too big now to fail as far as the industry and general public are concerned.
Except that with just about every report in the media about shady people, crime syndicates or big international drug busts and the name Rolex always being mentioned along with very flash cars and illegal weapons, one may think Rolex invented Teflon and perfected protection rackets around the brand.
There certainly are willing influential conspirators that have more sway by their silence than a few faceless people shoved aside and into a cupboard within an obscure corner of the internet.
I think those of us who have had a good many Rolex watches with movements dating back a number of decades and have grown to admire and respect how reliable they can be would probably find any number north of 5% utterly incredulous for any consumer goods let alone 25% or potentially more.
Probably way more as you and i suggest, as EasyE is a prime example of an unimaginable worst case scenario that it's difficult to fully comprehend and I have communicated with another from the forum with equally disastrous experiences as EasyE.
It's not good either way
For me, communicating with a member who is potentially a bit on the fence, I had determined that 25% was a good number to put out there that would make an ordinary person truly take stock and motivate them to move in a direction which is in their best interests.

Ok, thanks for your detailed explanations.

Your mentioned 75% and 25% are just some unverified numbers used (by you) to highlight the overall situation for this 32xx caliber series because one can consider that 25% failure rate is already extremely high. I get your point.

If we want to be consistent with the present poll result in this thread, the "source" of your numbers, one can probably say that, based on a TRF poll statistic with 1433 votes collected between January 2021 and April 2024, at least 30 % of 32xx movements have developed the low amplitude issue during the 5-year warranty period.

Back to probabilities to buy several watches which develop the well known issues: with an assumed 32xx caliber failure rate of 30% the probability that I bought my 3 different 32xx watches, which in fact all developed the low amplitude issue, was 2.7 %. So EasyE was extremely unlucky for his 6 (out of 8) 32xx watches? The probability for him was 0.07%.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Ok, thanks for your detailed explanations.

Your mentioned 75% and 25% are just some unverified numbers used (by you) to highlight the overall situation for this 32xx caliber series because one can consider that 25% failure rate is already extremely high. I get your point.

If we want to be consistent with the present poll result in this thread, the "source" of your numbers, one can probably say that, based on a TRF poll statistic with 1433 votes collected between January 2021 and April 2024, at least 30 % of 32xx movements have developed the low amplitude issue during the 5-year warranty period.

Back to probabilities to buy several watches which develop the well known issues: with an assumed 32xx caliber failure rate of 30% the probability that I bought my 3 different 32xx watches, which in fact all developed the low amplitude issue, was 2.7 %. So EasyE was extremely unlucky for his 6 (out of 8) 32xx watches? The probability for him was 0.07%.

Oh my.
I'm a little out of date with the roughly 25%.
Last time I looked at it the number was below 30% and now it's creeping up a bit you say.
It's no good, and no good can come from no good.

It lends more credence to the proposition that one is likely to derive more satisfaction from a 31xx movement over a 32xx.

That fix can't come soon enough it would seem, or bring on that 33xx movement so the whole disasterous saga can be put to rest.
I'll wager the 33xx will be able to be retrofitted into the same hole for an entire movement swap so that Rolex can claim that with each Rolex watch, comes an upgrade path for new and improved technology movements for the life of the watch which will only apply to the original owner should they chose to take up the offer.
There you go folks.
You heard it here first

[saxo3]

@Dirt, congratulations ... you just made it to 293 contributions (in this thread) without having owned a single 32xx watch and without any caliber data point.

An achievement which either merits a TRF Bronze Medal or the TRF Ig Nobel Prize.

[77T]

As long as we are peering into the future...
And...
The current 32xx discussion aside.
If a "Rolex Recharge" line of hybrid smartwatch comes to market, I think a 33xx would be the right place to start.

Maybe in a Tudor branded model?

Special solar recharge dials, GPS clocking, and a 33xx with micromotor - Ronda and Rolex could do a colab to improve the state of the art.
Perfect intro for all...

In a hybrid smartwatch, the micromotors drive hands independently and could do so for bidirectionally time adjustment (think of GMT set/reset on the fly).

The current state of the horology resolution is 1°, i.e. 360 steps per revolution. If they got that down to .6° it would make a center seconds hand so smooth that no pair of eyes could see the sweep as incremental movement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Oh my.
I'm a little out of date with the roughly 25%.
Last time I looked at it the number was below 30% and now it's creeping up a bit you say.
It's no good, and no good can come from no good.

It lends more credence to the proposition that one is likely to derive more satisfaction from a 31xx movement over a 32xx.

That fix can't come soon enough it would seem, or bring on that 33xx movement so the whole disasterous saga can be put to rest.
I'll wager the 33xx will be able to be retrofitted into the same hole for an entire movement swap so that Rolex can claim that with each Rolex watch, comes an upgrade path for new and improved technology movements for the life of the watch which will only apply to the original owner should they chose to take up the offer.
There you go folks.
You heard it here first

May it be so.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Ok, thanks for your detailed explanations.

Your mentioned 75% and 25% are just some unverified numbers used (by you) to highlight the overall situation for this 32xx caliber series because one can consider that 25% failure rate is already extremely high. I get your point.

If we want to be consistent with the present poll result in this thread, the "source" of your numbers, one can probably say that, based on a TRF poll statistic with 1433 votes collected between January 2021 and April 2024, at least 30 % of 32xx movements have developed the low amplitude issue during the 5-year warranty period.

Back to probabilities to buy several watches which develop the well known issues: with an assumed 32xx caliber failure rate of 30% the probability that I bought my 3 different 32xx watches, which in fact all developed the low amplitude issue, was 2.7 %. So EasyE was extremely unlucky for his 6 (out of 8) 32xx watches? The probability for him was 0.07%.

Remarkably small odds. Thanks that assessment.

Either the problem is, in fact, much higher, or every time I buy a watch someone in Geneva stabs an Easy E voodoo doll.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by saxo3

@Dirt, congratulations ... you just made it to 293 contributions (in this thread) without having owned a single 32xx watch and without any caliber data point.

An achievement which either merits a TRF Bronze Medal or the TRF Ig Nobel Prize.

WHAT.
Only Bronze?

Dirt, must do better, must do better, must do better.
Dirt is a baaad boy.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Easy E

Remarkably small odds. Thanks that assessment.

Either the problem is, in fact, much higher, or every time I buy a watch someone in Geneva stabs an Easy E voodoo doll.

Just look at the raw data and don't over analyse it. The numbers don't lie.
Besides data can be manipulated like statistics.

Regardless, I feel your pain and empathise with you.

[jukeboxs]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks for the update.

For your low power reserve of 65-66 hours, I would expect VERY low amplitude values after full winding. Was the 3285 movement fully wound at the beginning and in which watch position did you observe 65-66 hours? The Rolex specs for minimum 32xx power reserve is 69 hours.

My apologies, Saxo. I haven't checked in on this thread for a while ...

I fully wound the movement at outset (70-80 turns of the crown) and the watch was dial up for the whole time.

FYI - my BLRO was returned after its return visit to Rolex Kings Hill (4 months initial visit followed by 3 months 2nd visit, where this took me to 6 months outside my 5yr warranty, but FOC as originally submitted in time) and the movement readings were now in line with Rolex requirements - and they remain fine (1 month later). My SDc amplitude has dropped in recent months, now below 200 after 24 hours, so I will be returning this just before its 5th birthday in December. My LVc (3 years old this June) is showing no issues as yet.

[Via reggio]

Double post

[Via reggio]

There is a change in one of the trainwheels, the part number is the same but there is an undercut on the axis for example.
How do I upload pictures?

[tothemoon]

Originally Posted by Via reggio

There is a change in one of the trainwheels, the part number is the same but there is an undercut on the axis for example.
How do I upload pictures?

Click on the paper clip icon when you reply a post

[Andad]

Originally Posted by saxo3

@Dirt, congratulations ... you just made it to 293 contributions (in this thread) without having owned a single 32xx watch and without any caliber data point.

An achievement which either merits a TRF Bronze Medal or the TRF Ig Nobel Prize.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Via reggio

How do I upload pictures?

I use tapatalk.

[Via reggio]

wheel in watch vs sparepart