32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[saxo3]

Sound resonances and reflections inside the case are an important point.

If I remember correctly, Charles always measures with the microphone attached to the opposite side (9 AM) of the crown.

That's not optimal since one has a better sound transmission - with less reflections and attenuations (signal damping) - on the crown side.

Charles, I would do a simple test and rotate the watch position by 180 degrees and compare the results.

But, since you always tested in the same position and with the same instrument this would probably not explain the measured small increase of the beat error.

For my S1 (G2) it looks like that, the microphone is in very good mechanical (sound) contact with the crown.




Cheers Proost

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Sound resonances and reflections inside the case are an important point.

If I remember correctly, Charles always measures with the microphone attached to the opposite side (9 AM) of the crown.

That's not optimal since one has a better sound transmission - with less reflections and attenuations (signal damping) - on the crown side.

Charles, I would do a simple test and rotate the watch position by 180 degrees and compare the results.

But, since you always tested in the same position and with the same instrument this would probably not explain the measured small increase of the beat error.

For my S1 (G2) it looks like that, the microphone is in very good mechanical (sound) contact with the crown.



Cheers Proost

You are correct, the way shown in your pic is the best you can do when the movement is inside the case.

And it does indeed not explain the beat error change in Charles' readings. Like you said, any 'explanation' would be speculating.

Keep an eye on it and hopefully it will not further increase.

[SearChart]

And Saxo, I hereby sincerely apologize for using a highly offensive word.
I must've misinterpreted your writings as 'hostile' towards myself, not read it carefully enough and let emotions get the better of me.

I suspect we are both not native English speakers, which could have fortified my misinterpretation even further.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SearChart

And Saxo, I hereby sincerely apologize for using a highly offensive word.
I must've misinterpreted your writings as 'hostile' towards myself, not read it carefully enough and let emotions get the better of me.

I suspect we are both not native English speakers, which could have fortified my misinterpretation even further.

Thank you, accepted.
I am also not a native English speaker.
Hope for a good collaboration for the future.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by SearChart

You are correct, the way shown in your pic is the best you can do when the movement is inside the case.

And it does indeed not explain the beat error change in Charles' readings. Like you said, any 'explanation' would be speculating.

Keep an eye on it and hopefully it will not further increase.

Hi again Bas,

I know its better that way but i am using a Timegrapher that is NOT a Witschi S1 G2 at the moment.

I am using one from that amazing shop ... Amazon ... The Model 1900.

The microphone bracket does NOT like having a heavy watch like a Sub-date as it falls out sometimes from the Dial Down position so i have to adapt somehow. So I have the watch in reverse on the bracket and all is good.

I have tried to see if there is a difference between crown fitting on the screen ... I could not detect a difference.

I will try harder to solve the problem.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thank you, accepted.
I am also not a native English speaker.
Hope for a good collaboration for the future.

[TheVTCGuy]

Someone has got to ask this question, mine as well be me.

First, to all of you that are so painstakingly taking measurements, proposing theories, buying expensive equipment to investigate your Rolex, I must say I really don’t understand why. BUT, if this measuring and discussion and interest of yours is a passion you enjoy, more power to you! I am sure a lot of people don’t understand some of my passions and hobbies, to each their own, but here is the question.

Doesn’t all this investigating and searching for a problem with your 32XX movement distract from your enjoyment of the watch?

I akin this to using a loop to find every little nick and scratch on your Rolex and agonizing over it. Some of you, have spent a GREAT deal of time and effort (and perhaps money) on analyzing and critiquing every little tick of your Rolex, (I guess) searching for a fault. Now if your watch is not keeping accurate time, certainly I understand not being satisfied and wanting something done, but from what I have read it seems that a great many are not having any issues, even those that are taking copious measurements. I guess my question is:

Instead of seeking so hard to find fault with your Rolex, if it is keeping decent time, can’t you just wear and enjoy it? Why the concentrated effort to prove something wrong?

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Doesn’t all this investigating and searching for a problem with your 32XX movement distract from your enjoyment of the watch

For me the measuring, calculating and watching my watch has only enhanced my enjoyment

I am learning more and more how marvellous it really is

My measuring takes about 1/2 an hour daily which is not too long in reality


Sent from my iPhone 12 using Tapatalk

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

Hi again Bas,

I know its better that way but i am using a Timegrapher that is NOT a Witschi S1 G2 at the moment.

I am using one from that amazing shop ... Amazon ... The Model 1900.

The microphone bracket does NOT like having a heavy watch like a Sub-date as it falls out sometimes from the Dial Down position so i have to adapt somehow. So I have the watch in reverse on the bracket and all is good.

I have tried to see if there is a difference between crown fitting on the screen ... I could not detect a difference.

I will try harder to solve the problem.

Understood, you're doing the best you can with that you got
Your Amazon timegrapher is fine for measurements, a timegrapher is not rocket science, and Witschi is incredibly expensive for what is essentially a sensitive microphone with with some light hardware and software attached to it.

Not worth dropping your watch for a slightly better measuring position.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Someone has got to ask this question, mine as well be me.

First, to all of you that are so painstakingly taking measurements, proposing theories, buying expensive equipment to investigate your Rolex, I must say I really don’t understand why. BUT, if this measuring and discussion and interest of yours is a passion you enjoy, more power to you! I am sure a lot of people don’t understand some of my passions and hobbies, to each their own, but here is the question.

Doesn’t all this investigating and searching for a problem with your 32XX movement distract from your enjoyment of the watch?

I akin this to using a loop to find every little nick and scratch on your Rolex and agonizing over it. Some of you, have spent a GREAT deal of time and effort (and perhaps money) on analyzing and critiquing every little tick of your Rolex, (I guess) searching for a fault. Now if your watch is not keeping accurate time, certainly I understand not being satisfied and wanting something done, but from what I have read it seems that a great many are not having any issues, even those that are taking copious measurements. I guess my question is:

Instead of seeking so hard to find fault with your Rolex, if it is keeping decent time, can’t you just wear and enjoy it? Why the concentrated effort to prove something wrong?

Thanks for your contribution with several questions. I take the time to answer in detail because I believe you have a completely wrong picture from what is called here 'saxo3'.

I bought a timegrapher long time before I purchased my first 32xx watch, the SD43 (126600) which I reported several times in this thread.

I'm a Rolex vintage fan and enjoy several of them, even more so as all their 15xx movements run very nicely. I measure them every 4 to 6 months only. I don't care if accuracy for these vintages is off by a few (5-10) seconds per day, but prefer they run consistently fast and not slow. I find a timegrapher is useful to determine when my vintages should get a movement revision from Rolex.

I didn't seek hard to find the 32xx faults, but was very disappointed when I first saw and measured that all my 32xx watches were running much worse than all my 15xx watches.

At that time, I was not a member of any watch forum. For my 3235 I found a correlation between low amplitudes and (very) negative caliber rates. That triggered my interest and made me curious to search for the reason. I found out all by myself.

I don't want to proof that something is wrong, because I know that all my 2017/18 watches have a mechanical problem, the SD43 seems to be fixed. I am also here to see what the experiences of other owners with their newer 32xx calibers (from 2019-2021) is and I try to help other by sharing my experiences and own data.

I like fine and reliable instruments as well as taking, analysing, and displaying data. That's a bit of a passion too. Graphs certainly show more than 1000 words or long data tables, ask e.g. Charles.

[ROLEX*]

If I could interject and pardon me if I miss out the tiny details, is there any permanent solutions for the 32xx issue?

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by GreatScott

Do you think it has anything to do with the mainspring being attached now, does that play tricks while unwinding at specific intervals?

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

GreatScott
It looks like your question got overlooked by us all and that in my mind is unacceptable and therefore I apologise. It is not normal around here I assure you.

I am not a watchmaker so can not personally give you a definitive answer and speculation is not a healthy thing to do in a technical discussion I will however offer my own personal, totally unproven thoughts which are probably wrong anyway.

My own theory is based upon lubrication and a therefore pivot wearing causing friction and wear. BUT please note this is ONLY my opinion based upon no serious knowledge of a watches workings. This is just based on simple engineering. experiences for 50 years of work experience.
I have so far resisted opening my watch up and I hope I have the self control to ensure that things stay that way.

Probably the best person to ask on this forum is our “Resident” Rolex watchmaker …… Searchart. If you send him a direct message here in this thread I am sure he will answer it with a far more knowledgeable response.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by ROLEX*

If I could interject and pardon me if I miss out the tiny details, is there any permanent solutions for the 32xx issue?

As yet we do not know

Rolex never reveal anything they have done in the way of movement improvements. All that remains very secretive and only the RSCs around the globe and authorised Rolex trained watchmakers get any of that sort of information

That’s why a very few of us are constantly measuring watches to check on their performance.

We think so far late 2020 and 2021 watches with a 32xx movement are OK but only time will tell ……. probably, another 6 months yet, as the faults take some time to manifest themselves.

[ROLEX*]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

As yet we do not know

Rolex never reveal anything they have done in the way of movement improvements. All that remains very secretive and only the RSCs around the globe and authorised Rolex trained watchmakers get any of that sort of information

That’s why a very few of us are constantly measuring watches to check on their performance.

We think so far late 2020 and 2021 watches with a 32xx movement are OK but only time will tell ……. probably, another 6 months yet, as the faults take some time to manifest themselves.

What does it mean by OK in Accuracy and Precision numbers?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by ROLEX*

What does it mean by OK in Accuracy and Precision numbers?

Rolex SA specifies the movement precision, not the accuracy.

I have done some measurements, which are summarized in post #1232:
Amplitudes, Rates, Precision of 32xx and 31xx calibers

A simple explanation (w/o math. formulas) of the difference between accuracy and precision you can find in my post #1258.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks for your contribution with several questions. I take the time to answer in detail because I believe you have a completely wrong picture from what is called here 'saxo3'.

I bought a timegrapher long time before I purchased my first 32xx watch, the SD43 (126600) which I reported several times in this thread.

I'm a Rolex vintage fan and enjoy several of them, even more so as all their 15xx movements run very nicely. I measure them every 4 to 6 months only. I don't care if accuracy for these vintages is off by a few (5-10) seconds per day, but prefer they run consistently fast and not slow. I find a timegrapher is useful to determine when my vintages should get a movement revision from Rolex.

I didn't seek hard to find the 32xx faults, but was very disappointed when I first saw and measured that all my 32xx watches were running much worse than all my 15xx watches.

At that time, I was not a member of any watch forum. For my 3235 I found a correlation between low amplitudes and (very) negative caliber rates. That triggered my interest and made me curious to search for the reason. I found out all by myself.

I don't want to proof that something is wrong, because I know that all my 2017/18 watches have a mechanical problem, the SD43 seems to be fixed. I am also here to see what the experiences of other owners with their newer 32xx calibers (from 2019-2021) is and I try to help other by sharing my experiences and own data.

I like fine and reliable instruments as well as taking, analysing, and displaying data. That's a bit of a passion too. Graphs certainly show more than 1000 words or long data tables, ask e.g. Charles.

All excellent explanations, but I still do not understand some general points. Maybe it is because English is not your first language, or maybe it’s just I am not smart enough. Let me put a couple questions a different way; (and by the way, I have zero experience or knowledge about watch movements, testing, I couldn’t even tell you what amplitude is so I can not dispute your findings in any manner and that is not my intention).

You say your 15XX movements, well I think you are saying you are very happy with your 15xx movements running off by 5 to 10 seconds per day (but you prefer them running fast rather then slow, completely understandable). I am ignorant on these movements, are they rated to COSC? +4 -6? If so, then 5 or 10 seconds is not a bad deviation, especially for an old movement. You stated that your 32XX movements were running “much worse” then your 15XX. Now, is that in comparison to 5 or 10 seconds a day? Or is it in comparison to the advertised accuracy of these movements of + - 2 ? Is the problem you are expecting much better accuracy and not getting it? Or that your 32XX is much WORSE then the 5 or 10 seconds a day of your 15xx? I am probably not stating this very clear but are you not happy with the 32xx because it should be to a much higher standard then the 15xx? Or because it is just keeping much worse time over-all. I.e. An accuracy that caused the watch to be off by MORE then 5 or 10 seconds a day? As an example, if your 32XX was off by, oh, 4 or 6 seconds a day would that be acceptable to you? Or are you more demanding of this movement because of the higher accuracy claims? I hope I am getting some of this across clearly for you to understand but I don’t blame you if it is confusing. And please don’t say I can just look at the graphs, I tried to understand them but my head exploded.

My second question, and probably the most important point I was trying to make, deals with the final result. If you enjoy taking measurements and graphing the numbers and comparing with others their results then more power to you. However to what end? Let’s say the findings represent a world-over accuracy of worse then +- 2 seconds per day. I am just using a hypothetical situation but imagine your 32XX comes out to an average similar to your 15xx, 10 seconds a day for example. Does that mean you enjoy it any less? Will that make you return it to Rolex for an adjustment? And another, until it gets to +-2? And then will you keep re-checking and again send it in when it is 10 seconds a day slow? Do you understand my point? I am not accusing you of this, but it seems that some people and posters are so concerned with obtaining the advertised accuracy and SEEKING a problem the watch becomes more of a source of obsession, not enjoyment. If the watch is way-off of course I understand wanting it to be addressed, but if your 32XX movement ends up being 10 seconds fast/slow per day, and you can live with your 15xx movement having that accuracy, then why is that an issue?

I have probably done a lousy job of explaining and asking these two points, but I bring up my example of the guy with the loop, looking for scratches. Sure, if your watch has a MAJOR scratch visible in an obvious place I can understand wanting it addressed, but if you have to put on a loop and look and look and look some more to find scratches, first, you will definitely find some, second, SEEKING a problem detracts from the over-all enjoyment of a fine timepiece. If it is not a big problem, a large discrepancy in accuracy, then why do an exhaustive search to find one? Why not just wear the watch and enjoy it?

I hope that makes sense.

[saxo3]

Ufff, a lot of questions
I need a bit of time to answer.
I'll be back

Quid pro quo: And you explain me what a "Dorkelhead Tosser" is?

[Andad]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Ufff, a lot of questions
I need a bit of time to answer.
I'll be back

Quid pro quo: And you explain me what a "Dorkelhead Tosser" is?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

All excellent explanations, but I still do not understand some general points. Maybe it is because English is not your first language, or maybe it’s just I am not smart enough. Let me put a couple questions a different way; (and by the way, I have zero experience or knowledge about watch movements, testing, I couldn’t even tell you what amplitude is so I can not dispute your findings in any manner and that is not my intention).

I think it's not my English, but who knows…

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

You say your 15XX movements, well I think you are saying you are very happy with your 15xx movements running off by 5 to 10 seconds per day (but you prefer them running fast rather then slow, completely understandable).

No, I say that I can accept them running up to +5 or + 10 s/d.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I am ignorant on these movements, are they rated to COSC? +4 -6?

Some but not all 15xx movements are COSC.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

If so, then 5 or 10 seconds is not a bad deviation, especially for an old movement. You stated that your 32XX movements were running “much worse” then your 15XX. Now, is that in comparison to 5 or 10 seconds a day?

Yes.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Or is it in comparison to the advertised accuracy of these movements of + - 2 ?

No, Rolex SA does not specify or advertise an accuracy of +/- 2 sec/day. This is the specified precision.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Is the problem you are expecting much better accuracy and not getting it? Or that your 32XX is much WORSE then the 5 or 10 seconds a day of your 15xx? I am probably not stating this very clear but are you not happy with the 32xx because it should be to a much higher standard then the 15xx? Or because it is just keeping much worse time over-all. I.e. An accuracy that caused the watch to be off by MORE then 5 or 10 seconds a day?

I am not expecting a much better or perfect accuracy. I would expect that the 32xx production and quality standards in 2021 are a bit higher than in the 60’s and 70’s.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

As an example, if your 32XX was off by, oh, 4 or 6 seconds a day would that be acceptable to you?

Yes, if it would run consistently at +4 or +5 or +6 s/d then it's totally acceptable for me. Why? Then a watchmaker can regulate it to let's say +1 or +2 s/d.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Or are you more demanding of this movement because of the higher accuracy claims?

No, you might wish to understand the difference between accuracy and precision, see post #1228 in this thread.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I hope I am getting some of this across clearly for you to understand but I don’t blame you if it is confusing. And please don’t say I can just look at the graphs, I tried to understand them but my head exploded.

It's not confusing for me.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

My second question, and probably the most important point I was trying to make, deals with the final result. If you enjoy taking measurements and graphing the numbers and comparing with others their results then more power to you. However to what end? Let’s say the findings represent a world-over accuracy of worse then +- 2 seconds per day. I am just using a hypothetical situation but imagine your 32XX comes out to an average similar to your 15xx, 10 seconds a day for example. Does that mean you enjoy it any less?

No, if it runs consistently let's say +5 or +10 or even +15 s/d, then this watch has no problem, because it can be regulated by a watchmaker. The keyword is consistent, that means every day running too fast but by the same amount of seconds.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Will that make you return it to Rolex for an adjustment? And another, until it gets to +-2?

Not necessarily, my Sea-Dweller Ref. 126600 (3235) runs now with constant +5 s/d and it does not worry me at all. It could be regulated but I don't see the need.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

And then will you keep re-checking and again send it in when it is 10 seconds a day slow?

If it becomes slow and this gets worse over time, then there might be an issue, which is discussed extensively in this thread.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Do you understand my point?

Probably yes.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I am not accusing you of this, but it seems that some people and posters are so concerned with obtaining the advertised accuracy and SEEKING a problem the watch becomes more of a source of obsession, not enjoyment.

I understand your point but I am not of this type. You write it again "….advertised accuracy…"
What I have seen so far on this forum is that so many people seem not to understand what the difference between accuracy and precision is. Many (like you) expect or even request an accuracy of -2/+2 sec/day. They refer to Rolex specs, that's wrong in my opinion. I did not count how often padi56 (and others) have explained that in so many post and threads that accuracy depends on the wearing pattern of the watch owner, as well as many different external parameters.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

If the watch is way-off of course I understand wanting it to be addressed, but if your 32XX movement ends up being 10 seconds fast/slow per day, and you can live with your 15xx movement having that accuracy, then why is that an issue?

The difference is that I have two 32xx movements that are running with negative rates and this becomes worse over rather short time, i.e. a few weeks or months, not some years.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I have probably done a lousy job of explaining and asking these two points, but I bring up my example of the guy with the loop, looking for scratches. Sure, if your watch has a MAJOR scratch visible in an obvious place I can understand wanting it addressed, but if you have to put on a loop and look and look and look some more to find scratches, first, you will definitely find some, second, SEEKING a problem detracts from the over-all enjoyment of a fine timepiece.

I understand your comparison with the loupe people, but your comparison is not right. The 32xx issues reported for early sold movements (until about 2018/2019) are not minor loupe-type problems. Some watches show this caliber problems, others not. Maybe I was a bit unfortunate when I bought 3 problematic 32xx watches. I'm pretty sure that Rolex SA has understood and solved the 32xx issues.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

If it is not a big problem, a large discrepancy in accuracy, then why do an exhaustive search to find one? Why not just wear the watch and enjoy it?

I think my replies have answered that already before.
With your 17,5 k and my 0,7 k posts, one could get the impression that I'm passing a rookie test. (k = 1000)

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I hope that makes sense.

And I hope you appreciate my efforts (and time) to explain.

[CharlesN]

I have wondered if noise or temperature is also a possible cause of fluctuations.
The noise is not a factor as the room I am doing the tests in is near silent

Temperature seems to have no effect either.

I have attached below pictures showing my methods …

For noise ……




For temperature ………




Sent from my iPhone 12 using Tapatalk

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by saxo3

And I hope you appreciate my efforts (and time) to explain.

WOW !!!!!

Now thats what I call a seriously good and full answer.

Outstanding.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

I think it's not my English, but who knows…


And I hope you appreciate my efforts (and time) to explain.

Probably isn’t your English, I will admit that; you speak it very well and I admit I couldn’t understand a single word of whatever your native language is (unless it is Spanish), so I will admit it’s me. And I do understand your points. I do not agree with a lot of them, or your intense efforts, but they are your views and your business, I wish you luck in achieving your goals.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

WOW !!!!!

Now thats what I call a seriously good and full answer.

Outstanding.

Agreed, But I was hoping for a graph

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Agreed, But I was hoping for a graph

I am quite sure saxo3 can provide you with a graph.

Maybe he will provide a graph of the number of hours I spend on this forum.

But, maybe its not a good idea as my wife might see it and wonder why I spend so much time here.

I will try and prepare graph of the Correlation between Precision and Accuracy and the crossovers.

Please bear with me .. I can not do it as well as saxo3 as i can not figure how graphs appear on a computer. I will have to do it by hand.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Probably isn’t your English, I will admit that; you speak it very well and I admit I couldn’t understand a single word of whatever your native language is (unless it is Spanish), so I will admit it’s me. And I do understand your points. I do not agree with a lot of them, or your intense efforts, but they are your views and your business, I wish you luck in achieving your goals.

[saxo3]

. (first data point of the next graph)

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Ahhhhhhhhhh! Now I get it!

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Agreed, But I was hoping for a graph

I have done my best to do a graph showing what is going to happen in the future with all calibers in automatic mode

but Also ... Please don't forget .. There is a slight margin for error built in also to COSC standards.




I am sorry it is on its side but I can’t turn it over.
I guess it’s a bit like my watch on the timegrapher at 9U position


Sent from my iPhone 12 using Tapatalk

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I have done my best to do a graph showing what is going to happen in the future with all calibers in automatic mode

but Also ... Please don't forget .. There is a slight margin for error built in also to COSC standards.




I am sorry it is on its side but I can’t turn it over.
I guess it’s a bit like my watch on the timegrapher at 9U position


Sent from my iPhone 12 using Tapatalk

Sorry Charles, but Saxo has much better graphing skills then you do.

Although I think I do see the image of a Pony...

[CharlesN]

I used to horse ride when I was younger
But the vibration may have affected my watch so the precision was bad