New Explorer 124270 time difference

[SuperDomestique]

Picked up in June 2024. It’s been averaging +1.6 seconds time difference since purchase with error of +/1 1.37. This is calculated against NIST time with 3 resets. There’s been times where it’s been off by about 4 seconds. I guess it’s technically within the “Superlative Chronometer” standards. Thoughts on whether I should take it in for regulation?

I’d show the graph but looks like I need 10 posts beforehand

[padi56]

Originally Posted by SuperDomestique

Picked up in June 2024. It’s been averaging +1.6 seconds time difference since purchase with error of +/1 1.37. This is calculated against NIST time with 3 resets. There’s been times where it’s been off by about 4 seconds. I guess it’s technically within the “Superlative Chronometer” standards. Thoughts on whether I should take it in for regulation?

I’d show the graph but looks like I need 10 posts beforehand

Forget all this constant checking to time to exact second just wear and enjoy your watch in good health now that's far more important. Remember there are 86400 seconds in a day your watch is fine.

[brandrea]

Welcome to the forum.

[drrd]

Originally Posted by SuperDomestique

I guess it’s technically within the “Superlative Chronometer” standards.

Thoughts on whether I should take it in for regulation?

Errr…

[Harry-57]

If it's running outside of published spec you can have it looked at if it bothers you. What you describe wouldn't bother me but it's your watch and your choice.

[racerx]

I wish my 114270 ran +1.6

[Yachtbuoy]

Originally Posted by SuperDomestique

Picked up in June 2024. It’s been averaging +1.6 seconds time difference since purchase with error of +/1 1.37. This is calculated against NIST time with 3 resets. There’s been times where it’s been off by about 4 seconds. I guess it’s technically within the “Superlative Chronometer” standards. Thoughts on whether I should take it in for regulation?

I’d show the graph but looks like I need 10 posts beforehand

If it's running within the +2/-2 specs then it's really fine. I wouldn't worry about it so much or think about getting a quartz watch.

There's a whole range of factors which influence accuracy including temperature, wearing it, and how it rests at night.

[1William]

I have found that tracking my watch on a daily gives me some information but I prefer to track them over a week. During that week I give the watch significant wear and ensure that it is wound if put down for a day or two. I have found better results this way.

[Deroya]

Is this a troll post?

[stevestil]

You’re in for a lot of heartache and headaches if you keep this up my friend

Wear the watch and enjoy it. The watch is 3 months old. It doesn’t need to be regulated


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kevin of Larchmont]

There’s a cool thread over on the tech forum you’re really going to enjoy.

[SuperDomestique]

Wasn’t meant to be a troll post. I was reading over on Reddit that 3230 was accurate down to tenths of seconds. But then I also hear that there were issues with some 3230s not having proper lubrication and losing time.

Since the original post, average accuracy has interestingly crept up to +1.7 and over last week has been above +2. I’ll have an official Rolex store opening nearby soon, so I’ll swing by there to get it checked out.

All in all, very happy with it and it’s on my wrist every day.

[TickTockChuck]

Seems good to me!

[padi56]

Originally Posted by SuperDomestique

Wasn’t meant to be a troll post. I was reading over on Reddit that 3230 was accurate down to tenths of seconds. But then I also hear that there were issues with some 3230s not having proper lubrication and losing time.

Since the original post, average accuracy has interestingly crept up to +1.7 and over last week has been above +2. I’ll have an official Rolex store opening nearby soon, so I’ll swing by there to get it checked out.

All in all, very happy with it and it’s on my wrist every day.

Don't always believe what you read on the net, the bare uncased movements are still tested at the Swiss COSC to a AVERAGE of -4 +6 seconds a day to get the chronometer certification. And in the 15 days of testing the movement could vary by up to 10 seconds on any single day of testing and still pass the COSC test. Rolex then further tests movement in its case to a precision of -2+2 seconds now this don't mean it will perform exactly the same every single day on the wrist as there are many variables,youir watch is fine.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

There’s a cool thread over on the tech forum you’re really going to enjoy.

Why is it we never hear from their leader when the watch runs fast

[Moonwatcher]

I concur with all that has been written before and in innumerable other threads…your watch is fine, consider the variations, even outside superlative specs, as the evidence of your watch‘s intrinsically micro-mechanical nature and of its being, ever so slightly, subject to the variables life throws at it.
Your watch is gorgeous, enjoy it for what it is, and don’t try to enjoy it for what it is not, i.e. a computer..

[padi56]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Why is it we never hear from their leader when the watch runs fast

Have to agree on that one Brian.

[rajen]

You have been scammed and been sold a lemon! Sell it!

[SuperDomestique]

Two more months of data. Seems like it's stabilizing around 2 sec/day. Will pop into the AD and see what they think

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Today is the 28th day of a timing test I’ve been running on my 124270 and 226570 Explorers which I’ve owned for roughly 2 years and 1.5 years respectively. The Explorer is averaging +2.5 SPD and the Explorer II is averaging +3 SPD, the same as the last two times I ran the test give or take a few tenths, both out of spec but consistent. When performance changes I’ll worry.

[SuperDomestique]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Today is the 28th day of a timing test I’ve been running on my 124270 and 226570 Explorers which I’ve owned for roughly 2 years and 1.5 years respectively. The Explorer is averaging +2.5 SPD and the Explorer II is averaging +3 SPD, the same as the last two times I ran the test give or take a few tenths, both out of spec but consistent. When performance changes I’ll worry.

Thanks for the info, Kevin! Good to know that someone else is in the same boat. I'm not keen on getting it serviced at this time but would like to hear what my local Rolex AD says about it.

[omar-rye]

Originally Posted by SuperDomestique

Two more months of data. Seems like it's stabilizing around 2 sec/day. Will pop into the AD and see what they think

What do you expect their reaction to be about your Rolex having a deviation of 2 seconds per day?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SuperDomestique

Two more months of data. Seems like it's stabilizing around 2 sec/day. Will pop into the AD and see what they think

Your conclusion is wrong because your watch is not running with +2 s/d.