32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Exactly what do you think Rolex should do? Recall millions of watches? I believe waiting for returns is the appropriate thing for them to do. On the other hand, if the failure mechanism is clear and fix evident, they could do similar to what Omega did with their early Co-axials, do a couple of repairs and come out with a newly revised movement.

I guess I’m just surprised that, as Rolex techs have here have confirmed, they can’t fix the issue

At least if they could the watches could be sorted during services

[CedCraig]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Exactly what do you think Rolex should do? Recall millions of watches? I believe waiting for returns is the appropriate thing for them to do. On the other hand, if the failure mechanism is clear and fix evident, they could do similar to what Omega did with their early Co-axials, do a couple of repairs and come out with a newly revised movement.

I think Rolex should engineer an actual fix. Instead, what they‘ve done is exactly nothing to provide a long-term solution. Instead, they deny any problems and when a lemon comes back they just squirt on some lube and hope people will put their watches back in the safe and not wear them.

This isn‘t an isolated situation, but rather seems to be a fundamental design flaw. So they need to modify the design of the 32xx movement. To save face they could easily continue calling a slightly redesigned movement the 32xx series.

Given that Rolex updates movements infrequently, it would be a real shame if they go 10, 15, 20 years with a problem movement.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

How do you know that?

Agreed.

Because you (we) don’t know the details.

No.

100% agreed Saxo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

Possibly you have discovered the truth about Rolex ….
They have not found the root of the problem because as you said they don’t care.

Really appreciate your contributions to this thread Charles but you’re just assuming here. We do not know the extent of the problem and we do not whether Rolex has found and implemented a solution or not. One thing I’m sure of, is that Rolex really cares about it’s reputation that it constantly brags about and I doubt Rolex will allow anything that might tarnish this reputation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Really appreciate your contributions to this thread Charles but you’re just assuming here. We do not know the extent of the problem and we do not whether Rolex has found and implemented a solution or not.

But we do know. We have been told by at least one Rolex techy guy that it hasn’t.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by OrangeSport

But we do know. We have been told by at least one Rolex techy guy that it hasn’t.

What is a "Rolex techy guy"?
Can you provide the link to his (their) post(s)?

[Lol-x]

75+% saying no timekeeping problem, is overwhelming evidence of no defect in the 32XX movement.

You can't have an inherent defect that is selective to 24% of movements.
So any timekeeping issue would be in the assembly of the movement or the accuracy of the assertion of the watch being inaccurate.

Defects in the assembly of the movement (eg proper lubrication) are why Rolex has a 5 year warranty, so if you need you can return and get it remedied.

The onus is on those asserting to prove the precise defect, not to ask people to prove their watch is functioning accurately.

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by saxo3

What is a "Rolex techy guy"?
Can you provide the link to his (their) post(s)?

No but he posts here quit a bit

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by OrangeSport

No but he posts here quit a bit

Might be called BAS or something like that

Services watches for Rolex

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by OrangeSport

Might be called BAS or something like that

Services watches for Rolex

ok, you mean SearChart (aka Bas)

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

75+% saying no timekeeping problem, is overwhelming evidence of no defect in the 32XX movement.

You can't have an inherent defect that is selective to 24% of movements.
So any timekeeping issue would be in the assembly of the movement or the accuracy of the assertion of the watch being inaccurate.

Defects in the assembly of the movement (eg proper lubrication) are why Rolex has a 5 year warranty, so if you need you can return and get it remedied.

The onus is on those asserting to prove the precise defect, not to ask people to prove their watch is functioning accurately.

Hi there.

So you can’t take this poll result like that but say hypothetically we could and you accept this 24% defect rate. Are you saying that 24% is an acceptable rate of defect and the manufacturer wouldn’t need to take corrective action? Almost 1 in 4 break down and this won’t harm reputation etc?

We are not watchmakers but we have over and over again shown data that shows this issue.

If a car kept breaking down would a normal consumer have to prove the exact fault or report the symptoms?

Is it our fault Rolex choose to be very secretive about all this?

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Hi there.

So you can’t take this poll result like that but say hypothetically we could and you accept this 24% defect rate. Are you saying that 24% is an acceptable rate of defect and the manufacturer wouldn’t need to take corrective action? Almost 1 in 4 break down and this won’t harm reputation etc?

We are not watchmakers but we have over and over again shown data that shows this issue.

If a car kept breaking down would a normal consumer have to prove the exact fault or report the symptoms?

Is it our fault Rolex choose to be very secretive about all this?

That is 1 in 4 of a very small overall number and is it really a defect or just a maintenance issue? If it just needs a service/lubrication its not a defect.

"If a car kept breaking down" that is a false and exaggerated analogy.

Rolex doesn't have to tell you anything, where does it say that in your warranty? They just have to honour their 5 year warranty which they tend to do, or are you saying they have breached that too?

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

That is 1 in 4 of a very small overall number and is it really a defect or just a maintenance issue? If it just needs a service/lubrication its not a defect.

"If a car kept breaking down" that is a false and exaggerated analogy.

Rolex doesn't have to tell you anything, where does it say that in your warranty? They just have to honour their 5 year warranty which they tend to do, or are you saying they have breached that too?

1 in 4 is an enormous number for defects.

My DJ (2019) had to go in twice for the same issue under warranty, what happens after warranty expires in another year’s time or so? This normal? The number of people here posting about issues with the exact same symptoms normal to you?

Car analogy is actually spot on here, the key difference here is there is no safety issue so no one needs to do a recall etc.

The part they are lubricating is not a normal spot they need to lubricate. Our resident watchmaker has confirmed this.

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by amanbra

The part they are lubricating is not a normal spot they need to lubricate. Our resident watchmaker has confirmed this.

On the millions of watches produced and sold there is no evidence to conclude there is an inherent defect.

I can't comment on your isolated case and by the same token you cannot judge the making of millions of watches by your singular personal experience.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

On the millions of watches produced and sold there is no evidence to conclude there is an inherent defect.

I can't comment on your isolated case and by the same token you cannot judge the making of millions of watches by your singular personal experience.

I feel you’re coming into this with a preconceived view that Rolex can’t do anything wrong right now and haven’t really followed how this issue has played out.

Searchart, a Rolex watchmaker did a photo essay on the issue. I personally have had 5 of 8 watches go bad to this. I have a 9th at the moment where it’s too early to tell.

There are a large amount of reported issue both in this thread and outside of it. There is quite a lot of evidence especially when you consider that a lot of these watches aren’t even being worn as people treat them as investments and commodities.

Speaking to Sydney watchmakers they know Sydney RSC were backed up with warranty work. Archer from other watch forums has confirmed he knows fellow watchmakers getting burnt out over this issue.

[Lol-x]

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

We have a rolex watchmaker confirming the issue...

The search option will help you if you won't believe others..

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by amanbra

1 in 4 is an enormous number for defects.

My DJ (2019) had to go in twice for the same issue under warranty, what happens after warranty expires in another year’s time or so? This normal? The number of people here posting about issues with the exact same symptoms normal to you?

Car analogy is actually spot on here, the key difference here is there is no safety issue so no one needs to do a recall etc.

The part they are lubricating is not a normal spot they need to lubricate. Our resident watchmaker has confirmed this.

Not to detract from this thread which is certainly more interesting and relevant than "Which Rolex should I buy as an investment?" But...

To be fair, the poll is not vetted. Are all of the 1/4 verified owners of watches that have never been damaged? Are they all accurately tracking time? And is there any other explaination besides a problem in manufacture?

Would like some definitive answers. But the poll does not give that.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

On the millions of watches produced and sold there is no evidence to conclude there is an inherent defect.

I can't comment on your isolated case and by the same token you cannot judge the making of millions of watches by your singular personal experience.

I'm pretty sure Bas ultimately mentioned it most probably was an inherent defect Steve.

Granted the sample size here is relatively small, but 25% is significant, as is the number of repeat failures after service and that the issue is manifest on watches produced over a 4 year period.

All of that would suggest its not an assembly related issue which would have been a relatively simple fix. What is does point to is a defect that manifests itself under certain circumstances which, because of its very nature, is quite possibly hard to replicate under test conditions.

Why so defensive of Rolex here? Manufacturing defect or inherent design flaw, its not acceptable that its still happening years into the 32xx movement lifecycle.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Not to detract from this thread which is certainly more interesting and relevant than "Which Rolex should I buy as an investment?" But...

To be fair, the poll is not vetted. Are all of the 1/4 verified owners of watches that have never been damaged? Are they all accurately tracking time? And is there any other explaination besides a problem in manufacture?

Would like some definitive answers. But the poll does not give that.

I literally posted in bold that you can’t trust the poll. The 1/4 argument was on the basis that any manufacturing with a defect rate that large would be a major issue whilst his stance is that it’s not…

https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...postcount=3046

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Hi there.

So you can’t take this poll result like that but say hypothetically we could and you accept this 24% defect rate. Are you saying that 24% is an acceptable rate of defect and the manufacturer wouldn’t need to take corrective action? Almost 1 in 4 break down and this won’t harm reputation etc?

We are not watchmakers but we have over and over again shown data that shows this issue.

If a car kept breaking down would a normal consumer have to prove the exact fault or report the symptoms?

Is it our fault Rolex choose to be very secretive about all this?

mountainjogger

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

You don’t appear to be a person who’d really change their mind even when facts are presented but here is the photo essay you put in quotation marks.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=664616

[Blue September]

My brand new 124060 is returning the following, with 2 minutes to settle, monitored over 3 minutes, fully wound:
DU -2 to -3 s/d (271-282 degrees)
CU -3 to -7 s/d (223-236 degrees)
DD 0 s/d (274 degrees)
CD -1 to -6 s/d (236-241 degrees)

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

To do a "quick summary" of the state of this issue we have:

User searchart, a Rolex trained watchmaker who has seen and shared photos of this issue. He believes that the "just needs more lube fix" is a band-aid that will not last.

User wm82, a Rolex trained watchmaker, has shared seeing this and a date wheel post issue. He says his medium sized AD receives multiple 32xx watches a week with problems. He says he would not personally buy a 32xx based watch at this point since he believes it is not ready for prime time. That speaks volumes to me.

Elsewhere on the internet I have spoken with professional watchmakers who have colleagues working directly at RSCs. They are claiming burnout over large caseloads related to these movements. And the fact that they are sending them back out with no actual known long-term fix is not leading to good morale.

So, in summary, none of us know anything with enough precision to put a number on this. But there are way, way, WAY too many datapoints emerging for this to be some one in a million fluke the likes of which any manufactured product can suffer from. I believe as time goes on this will become accepted as fact. And for that we owe some thanks to Saxo and the others who have persisted to bring this information forward. And, of course, to you Steve for providing us the venue to do so.

[JoseR]

I purchased a DJ41 Blue in 2019 and had it for 3 years and even thou I didn't wear it every day it ran spot on. I just sold a couple months ago because it was getting almost no wrist time and I couldn't justify have it seat in the box. Maybe I was lucky, but I never had a problem with it as long as I had it.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Blue September

My brand new 124060 is returning the following, with 2 minutes to settle, monitored over 3 minutes, fully wound:
DU -2 to -3 s/d (271-282 degrees)
CU -3 to -7 s/d (223-236 degrees)
DD 0 s/d (274 degrees)
CD -1 to -6 s/d (236-241 degrees)

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

Thanks for joining with some interesting data about a NEW 3230 caliber.

3U = CU = crown up?
9U= CD = crown down?
6U = CL = crown left is missing?

Why do the CU and CD rates vary over such a wide range?

It would be interesting to measure also after 24 hours at rest, adding 6U position.

[CedCraig]

Here‘s a good summary of the fundamental design flaw with the 32xx movements, paraphrased from one of the responses to the photo essay thread. The problem is not a lack of lubrication. The issue is there should not be a friction on the dial side seconds wheel pivot. The temporary fix consists in replacing the part and lubricating to mitigate the friction, but this is a temporary fix, a paliative, it delays the reocurence of the drag, but eventually it manifests itself again after a year or so, having to pay another visit to the RSC. Rolex need to redesign the part or other elements of the movement to fix the problem once for all.

Recall from that thread that it‘s not one watchmaker saying this, it‘s multiple watchmakers.

As to the size of the problem, I think it‘s far larger than the naysayers here claim. A majority of Rolex buyers aren‘t WIS with timegraphers who post on forums, but people who don‘t know a balance spring from a mainspring, they just want a quality, prestigious watch. And lots of newer Rolex buyers stick their watches in the safe and wait for the investment to pay off. Most of these people will never notice the low amplitude problem.

My plan is to see if my 2022 Air-King develops the problem within the warranty period. If so, I‘ll get it fixed and sell it and enjoy my other watches that don‘t have design defects. If the problem doesn‘t develop in 5 years, I‘ll consider myself lucky.

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Here‘s a good summary of the fundamental design flaw with the 32xx movements, paraphrased from one of the responses to the photo essay thread. The problem is not a lack of lubrication. The issue is there should not be a friction on the dial side seconds wheel pivot. The temporary fix consists in replacing the part and lubricating to mitigate the friction, but this is a temporary fix, a paliative, it delays the reocurence of the drag, but eventually it manifests itself again after a year or so, having to pay another visit to the RSC. Rolex need to redesign the part or other elements of the movement to fix the problem once for all.

Recall from that thread that it‘s not one watchmaker saying this, it‘s multiple watchmakers.

As to the size of the problem, I think it‘s far larger than the naysayers here claim. A majority of Rolex buyers aren‘t WIS with timegraphers who post on forums, but people who don‘t know a balance spring from a mainspring, they just want a quality, prestigious watch. And lots of newer Rolex buyers stick their watches in the safe and wait for the investment to pay off. Most of these people will never notice the low amplitude problem.

My plan is to see if my 2022 Air-King develops the problem within the warranty period. If so, I‘ll get it fixed and sell it and enjoy my other watches that don‘t have design defects. If the problem doesn‘t develop in 5 years, I‘ll consider myself lucky.

Note to self;

Don’t buy an AK from @CedCraig. :)

[MikeyV]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Here‘s a good summary of the fundamental design flaw with the 32xx movements, paraphrased from one of the responses to the photo essay thread. The problem is not a lack of lubrication. The issue is there should not be a friction on the dial side seconds wheel pivot. The temporary fix consists in replacing the part and lubricating to mitigate the friction, but this is a temporary fix, a paliative, it delays the reocurence of the drag, but eventually it manifests itself again after a year or so, having to pay another visit to the RSC. Rolex need to redesign the part or other elements of the movement to fix the problem once for all.

Recall from that thread that it‘s not one watchmaker saying this, it‘s multiple watchmakers.

As to the size of the problem, I think it‘s far larger than the naysayers here claim. A majority of Rolex buyers aren‘t WIS with timegraphers who post on forums, but people who don‘t know a balance spring from a mainspring, they just want a quality, prestigious watch. And lots of newer Rolex buyers stick their watches in the safe and wait for the investment to pay off. Most of these people will never notice the low amplitude problem.

My plan is to see if my 2022 Air-King develops the problem within the warranty period. If so, I‘ll get it fixed and sell it and enjoy my other watches that don‘t have design defects. If the problem doesn‘t develop in 5 years, I‘ll consider myself lucky.

My watch was sent in for this problem, came back perfect, then went to running slow again. When it was running at 6-7 spd slow, one damned day (literally) , it went back to running perfectly. Ran very well for 9-10 months and now has slowly gone to hell again. 10 -12 spd slow.

How can that be explained by second wheel pivot wear? I'm not saying anyone is wrong - I know who said this first - and I believe.

I just can't fathom how it could get better after it got worse if it's a wear/friction issue. Oil Migration?

I have YEARS of data where I check the time on my watch daily.


My warranty is up in June - I'll send it in again I guess.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by amanbra

really sucks how it's still bad after 2 rounds at RSC. If my DJ goes bad after the 2nd warranty job I'll be selling it... =(

Based on what I’ve read It’s only been to the RSC once .. Mikey can correct me if I’ve misunderstood


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk