32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[Aerogph]

Originally Posted by Mountain

I’ve just completed the isocronism experiment on my explorer, measuring from fully wound at 0 to 60 hours left in the dial up position. All measurements taken dial up.

I’m very happy with the results, so following the service about a month ago, all seems well with my watch.

Well the numbers seem quite good. Caliber 3230, correct?

Originally Posted by sski

thought i'd report back regarding my DJ 36......i noticed this week that it was running behind about 35 mins. (at the tail end of the 70 hr. power reserve.) i figure it may have about an hour or 2 remaining.

Is this normal for the precision to drop off drastically around the end of pr, or is this a potential 3235 movt. problem? (i don't have the timing device, so can't say for sure.)

35 minutes is way too much. I quote HiBoost and think it should be checked on a machine to see the performance. Just to be sure before bring it on a timegrapher, I'll do the test again to see if there's some sort of consistency with the numbers.

Originally Posted by SearChart

Being skeptical is fine.
Personally I'm not worried about the 7140 and 4131 at all, I will only get worried if those start rolling in for warranty repairs.

Exactly, and you'd be the first to notice it. If it was a flaw in the escapement or on the material as we speculated, it will definetly show on these 2 as well.

Originally Posted by JMGoodnight369

Well I’ll go ahead and tell you this theory is incorrect. I had to service my 124060 Submariner 10 months into owning it due to low amplitude. This was bought from an AD. It’s the same 3230 as the explorer. The date or GMT functions have nothing to do with this issue

We have the same watch and I saw some people having the same issue but it's less widespread with 3230s calibers. That is what I noticed by asking Rolex watchmakers. Your watch is being worn everyday?

[Mountain]

[QUOTE=Aerogph;12738942]Well the numbers seem quite good. Caliber 3230, correct?

Yes, 3230

[t_serban]

Finally got a timegrapher and ready to start testing. Should I rest the watch in any particular position in the 24h after the full wind?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by t_serban

Finally got a timegrapher and ready to start testing. Should I rest the watch in any particular position in the 24h after the full wind?

Depends what you plan to do.

[t_serban]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Depends what you plan to do.

I want to do what HiBoost did in the first post.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by t_serban

I want to do what HiBoost did in the first post.

[t_serban]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I don't mean which positions should I test. I'm asking should I leave the watch DU for 24 hours after full wind and before putting it on the timegrapher?

[saxo3]

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

[t_serban]

Thanks.

[t_serban]

Here are the measurements for my 124060 Sub with the 3230 movement, purchased new on March 1st 2023, using a Weishi 1000.
The watch was rested DU and not moved at all between measurements.

After full wind

Position    Rate      Amplitude      Beat error
DU          +2        281            0.3
6U          +1        243            0.0
9U          +2        246            0.0
3U          -1        244            0.3
DD          +2        272            0.1

Avg         +1.2      257.2          0.14
Stddev      +1.16     16.04          0.13

After 12h

Position    Rate      Amplitude      Beat error
DU          +3        264            0.2
6U           0        232            0.0
9U           0        235            0.0
3U           0        228            0.3
DD          +3        270            0.2

Avg         +1.2      245.8          0.14
Stddev      +1.46     17.55          0.12

After 24h

Position    Rate      Amplitude      Beat error
DU          +2        256            0.2
6U          +2        227            0.0
9U          +2        230            0.1
3U           0        217            0.3
DD          +2        259            0.2

Avg         +1.6      237.8          0.16
Stddev      +0.8      16.67          0.10

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by t_serban

Here are the measurements for my 124060 Sub with the 3230 movement, purchased new on March 1st 2023, using a Weishi 1000.
The watch was rested DU and not moved at all between measurements.

That was thread post 4000 !

Measurements well done! Amplitudes and rates are all very good; a pity that you bought the Weishi 1000 instead of the 1900. The numbers of decimals for amplitude Avg and Stddev are meaningless.

[Tridor]

Originally Posted by saxo3

That was thread post 4000 !

Well, we're now at # 4002 and on our way up. Amazing!

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by saxo3

a pity that you bought the Weishi 1000 instead of the 1900. The numbers of decimals for amplitude Avg and Stddev are meaningless.

I don't think it matters for this purpose. Both machines have identical accuracy, resolution and measuring period specs:

Rate: -999 s/d - +999 s/d (Accuracy +/-1s/day)
Amplitude: 100°- 360° (Accuracy : +/-1°)
Beat error: 0 - 9.9ms (Accuracy : +/-0.1ms)
Measuring period: 2s, 4s, 8s, 10s, 20s, 30s, 60s

The 1900 has an improved display, but that has no real value outside of watch repair scenarios. For gathering health data I believe the two are effectively equivalent.

ref:

https://www.cousinsuk.com/PDF/products/6434_T38209.pdf
https://www.cousinsuk.com/PDF/products/8445_W47107.pdf

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I don't think it matters for this purpose. Both machines have identical accuracy, resolution and measuring period specs:

Rate: -999 s/d - +999 s/d (Accuracy +/-1s/day)
Amplitude: 100°- 360° (Accuracy : +/-1°)
Beat error: 0 - 9.9ms (Accuracy : +/-0.1ms)
Measuring period: 2s, 4s, 8s, 10s, 20s, 30s, 60s

The 1900 has an improved display, but that has no real value outside of watch repair scenarios. For gathering health data I believe the two are effectively equivalent.

ref:

https://www.cousinsuk.com/PDF/products/6434_T38209.pdf
https://www.cousinsuk.com/PDF/products/8445_W47107.pdf

Nonsense and you even deliver the facts with the links to the manuals

Fact is that the Weishi 1900 can have a better accuracy of +/- 0.1 s/d compared to the Weishi 1000 with +/- 1 s/d.

I am not going to argue with anybody here what matters or is needed.

Be better prepared next time ...

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I don't think it matters for this purpose.

I have to disagree with you.

Yes, the Weishi models 1000 and 1900 are good.

But Weishi, in their wisdom, created the 1900 with the choice of adding more decimal points to the readouts which leads to the possibility of much greater information with which a much better understanding of errors can be calculated and seen.

The Weishi 1900 is a seriously good machine for dealing with the sort of figures we are talking about ion this thread which is mainly about the 32xx movements and their problems.

I, personally had a Weishi 1000 to start off, That was exchanged for a model 1900 within 2 days as I found the data I was collecting was nowhere near accurate enough for serious recording of data and adding to graphs etc.
The 1900 model fulfilled what was needed.

Of course there is a further step one can take ... The Witchi machines. Those are far better but are also far more costly.

To sum it up ... The Weishi 1000 model is excellent for a quick look by a hobbyist who does not need accuracy.

The Weishi 1900 model fulfils what is needed for most serious research calculations etc.

The Witschi, Well that just does it all.

It is actually a prime example of the more you pay for a machine the better it is. Pure and unarguably simply true.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I don't think it matters for this purpose. Both machines have identical accuracy, resolution and measuring period

Just as an additional point ...

You attached links to the Weishi manuals.

You did NOT show the front cover of the manual.

The model 1900 front cover is printed on yellow paper and the picture showing the watch in the holder is actually showing the watch in the wrong way.

The winding crown should always be placed against the microphone, not the sprung retainer.

[SearChart]

Anyone here who owns a Witschi and a Weishi? How do they compare?

[CharlesN]

I own both a Weishi 1900 and a Witschi.

I had a Weishi 1000 but as I mentioned in the 2 posts above the 1000 was exchanged for a 1900 after only 2 days.

I then decided I needed better so I went for a Witschi.

The Witschi is far better and the screen does all the work for me.

[csaltphoto]

On Ali Express the price difference is like $20 and both are half the cost of US sites

[t_serban]

Accuracy differences aside, would you say the Weishi 1000 is insufficiently accurate to diagnose the problem in this thread? Seems to me the possible ranges for good/bad amplitudes and rates are sufficiently big for this to not matter i.e. if there's a problem the Weishi 1000 is enough to spot it.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Nonsense and you even deliver the facts with the links to the manuals

Fact is that the Weishi 1900 can have a better accuracy of +/- 0.1 s/d compared to the Weishi 1000 with +/- 1 s/d.

I am not going to argue with anybody here what matters or is needed.

Be better prepared next time ...

The specs on both units refer to precision not accuracy.

[t_serban]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

Just as an additional point ...

You attached links to the Weishi manuals.

You did NOT show the front cover of the manual.

The model 1900 front cover is printed on yellow paper and the picture showing the watch in the holder is actually showing the watch in the wrong way.

The winding crown should always be placed against the microphone, not the sprung retainer.

Is the microphone the fixed metal part on the left?

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by t_serban

Is the microphone the fixed metal part on the left?

Yes.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by t_serban

would you say the Weishi 1000 is insufficiently accurate to diagnose the problem in this thread?

The Weishi 1900 is most definitely a better machine for measuring and seeing the error as it has the extra decimal point which gives a far truer reading.

Don't forget ... We are dealing with quite small numbers so decimal points do make a difference.

[t_serban]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

The Weishi 1900 is most definitely a better machine for measuring and seeing the error as it has the extra decimal point which gives a far truer reading.

Don't forget ... We are dealing with quite small numbers so decimal points do make a difference.

I'm not sure I follow. Assuming the difference in measurement is even a full degree for amplitude, given the amplitudes in this thread varying more or less between 180 to 300 degrees, I don't see a situation where X is a healthy value but X +- 1 would be unhealthy. Even in the case of accuracy, which is a much smaller value, +-1 second won't make a difference for overall movement health.

Unless I misunderstood and the precision difference between the weishi 1000 and 1900 is huge in reality.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Nonsense and you even deliver the facts with the links to the manuals

Fact is that the Weishi 1900 can have a better accuracy of +/- 0.1 s/d compared to the Weishi 1000 with +/- 1 s/d.

I am not going to argue with anybody here what matters or is needed.

Be better prepared next time ...

Ohhh, Dr. Ego is extra crabby today! I love how in the process of arguing with somebody you assert that you are not going to argue with anybody. Well done!

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I have to disagree with you.

Yes, the Weishi models 1000 and 1900 are good.

But Weishi, in their wisdom, created the 1900 with the choice of adding more decimal points to the readouts which leads to the possibility of much greater information with which a much better understanding of errors can be calculated and seen.

The Weishi 1900 is a seriously good machine for dealing with the sort of figures we are talking about ion this thread which is mainly about the 32xx movements and their problems.

I, personally had a Weishi 1000 to start off, That was exchanged for a model 1900 within 2 days as I found the data I was collecting was nowhere near accurate enough for serious recording of data and adding to graphs etc.
The 1900 model fulfilled what was needed.

Both the 1000 and the 1900 measure amplitude to the same 1.0 degree resolution, right? The 1000 does s/d to 1.0 sec and the 1900 does s/d to 0.1 seconds. You are saying you can't tell if there is a problem based on 1 degree and 1 second resolution? If the 1000 tells you the amplitude is 195 degrees and the timing is -25 s/d, you aren't really sure if something is going on unless you know that it is really -25.2 s/d?

I would assert the only value of 0.1 s/d resolution is when trying to regulat to "perfection." I.e. in situations where 0.3 s/d isn't good enough, and you want to target exactly 0.0 s/d. But a) we aren't working on our watches and b) the 32xx issues don't manifest themselves in such small ways. When there is a problem, there is a big problem, and 1 s/d is going to be plenty to spot it.

Again, I never argued that the 1900 isn't a superior machine. But for OUR PURPOSES HERE, i.e. detecting a problem, I still say there is no meaningful difference. Obviously the Witschi class of machine gets you something entirely different. But 1900 vs 1000? Just not seeing it, sorry. To say owning the 1000 is a "pity" is just more condescending crap that is unhelpful and rude (but on-brand).

[Kevin of Larchmont]

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

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

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

Ok, regardless of whatever side of the debate you’re on … that is funny

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

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

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



Live & let live.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

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

Are we trying to hate our watches more precisely or more accurately?